Front Spacers = Alignment?
#2
i dont believe so. your only spreading the wheels apart and spacers dont effect the toe in or toe out. I think you would be all set putting them on and be done.
By the way i have your phone on my cell as the wallpaper. Nice looking ride.
By the way i have your phone on my cell as the wallpaper. Nice looking ride.
#5
Sounds nice, now off to the shopping, Do you have rears also?
#6
Not directly, anyway.
There is a tiny indirect effect on camber and toe, but for only 5mm spacers the changes are nowhere near big enough to be concerned about. A change in the amount of steering kickback is entirely possible, and that itself may depend on what camber the wheels are at.
Norm
There is a tiny indirect effect on camber and toe, but for only 5mm spacers the changes are nowhere near big enough to be concerned about. A change in the amount of steering kickback is entirely possible, and that itself may depend on what camber the wheels are at.
Norm
#7
Not directly, anyway.
There is a tiny indirect effect on camber and toe, but for only 5mm spacers the changes are nowhere near big enough to be concerned about. A change in the amount of steering kickback is entirely possible, and that itself may depend on what camber the wheels are at.
Norm
There is a tiny indirect effect on camber and toe, but for only 5mm spacers the changes are nowhere near big enough to be concerned about. A change in the amount of steering kickback is entirely possible, and that itself may depend on what camber the wheels are at.
Norm
#8
Mostly I was identifying that although the alignment changes are tiny, they do exist.
In addition to what the simplified kinematic diagrams show, kickback also depends on where the forces are applied to the tire. At significant negative (or positive) camber, the centroid of the disturbing force is not at the midpoint of the tire tread (where using just the diagrams implies it is).
A spacer also reduces the springs' overall motion ratio, so wheel rates and ride heights both show minor changes (lower for both) in addition to whatever happens due to bending in the knuckle and strut.
Norm
In addition to what the simplified kinematic diagrams show, kickback also depends on where the forces are applied to the tire. At significant negative (or positive) camber, the centroid of the disturbing force is not at the midpoint of the tire tread (where using just the diagrams implies it is).
A spacer also reduces the springs' overall motion ratio, so wheel rates and ride heights both show minor changes (lower for both) in addition to whatever happens due to bending in the knuckle and strut.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 03-16-2009 at 04:39 AM.
#10
From a practical standpoint there would be no difference.
In addition to what the simplified kinematic diagrams show, kickback also depends on where the forces are applied to the tire. At significant negative (or positive) camber, the centroid of the disturbing force is not at the midpoint of the tire tread (where using just the diagrams implies it is).
A spacer also reduces the springs' overall motion ratio, so wheel rates and ride heights both show minor changes (lower for both) in addition to whatever happens due to bending in the knuckle and strut.
Norm
A spacer also reduces the springs' overall motion ratio, so wheel rates and ride heights both show minor changes (lower for both) in addition to whatever happens due to bending in the knuckle and strut.
Norm
And again, even if it were a swing arm, you would not notice a change in motion ratio (5mm spacer compared to a 24" swing arm? Even an inch spacer would be under 5% length change). Technically it would make a difference but really not anything that would matter, my bet is that most springs probably have a 5% tolerance in rate in the first place.
Last edited by MorpheusZero; 03-16-2009 at 12:21 PM.
#11
VQuick - wheel rate is the effective spring rate at the wheel. Spring rate and wheel rate differ because the spring does not act at the wheel location, or along the same line as the wheel travels, and generally at least one other very minor effect. In most strut suspensions, wheel rate is on the order of 90-95% of the spring rate.
Morpheus - don't forget that for purposes of rate comparisons any length ratio (or cosine, for that matter) gets squared, so a 4% length ratio drops the MR by about 8%. Earlier today I ran some really quick numbers for the swing axle of a Corvair-weight car (100 lb/in initial wheel rate assumed) and got a ride height difference of a little over 0.5" with 1" spacers, which corresponds to over 1.5° camber change. Seemed reasonable. A 5mm spacer working with a 120" front view virtual swing arm implies only an 0.33% wheel rate change (less than 1/32" ride height and 0.01° camber changes).
I'm an engineer and while I'm comfortable identifying small effects like adding 5mm spacers to a typical strut suspension as having negligible effect, I don't think it's proper to say or indicate that the effects themselves do not exist.
A 5% tolerance on spring rate drops out in a "before and after" comparison when spacers are added to an existing vehicle (though you certainly would consider it if you were working up an original design).
Norm
Morpheus - don't forget that for purposes of rate comparisons any length ratio (or cosine, for that matter) gets squared, so a 4% length ratio drops the MR by about 8%. Earlier today I ran some really quick numbers for the swing axle of a Corvair-weight car (100 lb/in initial wheel rate assumed) and got a ride height difference of a little over 0.5" with 1" spacers, which corresponds to over 1.5° camber change. Seemed reasonable. A 5mm spacer working with a 120" front view virtual swing arm implies only an 0.33% wheel rate change (less than 1/32" ride height and 0.01° camber changes).
I'm an engineer and while I'm comfortable identifying small effects like adding 5mm spacers to a typical strut suspension as having negligible effect, I don't think it's proper to say or indicate that the effects themselves do not exist.
A 5% tolerance on spring rate drops out in a "before and after" comparison when spacers are added to an existing vehicle (though you certainly would consider it if you were working up an original design).
Norm
#12
Morpheus - don't forget that for purposes of rate comparisons any length ratio (or cosine, for that matter) gets squared, so a 4% length ratio drops the MR by about 8%. Earlier today I ran some really quick numbers for the swing axle of a Corvair-weight car (100 lb/in initial wheel rate assumed) and got a ride height difference of a little over 0.5" with 1" spacers, which corresponds to over 1.5° camber change. Seemed reasonable. A 5mm spacer working with a 120" (what? why 120"?) front view virtual swing arm implies only an 0.33% wheel rate change (less than 1/32" ride height and 0.01° camber changes).
I'm an engineer
and while I'm comfortable identifying small effects like adding 5mm spacers to a typical strut suspension as having negligible effect, I don't think it's proper to say or indicate that the effects themselves do not exist.
A 5% tolerance on spring rate drops out in a "before and after" comparison when spacers are added to an existing vehicle (though you certainly would consider it if you were working up an original design).
#13
I'm not an engineer but I'm smart enough to understand the fundamentals of classical mechanics.
Morpheus, you guys are really in agreement here, so lay off Norm.
(Norm didn't say there would be a noticeable change.)
Morpheus, you guys are really in agreement here, so lay off Norm.
Originally Posted by Norm
There is a tiny indirect effect on camber and toe, but for only 5mm spacers the changes are nowhere near big enough to be concerned about.
Originally Posted by Morpheus
I'd be very surprised if there was any noticeable change in alignment even with a 25mm+ spacer.
Originally Posted by Norm
although the alignment changes are tiny, they do exist.
Originally Posted by Morpheus
From a practical standpoint there would be no difference.
Originally Posted by Norm
while I'm comfortable identifying small effects like adding 5mm spacers to a typical strut suspension as having negligible effect, I don't think it's proper to say or indicate that the effects themselves do not exist.
#14
And for the record, I never said (or implied) that the effects don't exist, I just said they don't matter. Yeah if I lose a quarter then my net worth technically goes down, but no one cares because it's insignificant and not even worth mentioning, much like the alignment changes that a 5mm spacer will bring about on the front of a maxima.
#15
, seeing as the slope of the camber curve will have an exponential effect on alignment change (higher slope of camber curve dictates higher motion ratio change AND higher camber change per ride height change). In fact with our suspension at a certain ride height (where the camber curve is flat) there will be no motion ratio change at all.
Camber gain goes to zero when the control arm is perpendicular to the strut axis. Given the initial inclination of the strut and limitations on the amount of available bump travel, that may not happen. Or if it does, there may be a number of more urgent things on your mind.
Respect I'm an EE major a few quarters from graduation.
I figure that there aren't any 'downsides' to putting more information into a reply rather than less. Readers can use as much of it as they choose, but at least there's a chance of sparking a little extra awareness. Or curiosity. It makes ME think a little more carefully and/or actually do a little research before I hit the 'Submit' button. And when I'm wrong or slightly off the track it makes it easier to find out where I needed to have thought some more.
Norm
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post