How to calculate no camber?

think of it as the truck leaning into a turn (with camber gain)

Even if you put a little camber in the front, I can't remember what Max uses something like a half degree per inch of travel maybye? Hopefully he can chime in and correct me if I am wrong, but its really not that much. It would probably make bad Nissan camber look like S-10 camber. I am working on Nissan arms now trying to dial them in for the least amount of camber change.

  Why camber?

 Why do vehicles have camber? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the wheels to travel up and down without leaning in or moving all over the place? There is a lot more going on in the front suspension of your truck than you would think, but for now we will focus on camber and why vehicle manufactures have continued designing camber into their vehicle’s suspension. So, let’s take a look at why camber is and what is its purpose.

Camber is caused by a combination of the unequal length of the upper and lower A-arms and the fact that the ball joints are further apart than the mounting points on the frame, thus creating an instant center. The arrangement of geometry can be changed to create more or less camber gain to yield a particular outcome. For instance, a performance car would benefit more from additional camber than a Cadillac would, wider cars would need less camber than narrow vehicles and heavy cars would like more camber than light cars. Why isn’t important right now, just understand that camber comes in more than one size.

So why camber then? When a vehicle enters a corner, centrifugal force is trying to push the vehicle off of the road, while the tires are trying desperately to keep the vehicle going in the direction that they are pointed. This struggle causes a few different things to happen; the most obvious thing that happens during cornering is that the vehicle leans to the outside of the corner. That would seem harmless enough, but understand that the wheels are directly attached to the chassis via the a-arms and the a-arms are being pulled to the same angle as the chassis. This angle that the tires are being forced to follow is NOT good for traction and cornering speed will suffer accordingly. Now, if you were to design a suspension that generated camber during cornering, the angle of the leaning chassis would be offset by the camber, allowing the tires to do their job efficiently, thus raising the performance capability of the vehicle.

So, you might ask, why don’t I just use a giant sway bar on my vehicle to keep it from leaning while cornering and as a result, negating the need for camber? Well, I’ll tell you why… Because sway bars do not add traction, they take it (leave this one for another article). But just for argument’s sake, let’s assume that we have a vehicle that will not lean in a corner, would we still want camber then? Yes. A small amount of camber is almost always helpful. By dialing-in a 1/2° of camber (or so), you will help keep the contact patch of the tire flat to the road when cornering without sacrificing tread life. The idea of a vehicle that doesn’t lean while cornering is absurd and so having some camber is a good idea especially with today’s low-profile tires.

thank you max. well worded. the tire will tip outward, or positive, on the outside wheel. taking away the contact patch. and, it should be counter acted by designing it into the suspension. also, if you have seen when the wheels are turned to lock at stop, they turn sharper when positive cambered. look at a 300/magnum, they have a ton at lock. they turn suprisingly well though for the size.

Plus with no camber the tire will slide in and out on pavement through travel its crazy to watch

0 camber with a 25 series tire FTW! haha J/K

Edited: 1/19/2009 2:39:10 PM by gettwisted07

ok.ok. so I should have worded it different. I didnt mean exactly No camber just about 1.0 degree negative. Sorry about that Max. Well ive worked at a very respectable alignment shop for a couple years aligning anything with Tires on it. MOST FWD vehicle run quite a bit of camber about 2.0 degrees negative. MOST RWD vehicles run around 0.5 to 1.0 degrees tops. So sorry about the confusion. I just really dont like the camber that my hardbody gets on 22's. I just wanted to strighten it up a bit. thanks guys

Too much camber is from the suspension being pushed way past it's design limit. This is why I suggest drop spindles instead of a-arms. Even though some vehicles have drop spindles, they weren't designed for the tall wheel/tire combos that are being used today. My suggestions would be to redesign your suspension or build a 3" to 4" drop spindle.   Sounds easy huh?

in referance to what keef said...   i notice on my colorado that it does this a tiny bit just before it hits the ground. u mean that the wheels pull in towards each other yeh??     i raised the lower balljoint 2inch with the belltech drop balljoints. and then i made new top arm mountings that were 2 inchs higher. this reduced the camber back to around a stock amount and seemed more reasonable.   i can see that the arms are now 2 inchs further apart where they mount to the chassis and yet at the balljoint they are still the same thus changing some of the geometry?? right??     do u think the wheels are pulling in due to the original set up not bein designed to travel to such a low position and to do so, one of the arms need to be longer or shorter? or should i have kept the upper arm in its stock position?  or is there an equation i can use to find where it should be mounted after raising the lower balljoint?     thansk for ur help. i get a head ache everytime i think about it.                

i have looking at the issue of my wheels wanting to pull in just before laying out for a couple days now and i still dont no what the solution is.   i have been tryin to look at a few examples and have sat down and looked at the truck moving up and down and watched it. i also noticed on that flash player thing that is from suicide doors that u push the buttons on and it goes up and down.... the wheels actually slide in and out on there.