camber question

ok so how do you keep the camber from coming back to negative at full lift? I know camber is the issue of the arms being diff length, specifically the upper shorter than the lower, but extending the upper will just cause positive camber when the arms are parallel, correct? So whats the resolution to this issue?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is an ask max forum, Bye Bye

The trick is to design your suspension to not go into negative camber at full droop. Duh, right? When I build a suspension from scratch, I cycle my design on paper and make changes until I like the way the suspension works through the entire travel. From the factory, most suspension designs are only concerned with the middle half. The first and last portion are a compromise to benefit the portion of the travel where 95% of life will be spent. To cure a stock suspension, you will have to do some homework that will probably end up with pivot points being moved, not arms being lengthened.

i see, so really all these "lengthened" arms just fix the camber at any one given point in the travel correct?

Most custom arms that I have dealt with do not better the camber curve. That is why I've been pushing the dropped spindle thing so much. By simply lengthening the arm to cure camber at one point is only going to make it worse at another, unless the geometry has been changed to accomodate the longer arm.

Originally posted by BioMax

To cure a stock suspension, you will have to do some homework that will probably end up with pivot points being moved, not arms being lengthened.

Max is right as usual, most minitruckers (and fullsize truckers too) count on negative camber to help wheels tuck, but the truth is as max said, this is one extreme end of the designed operation. going back negative at full lift to clear big wheels turning is the other end. The limitation is that the factory stuff was engineered to run much higher than full drop, and much lower than full lift.

I maintain that there isnt a frame laying truck built that is using existing front suspension which wouldnt benefit from a frame z, speaking from ride quality, bump steer, and tire wear perspectives only. Of course, that would exacerbate the negative camber at full lift, and decrease negative camber at full drop.

There is another thread on narrowing front suspension track width, I think the combination of narrowing the front frame with a healthy z will be the two future mods. No lifting all the way to turn, and no need for negative camber at drop. You would cruise AND turn with the front a scant few inches off the ground. No more stargazing, which I think would be the greatest benefit.

i appreciate all the healthy responses guys, and also I narrowed the front 4" and z-ed it 1.5" the only thing that really limits my turning is the tires rubbing the frame on one side at full lock, but nothing I can do about that, I can still lift it plenty to turn all I need to, not like it's gonna be a daily

Hey Cody, you don't know the trackwidth of a stock chevy like yours do you?

no I don't, someone posted a site somewhere about all kinds of specs on factory vehicles but I forgot what it was