FAQ  •  Login

Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

<<

RobtheFiend

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 640

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:35 am

Location: Sweden

Cars: Opel Astra -99 1.6 16

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:30 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Killrob wrote:
Prasiatko wrote:Having a few cars where i am unable to alter the rear camber angle.

Because you can't have camber on solid axle suspensions :)


You really need to do more research.

http://www.wintersperformance.com/catalogs.htm

Look through these, and then you know better. ;)
<<

Killrob

User avatar

Developer - Lead Beta Tester/Producer/German Efficiency Expert
Developer - Lead Beta Tester/Producer/German Efficiency Expert

Posts: 3711

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:00 am

Location: Lower Hutt, New Zealand

Cars: I owned a Twingo... totally bad-ass!

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:32 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

RobtheFiend wrote:
Killrob wrote:
Prasiatko wrote:Having a few cars where i am unable to alter the rear camber angle.

Because you can't have camber on solid axle suspensions :)


You really need to do more research.

http://www.wintersperformance.com/catalogs.htm

Look through these, and then you know better. ;)

Production cars?
<<

Packbat

User avatar

Posts: 953

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:07 pm

Location: Eastern Time Zone, USA

Cars: I, being poor, have only my dreams

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:58 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Did a quick Googling looking for information on solid-axle camber on production vehicles:
Even granted that you could design in a small camber angle on a solid axle, like Killrob says, it's not a production-car thing. If I had to guess, I'd guess because reliability, safety, and cost, but whatever the cause, it's not something generally done in the factory.
<<

ArnRno

Posts: 194

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:10 am

Cars: 2002 Impreza
1962 Super 88

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 2:19 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Packbat - those examples are both rear drive with a solid axle, but did you find any info on front-drive with a solid rear axle? Killrob, too?

I found something I mentioned earlier in this thread yesterday about camber changes on dead axles, seemingly just shims, but I will try to do a bit more research after work tonight/ this weekend, I'll try to see if anything ever left the factory like that. Front drive with a solid rear axle isn't a terribly common set-up as far as I know IRL, but it's a design I liked using in the game.
<<

Packbat

User avatar

Posts: 953

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:07 pm

Location: Eastern Time Zone, USA

Cars: I, being poor, have only my dreams

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 2:46 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Let us know either way - I did a quick search and couldn't find anything. (Except a page saying, "if you're using independent suspension on the driven wheels, you shouldn't be using a solid axle on the non-driven wheels - a strut suspension is cheap." But I think that might have been a student paper.)
<<

ArnRno

Posts: 194

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:10 am

Cars: 2002 Impreza
1962 Super 88

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 3:02 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

My Google-fu isn't nearly as good as some other people I know. I think right now, the best way I can try to see if dead-axle camber adj. is even a thing is to look up specs on vehicles that had that sort of suspension, and see if I can find factory camber specs, or repair specs, or maybe repair manuals. Problem is I can't think of a ton of vehicles with that set-up at the moment. Chrysler K-cars had it, IIRC, so that mean at least first-gen Dodge Caravans and the variants would have it, too.

Ha, ha, okay - so my mind wandered. I typed the above paragraph, then went to Google. Tried "1990 Dodge Caravan rear camber," and found shims right away, not fancy hot rod stuff, just shims for camber changes, up to one degree either way. Now we know that it IS adjustable, I need to verify whether or not these cars/vans, or others with similar rear suspension, ever left the factory at anything other than "+/- 0.0 degrees."

I'm going to keep going on the search - I figure if anything mainstream left the factory with a non-neutral camber, than there is our answer, right?

EDIT: Found something! 2008 Dodge Caravan (still a solid rear axle, believe it or not) has factory rear camber spec listed at "−0.46° to +0.34°," so to me, that sounds like factory specs apart from "0.0" do exist! I feel like I've accomplished something today!

EDIT II: Checked the K-cars, too, same sort of thing in that I'm finding alignment shims all over the net to adjust rear camber on their solid axle, but hard to find the actual specs - not many home mechs keeping their 83 LeBarons alive, apparently.
<<

Packbat

User avatar

Posts: 953

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:07 pm

Location: Eastern Time Zone, USA

Cars: I, being poor, have only my dreams

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Hurray, research!
ArnRno wrote:EDIT: Found something! 2008 Dodge Caravan (still a solid rear axle, believe it or not) has factory rear camber spec listed at "−0.46° to +0.34°," so to me, that sounds like factory specs apart from "0.0" do exist! I feel like I've accomplished something today!

What does it give for the front wheels? "−0.46° to +0.34°" sounds like an engineering tolerance to me - basically, "if our measurement of the camber is within this range, it's good enough" - and when we're designing around tenths of a degree or finer in-game, an eight-tenths wide range doesn't sound like a design camber so much as "make sure it's not too far away from zero". The forumite I found earlier said Ford 8.8 axles were "all over the map"; this sounds similar.

If for the front it says something like "-0.52° to -0.47°", I think that would confirm my speculation.

(Edit: I'm actually expecting it to specify more precisely than that for the front, but I don't actually know - I'm very curious.)
<<

Lordred

User avatar

Posts: 695

Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm

Location: California, USA

Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 5:18 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Packbat wrote:Hurray, research!
ArnRno wrote:EDIT: Found something! 2008 Dodge Caravan (still a solid rear axle, believe it or not) has factory rear camber spec listed at "−0.46° to +0.34°," so to me, that sounds like factory specs apart from "0.0" do exist! I feel like I've accomplished something today!

What does it give for the front wheels? "−0.46° to +0.34°" sounds like an engineering tolerance to me - basically, "if our measurement of the camber is within this range, it's good enough" - and when we're designing around tenths of a degree or finer in-game, an eight-tenths wide range doesn't sound like a design camber so much as "make sure it's not too far away from zero". The forumite I found earlier said Ford 8.8 axles were "all over the map"; this sounds similar.

If for the front it says something like "-0.52° to -0.47°", I think that would confirm my speculation.

(Edit: I'm actually expecting it to specify more precisely than that for the front, but I don't actually know - I'm very curious.)



Solid axle with no drive line components Can have adjustable camber, if designed too, though at that point might as well have torsion bar.

Solid LIVE axle does not have any form of adjustment.
Image
ID: 1963886
<<

ArnRno

Posts: 194

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:10 am

Cars: 2002 Impreza
1962 Super 88

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 5:53 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Lordred, that's what I've been talking about this whole time, dead axles, I'm on the same page here, Packbat is too, I think.

Packbat, I'll have to check again tomorrow - I looked that up at work, and I'm not sure where I ended up, so I'll have to check the history on the browser. I don't want to chase all that again tonight.
<<

Lordred

User avatar

Posts: 695

Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm

Location: California, USA

Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria

Post Thu Dec 03, 2015 6:51 pm

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

ArnRno wrote:Lordred, that's what I've been talking about this whole time, dead axles, I'm on the same page here, Packbat is too, I think.

Packbat, I'll have to check again tomorrow - I looked that up at work, and I'm not sure where I ended up, so I'll have to check the history on the browser. I don't want to chase all that again tonight.



I am only saying it CAN be done, but it would be meaningless to design a Solid rear axle with camber adjustment, as you would be over engineering the Axle to achieve what torsion bar can do for the same money, with better results.

For a Rear solid axle to have camber adjustment you need to split the axle shaft with a U-joint, add a 'steering knuckle' type housing, add an upper / lower mount point + brace. OR a Kinpin + brace, and use a an eccentric bushing for the upper mount/kingpin.

While I have not seen this setup used in the rear axle of a production car, Ford, Chevy, and Chrysler have used it for YEARS in the front suspension, and still do.

Front Solid Axle equipped trucks use a setup similar to this. Image

Which provides front end camber adjustment on solid axle equipped units.

On 4WD models the front end camber adjustment is normally lost. Axles like the DANA 44 however retain adjustable camber (not a lot).

In the end, I see locked camber for solid axles as an acceptable trade off for its comparable cheapness.


Edit: This is the stock Dana 44 axle used on Jeeps for a long time, and some Chevy/Ford/Dodges over the years, front camber is adjustable with an eccentric bushing. They are popular to be retro-fit into the rear, but require a brace to prevent the wheels from turning.
Image
Image
ID: 1963886
<<

Packbat

User avatar

Posts: 953

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:07 pm

Location: Eastern Time Zone, USA

Cars: I, being poor, have only my dreams

Post Fri Dec 04, 2015 3:15 am

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Interesting! So the way to go would be to allow a degree or so of camber on the dead axle?
<<

Lordred

User avatar

Posts: 695

Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm

Location: California, USA

Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria

Post Fri Dec 04, 2015 3:27 am

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

I still lean to saying no, as to have camber adjustment on a rear solid reqiures some extra work, it can be done, but at the cost of more engineering time, at that point why not use trailing arms or torsion bar?

I was mearly making the case that it is possible.
Image
ID: 1963886
<<

Packbat

User avatar

Posts: 953

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:07 pm

Location: Eastern Time Zone, USA

Cars: I, being poor, have only my dreams

Post Fri Dec 04, 2015 4:18 am

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Good to know! I think we had well established that it was possible, and were just debating whether it was something that should be included in-game. It sounds like it needn't be.
<<

ArnRno

Posts: 194

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:10 am

Cars: 2002 Impreza
1962 Super 88

Post Fri Dec 04, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

Lordred wrote:I still lean to saying no, as to have camber adjustment on a rear solid reqiures some extra work, it can be done, but at the cost of more engineering time, at that point why not use trailing arms or torsion bar?

I was mearly making the case that it is possible.


I'm still leaning towards yes - Let us step back and stop thinking about "adjustment" (even though I brought it up), and just think right from the start about the car leaving the factory.
Example - If a vehicle with dead axle could be made to have an ideal camber of zero degrees, and be completely non-adjustable, we accept this, yes? Okay, then why would you be against an axle being completely non-adjustable with a camber of +/- a degree or two?

Simplify it further - imaginary dead axle is one single piece of billet, machined to a spec where the wheel mounts are parallel to each other, perpendicular to the ground - zero camber, one way or the other. This piece takes (X) amount of engineering time and (Y) amount of production costs. Imagine now that a second axle has its mounting surfaces machined a degree off on either side, opposite to each other, neither parallel to the ground - the axle now has camber, one way or the other, with no significant increase to engineering time or production costs, if at all.

In the real world, a dead axle would not be a single piece like this, but think about what a dead axle is - it is a rigid tube or bar, with spindles/bearing surfaces/ hub-mounting points on each end, and suspension/ shock mounts. Do you want pictures? I have pictures. All of these mounts and etc. are joined to the beam/ tube itself, 99.9% of the time by welding. The axles are designed by the engineers that, once all put together and under the car, to have a a camber of (Z) - It might be positive, it might be negative, it might be neutral, but regardless, THERE IS TECHNICALLY A MEASURABLE CAMBER ON THE WHEELS.

Now, we don't care what-so-ever whether that is adjustable or not after the car is sold to the customer, we are just designing a car (or truck), and performance at brand-new at zero miles is what we give any damns about. This is Automation, not Car Mechanic Simulator 2015. If for some reason the only possible way to change camber on this vehicle is to hire engineers and cut a new axle out of billet with different dimensions, then so be it, I don't care - but tell me, TELL ME, why it should not be possible to design the axle a liiiittle differently from the factory to have half a damn degree of camber either way. Tell me why zero degrees is the only possible way a straight, dead axle could and should be designed.



FWIW - I love making vans and small cars with a cheap dead axle in the back. In a van, you have a very durable axle with the highest load rating, and it can give you a flat cargo floor which is very important. In small little hatches and coupes, it's cheap, it's functional, it's compact, it's simple to engineer. Etc. Not every car I make is the "best" car, and that's on purpose - I don't always want IRS, sometimes a straight axle is perfectly fine, especially if I have a tenth of a degree or two of camber to play with.
<<

ArnRno

Posts: 194

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:10 am

Cars: 2002 Impreza
1962 Super 88

Post Fri Dec 04, 2015 11:41 am

Re: Open Beta [B151127+] Feedback

!!!!!

I was just in traffic at lunch behind one of those new Nissan NV200 vans - It definitely had a solid dead axle in the rear, and the camber on the back was definitely negative, honestly, it was further from zero than the front wheels were and they're obviously IFS. SUCCESS!
PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests