-2.2* front camber -1.5* rear camber, toe .01 front 0 back , castor left front 4.9* castor right front 4.2* What do you run???

 

front
.camber -2.0
.toe -1/16 out
.castor stock

rear
.camber -1.5
.toe -1/16 in

 

Thank's minimusprime, they are not that much different.Some auto cross guy's have been telling me to put more negitive camber in (up to -2.5 in the front).

 

Your alignment is pretty good for general sporting purposes. Yes, a little more negative camber can be beneficial, but you're already worlds better than stock.

FYI, I run -2.4F, -1.8R. Zero toe all around. Ideal autocross would probably be a touch of toe out up front for most folks, thought that has drawbacks on the street.

Scott
90SM

 

with such an important part of how a car handles, i thought their would be more information. Thanks for your imput Scott, what would be the draw back with more toe on the street.inside edge tire wear ?

 

Here are my settings after much thought and 3 alignments in the last year (due to mods--COs and new rear links)

Front: camber -2.0, caster 3.9, toe -0.1 (ie out)
Rear: camber -1.5, toe 0

According to the Hunter database, the stock range for front camber is -0.1 to -0.9 and front toe +0.11 to +0.19 approx. which is slight toe in. Rear stock has -1.4 tp -2.1 camber (!) and +0.13 to +0.27 toe (in again).

My car is skittish on those nasty groves that large trucks and SUVs create at stop lights on soft tarmac, but very stable on the freeway. It turns in beautifully on the track. Tire wear has been remarkably low given my tires (RT615s) and settings. I recon I will get close to 15000 miles out of them.

 

Yes, tire wear is a consideration. Toe has a much greater impact on wear than camber does. Too much toe also effects fuel consumption and vehicle stability.

The later point is why MINI specs some toe in. It increases stability at higher speeds, which is better for most drivers when they are talking on the cell phone or putting on make-up. For the inverse of that, autocrossers tend to look for some toe out

Straight line traction (acceleration and braking) is best when camber and toe are near 0. Cornering grip improves with negative camber, up to a point. Transient response improves with toe out, but stability decreases. It's a balancing act, and there is no single best answer that applies to all cars and conditions. I think you have a good compromise setup.

Scott
90SM

 

dr Phill ' the stock setting seem almost backwards. Scott ,thanks again.

 

Front:

Camber - 2.4
Toe - 0 to 1/16th out

Rear:

Camber - 1.4
Toe - 1/8th in total

Castor left stock.

15 x 7 wheels, effective et 33.

These setting used for street, auto-x, and track days. Only the 15" wheels and tires change for each appliction.

 

These settings are correct

From
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...d.php?t=108346

Stock alignment for 2002-2006 MC or MCS
Front camber -0.9 to -0.1 degrees
Front toe 0.11 to 0.19 degrees or 1/8 to 3/16" toe in.
Rear camber -1.0 to -2.0 degrees
Rear toe 0.13 to 0.27 degrees or 1/8 to 1/4" toe in.

Possible autocross alignment range
Front camber -2.0 to -3.0
Front toe 1/16" (-0.06 degrees) out to 1/8" (-0.12 degrees) out
Rear camber -1.0 to -1.6 (can be about 1 degree less negative than front)
Rear toe zero (zero degrees) to 1/16" (0.06 degrees) in

Read this
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=99227

More alignment discussion-
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=39834
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...d.php?t=109115

pmfranke,
-2.2* front camber -1.5* rear camber, toe .01 front 0 back , castor left front 4.9* castor right front 4.2* What do you run???

You can keep the settings how they are and get used to them first or-
Front camber can be as negative at -2.4 or -2.5 degrees but more negative means you are running on the inside edges of your tires when going straight.

Rear camber can be less negative if you want less understeer. Generally you want about 1 degree less negative in the rear compared to the fronts so -1.2 or -1.3 would make sense for you if you keep the fronts at -2.2.

Toe setting of .01 is same as zero toe. You have essentially zero toe front and rear which is fine. This is better for braking and accelerating but not as good for turn in response in cornering which we do a lot of with autocross.

For street use zero toe front and rear is good. Stock settings are toe in for both front and rear to help with understeer and safety. Toe out of 1/16" is a compromise towards more performance. More toe out will risk more tire wear.
Rear toe can be slightly toe in and be OK but not toe out.

There has been much discussion on alignment for the MINI for all types of driving. Do a search to find the threads. Many are in Racing forums or the suspension forum.

 

For the adjustments available on a stock 2006 MCS, is it worth having an alignment to try and get as far as possible to what has been recommend in this thread, or is the adjustability just not there to make it worth it?

For now I want to stay in the stock class for autocross, so I am interested in alignment changes available without additional hardware.

 

The early 2002 to 2004 MINIs were hardly adjustable for camber.
Different toe settings were possible front and rear.

For 2005 and 2006 MINIs the rear lower control arm had a small adjuster to allow for some play for more or less negative camber. Front camber not adjustable. Caster not adjustable. Toe can be set front and rear.

For 2007 MINIs the front has a small adjuster for camber and I think rear is adjustable a little. One approach is to get as much front negative camber as possible and about -1.0 to -1.4 degrees in the rear and then set toe settings as you wish.

So for your 2006 MINI-
You need adjustable camber plates to get any more front camber- you have about -0.5 degrees and it is not adjustable. In the rear you can adjust a little just don't go too negative. Toe settings you can choose but zero toe front and rear has been suggested as a basic starting point. You want more aggressive then go 1/16" toe out in front and 1/16" toe in for the rear.

More important in stock classes is which wheels and tires you use.
Wheels need to be light and stock sized. Tires can be R compound (best) or street tires.

 

...I'm currently running a variable toe setting on the passenger side only

Very interesting steering gain after about 5 degrees of steering input...

 

meb: Are you referring to something other than Ackerman?

 

Front:

Camber - 2.0
Toe - 0

Rear:

Camber - 1.8
Toe - 1/8th in total

Castor left stock.

17 x 7 wheels, effective et 42.

This is where we started. Will be tweaking based on wear and performance. Hope to get good street/track performance with near normal wear.

 

went to the alignment shop yesterday and the owner said that my car had settled . all the settings were different than what it was set to two year earler . went with my first settings.ttt feels very good . smooth transitions in the corners, still have a little pull to the right during take off.tire pressure is good , alignment now fine,wonder what it could be? THANKS ALL,Peter.

 

Sorry, I was being a wise a$$...not very helpful, I know. I think I have a broken inner tie rod and things are really interesting at highway speeds...but more so in the twisties . Feels like the entire rack is moving around under my feet, but no one can detect any looseness anywhere

For what it's worth, I sampled BMW's variable rate steering gear in a 335i...very unusual feel at brisk speeds on roads that have a combination of long sweepers and tight turns. Initially very hard to get use to.

 

The current issue of the BMW CCA magazine Roundel has a not very complimentary review of the new BMW variable steering. The comments were part of an article about one of those crazy high speed car evaluation road drives that journalists take from Death Valley Calif. to some destination "X". Quoted as having a very unusual feel and causing weird vehicle dynamics at high speeds and rough roads. Spare me, Lord.

John Petrich in Seattle

 

That's good.

Re-align every two years max is good. If you hit more potholes then do it more often.

The little pull to the right might be some torque steer from power plus Quaife and our roads.

Usually I get a little tug with hard accelerations. Just have the steering wheel firmly in hand while you go.

 

Thanks Brad, see you sunday.

 

Street use only, which is rural road & hwy for me:
Front
Camber -1 degree
Toe .15 per side
Rear
Camber -1.4
Toe .20 per side

Understeer has been good to me, I enjoy late braking, tire wear has a consideration in my choice for the current setting, and I have a Quaife ATB which provides mid-corner pull under acceleration instead of push. If you have ever exited the highway carrying excessive speed, and encountered another vehicle failing to yield right of way, you can appreciate toe-in (plus rear camber) while hard on the brakes and having to perform a steering maneuver at the same time.

 

It's a nice feeling, Kieth, to know your car won't bite your backside. stability is a wonderful thing!

John,

Yes, very intersting engineering that variable rate rack...not sure what prompted that...I know bimmers are getting a wee bit portly, but they're not Mack trucks. The Ultimate Driving Machine appears to be appealing more and more to a push-button society...

 

Those writers always complain any thing new thats their job, all I can say is I am impressed with the steering on my son's 335I, but even more impressed with the steering on my 08 M5. The beast just feels great on the road and on the track, took it to summit point and had a lot of fun turnin was just great, only time I felt the weight was in turn 1 and turn 4. If I were to use the M5 as a track car suspension and brake upgrades would be in order, thankfully I still have THDUKE for track duty, but once in a while its nice to cruise the front straight of Summit at 150MPH +

 

No problem with the standard steering fare in a BMW. But the other stuff felt truely odd.

 

Trevor - you got the M5!!!! Congrats!

mb