What Does Good Geo Look Like for Fast Road Driving?
Discussion
Well your camber settings are out 
This explains what effect that will have (scroll down).
https://suspensionsecrets.co.uk/camber/
PS best settings for Porsches on the road are typically factory geo.
Edited to correct brain fail
This explains what effect that will have (scroll down).
https://suspensionsecrets.co.uk/camber/
PS best settings for Porsches on the road are typically factory geo.
Edited to correct brain fail
Edited by Discombobulate on Monday 7th April 21:12
Yeah they will have loaded up whatever the Hunter system settings are for the car and I'm assuming they are the Porsche factory settings, but... it's an assumption. Possible that their system could be incorrect / out-of-date or some other issue.
Also, you mentioned the toe is out, which as someone who's unfamiliar with all this is an interesting observation. I was working on the basis that the toe settings are fine as the values here are all green and within tolerance. Zero degrees at the front and .20 / .25 degrees at the rear.
But quite likely I'm missing something?
The way I read the report... the front and rear camber needs attention (and maybe the thrust angle too?).
Also, you mentioned the toe is out, which as someone who's unfamiliar with all this is an interesting observation. I was working on the basis that the toe settings are fine as the values here are all green and within tolerance. Zero degrees at the front and .20 / .25 degrees at the rear.
But quite likely I'm missing something?
The way I read the report... the front and rear camber needs attention (and maybe the thrust angle too?).
Was the geo set up checked, or checked and adjusted ?
The rear camber seems high relative to the front.
There’s a geo sheet from a similar car car, set up by Center Gravity here :
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
It’s much more what I’d expect to see.
If you want a sharper set up, you’d remove some toe-in on the front (but I wouldn’t go any further than parallel, and would advise against toe out) then add some additional negative camber to the front, along with some additional (though less than the front) rear camber.
The rear camber seems high relative to the front.
There’s a geo sheet from a similar car car, set up by Center Gravity here :
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
It’s much more what I’d expect to see.
If you want a sharper set up, you’d remove some toe-in on the front (but I wouldn’t go any further than parallel, and would advise against toe out) then add some additional negative camber to the front, along with some additional (though less than the front) rear camber.
Checked and they made some minor adjustments to the toe settings but didn't touch anything else.
Thanks for sharing this thread. Can't believe I didn't come across that in the search I did. Exactly what I'm looking for. Will be taking the car to Charles Ivey as I think they're the highest quality garage for this kind of thing that's nearby (central London).
Unless any other suggestions? Know CG is probably the benchmark. Unfortunately too far at the moment.
Thanks for sharing this thread. Can't believe I didn't come across that in the search I did. Exactly what I'm looking for. Will be taking the car to Charles Ivey as I think they're the highest quality garage for this kind of thing that's nearby (central London).
Unless any other suggestions? Know CG is probably the benchmark. Unfortunately too far at the moment.
DangerDoom said:
Yeah they will have loaded up whatever the Hunter system settings are for the car and I'm assuming they are the Porsche factory settings, but... it's an assumption. Possible that their system could be incorrect / out-of-date or some other issue.
Also, you mentioned the toe is out, which as someone who's unfamiliar with all this is an interesting observation. I was working on the basis that the toe settings are fine as the values here are all green and within tolerance. Zero degrees at the front and .20 / .25 degrees at the rear.
But quite likely I'm missing something?
The way I read the report... the front and rear camber needs attention (and maybe the thrust angle too?).
Ignore me. Complete brain fail. Camber not toe. Post edited to correct.Also, you mentioned the toe is out, which as someone who's unfamiliar with all this is an interesting observation. I was working on the basis that the toe settings are fine as the values here are all green and within tolerance. Zero degrees at the front and .20 / .25 degrees at the rear.
But quite likely I'm missing something?
The way I read the report... the front and rear camber needs attention (and maybe the thrust angle too?).
I must stop drinking in the day.....
I have been experimenting with suspension and settings on pretty much every car since I was 20, so a long time. I think there is some personal choices and preferences but for me
I like a bit of negative camber it helps the feeling and level of turn in plenty written about what is happening with this the contact patch and so on. For me under 2 degrees is fine, over can be a little more camber sensitive and feel becomes a little more 'tramline' and 'pull' when you might not want it.
Toe at the front is another interesting one toe in can be blunt and dull and less 'sharp' dead straight or a small amount of toe out will sharpen the steering and provide a more responsible front end Ofcourse there are loads written about this and lots of very technical points With bump steer, rake, etc etc
For me I will usually go for 0-2/3 mins toe out F if the suspension is good enough (good ball joints, mounts etc)
Camber front 1-2 degrees much over 2 can be a tad too much on the road usually
Rear camber I like nearer 2 degrees on the later 911's again fine
I'm no expert but this is the best so far with settings and I am about to go for a little more front and rear camber. Look at factory GT3 settings and you will see differences between road set ups and sportier set ups
I like a bit of negative camber it helps the feeling and level of turn in plenty written about what is happening with this the contact patch and so on. For me under 2 degrees is fine, over can be a little more camber sensitive and feel becomes a little more 'tramline' and 'pull' when you might not want it.
Toe at the front is another interesting one toe in can be blunt and dull and less 'sharp' dead straight or a small amount of toe out will sharpen the steering and provide a more responsible front end Ofcourse there are loads written about this and lots of very technical points With bump steer, rake, etc etc
For me I will usually go for 0-2/3 mins toe out F if the suspension is good enough (good ball joints, mounts etc)
Camber front 1-2 degrees much over 2 can be a tad too much on the road usually
Rear camber I like nearer 2 degrees on the later 911's again fine
I'm no expert but this is the best so far with settings and I am about to go for a little more front and rear camber. Look at factory GT3 settings and you will see differences between road set ups and sportier set ups
Edited by Adrian-9iafn on Tuesday 8th April 17:33
maz8062 said:
If a "Hunter" alignment machine took it, they should have dialled in factory settings. If they've left it at that, something could be off. Is it a crash-damaged car? If not, take it to a shop with a Hunter machine, or Porsche, to get it dialled in properly.
Correction, take it to any decent Porsche independent (especially those involved with racing, racing prep or race support, or better still an Indy whose staff race/track their own cars) Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
Slippydiff said:
Correction, take it to any decent Porsche independent (especially those involved with racing, racing prep or race support, or better still an Indy whose staff race/track their own cars)
Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
I’d add West Tuning to the above list, they’ve setup my cars for 20 years, always feel much sharper after they have worked their magicFailing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
Slippydiff said:
Correction, take it to any decent Porsche independent (especially those involved with racing, racing prep or race support, or better still an Indy whose staff race/track their own cars)
Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
If one takes a car to an alignment company that uses a Hunter alignment machine, they'll have access to the alignment settings for the particular car and dial them in. Crash-damaged cars, especially CAT S, are sometimes not repaired property leaving the chassis out of whack. I know because this has happened to me before - no matter how hard Tony Bones (RIP) tried to dial in the numbers, he couldn't because the chassis wasn't straight. If a company has the alignment specs for a car but can't dial them in, more often than not, something is not right.Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
Each car comes with alignment specs - it is not a dark art unless one is looking for "fast road" track specs, etc. I don't waste time with fancy alignment specs for the road. I stick with stock all day, every day.
And no, I'm not a keyboard jockey; I opine based on my personal experience. Furthermore, I don't take potshots at other posters - it's a waste of time to hate on shadows.
Edited by maz8062 on Tuesday 8th April 20:00
For a road car I like the opposite to Adrian.
I like around 0.03 toe in on the front and around 0.7 of negative camber.
Then around 1.8-2.1 on the rear and 0.14 toe in.
I do like cars that are set up with loads of negative camber and no toe or a smidge of toe out, however, and this is important, only if the car is quite low with stiff roll bars. And once you start putting toe out it really does need the camber to be dialled in to make sure the car doesn't become tail happy, which is really hard on stock dampers and springs.
But for me, on a stock car, I would go with I like around 0.03 toe in on the front and around 0.7 of negative camber, then around 1.8-2.1 on the rear and 0.14 toe in.
This will give you steering that doesn't feel too light, sort of goes where you point it, will have massive amounts of rear end grip, it will not feel twitchy in the slightest and would need to be seriously provoked to get the rear end to let go and would be a bit pants for the track, but on the road that is what I want.
Oh, and I want it balanced, so the right and left are 100% matched, so turn in etc. is the same whether going left of right. Nearly the same is not good enough my brain can't cope with that and makes me feel unsure.
Looking at your geo, I would imagine the excessive rear camber and toe in balances out the steering with 0 toe up front from being too twitchy, but I bet it eats the inside edge of your rear tyres.
I like around 0.03 toe in on the front and around 0.7 of negative camber.
Then around 1.8-2.1 on the rear and 0.14 toe in.
I do like cars that are set up with loads of negative camber and no toe or a smidge of toe out, however, and this is important, only if the car is quite low with stiff roll bars. And once you start putting toe out it really does need the camber to be dialled in to make sure the car doesn't become tail happy, which is really hard on stock dampers and springs.
But for me, on a stock car, I would go with I like around 0.03 toe in on the front and around 0.7 of negative camber, then around 1.8-2.1 on the rear and 0.14 toe in.
This will give you steering that doesn't feel too light, sort of goes where you point it, will have massive amounts of rear end grip, it will not feel twitchy in the slightest and would need to be seriously provoked to get the rear end to let go and would be a bit pants for the track, but on the road that is what I want.
Oh, and I want it balanced, so the right and left are 100% matched, so turn in etc. is the same whether going left of right. Nearly the same is not good enough my brain can't cope with that and makes me feel unsure.
Looking at your geo, I would imagine the excessive rear camber and toe in balances out the steering with 0 toe up front from being too twitchy, but I bet it eats the inside edge of your rear tyres.
Edited by Ed.Neumann on Tuesday 8th April 20:28
Johnson897210 said:
Slippydiff said:
Do not take it to Porsche.
?Too expensive or some other reason? If they can’t reset to stock settings then surely no one can.
Most OPC’s these days are manned by corporate drones, who are forced to operate on a “Computer says yes, or computer says no” basis.
Unless you know what you want (and fair play to the OP for taking the trouble to ask on here) AND you have a service adviser receptive to your request, AND a technician willing to set the car up in a manner which may possibly end up showing a lot of red boxes, rather green ones, you’re wasting your time and money.
If however you want a car set up to factory settings, you’d be fine using on OPC.
But if I genuinely wanted a car set up how the factory intended it to be, I’d be heading over to Center Gravity.
Edited by Slippydiff on Tuesday 8th April 23:34
maz8062 said:
Slippydiff said:
Correction, take it to any decent Porsche independent (especially those involved with racing, racing prep or race support, or better still an Indy whose staff race/track their own cars)
Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
If one takes a car to an alignment company that uses a Hunter alignment machine, they'll have access to the alignment settings for the particular car and dial them in. Crash-damaged cars, especially CAT S, are sometimes not repaired property leaving the chassis out of whack. I know because this has happened to me before - no matter how hard Tony Bones (RIP) tried to dial in the numbers, he couldn't because the chassis wasn't straight. If a company has the alignment specs for a car but can't dial them in, more often than not, something is not right.Failing that take it to Center Gravity, String Theory, Suspension Secrets or a similar outfit.
Do not take it to Porsche.
Not sure why you’d suggest the car has been crash damaged ? (other than you appear all too often to be a trigger-happy keyboard jockey on an internet forum)
Each car comes with alignment specs - it is not a dark art unless one is looking for "fast road" track specs, etc. I don't waste time with fancy alignment specs for the road. I stick with stock all day, every day.
And no, I'm not a keyboard jockey; I opine based on my personal experience. Furthermore, I don't take potshots at other posters - it's a waste of time to hate in the shadows.
You’re not a keyboard warrior, you are however a keyboard jockey, and there’s a subtle difference, hence why I used the word jockey rather than be offensive/take a potshot and use the word “warrior”.
However, you have posted stuff that’s not factually correct over the last 12 months, and I’m not the only one who’s commented in response to your posts. It’s a public forum, if you post misinformation, you will get challenged.
If you don’t like it, check your facts before posting, or don’t post. It is that simple.
You do like a bun fight, your recently posted comments suggesting the Gen 1 M97 engibe is equal to the Gen 2 DFi engines aren’t overly helpful, or indeed accurate, irrespective of whether or not you’ve managed to take a Gen 1 car to moon mileage, the bottom line is a shocking percentage of M96/M97 engines have failed due to bore scoring issues, and to pretend otherwise is not helpful to someone thinking of making their first foray into Porsche ownership.
The fact of the matter is, the DFi engines may not be 100% reliable, no engine is, but if someone can afford a DFi engined car, it would be a safER bet over an M96/97 engined variant that hasn’t been subject to a rebuild.
As for hating from the shadows, I’ve been on this forum a good few years, and have a lot more Porsche experience than you, I’ve also rattled spanners for a living, and still keep my hand in.
I post on very few topics on here these days, and when I do post, I do so for one of two reasons, for fun or to help others. Period.
If you consider that hating from the shadows, more fool you.
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff