Steering Alignment (with Correct Data in Post 1) - Page 2 - Alfa Romeo Forum
You are currently unregistered, register for more features.    
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Status: Living the dream, driving an Alfa
AO Member
 
Marzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United Kingdom
County: Dorset
Images: 19
I have just fitted 2 new P Zero Neros on my Brera S 2.2. Cost £466 ouch but, as previously detailed by Peter Cambridge, Prodrive selected the P Zero Nero for the S for a very specific reason.

I obtained the prodrive S geometry settings from my local dealer which was lucky as many don't have a clue about the S, and then contacted Peter Cambridge to seek his advice as to whether I should have the tracking adjusted and remove the Toe In.

He stated that if I had the Prodrive Settings for the S then I should keep them exactly as they are and not adjust them. Turns out the tracking was spot on anyway despite wearing the inners so, looks like a feature of having the Prodrive set up is some uneven wear, damn!

Peter actually states that if I remove the toe to zero at the front there would be more wear on the inner edges and the car would not be so precise on the turn in to a corner!

Mind you, new tyres have transformed the handling again, gone is any nervy twitchy feeling on uneven roads and tramlining has also dissapeared. Much more planted and smooth through the wheel.

If anyone wants the Prodrive tracking settings for a 2.2 Brera S then just PM me.

Ex 164QV, 145QV, 156 2.0TS Modifica, 159Ti, Maserati Ghibli GT.....sob, I want it back mummy Brera S Modifica
Marzy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Status: -
AO Member
 
inkybee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: Antrim
TUT Assymetric front tyre wear on Alfas

My comments may seem a bit vague but here goes. A Vauxhall dealer friend, knowledgeable in things mechanical, told me that they had had trouble with Omegas wearing the inside shoulders of their front wheels. They found that under braking the front wheels tended to splay outwards, and he advocated the front alignment be set to parallel or a little toe-in. My problem at the time concerned a 156SW and I have gleaned that, with miles, the suspension bushes wear or soften a bit. This leads to a thou here and a thou there which together add up to increasing errors in the steering geometry, which might not have been right in the first place. The next owner of my 156 arrived at a partial cure by using "harder" tyre rubber.
inkybee is offline  
(Post Link) post #28 of 415 Old 20-03-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marzy View Post
Peter actually states that if I remove the toe to zero at the front there would be more wear on the inner edges and the car would not be so precise on the turn in to a corner!

:
This can't be correct. I understand that the steering won't feel so 'sharp'. This is because the standard set up turns the inside wheel quicker so that it drags like an anchor (and wears quicker).

The real wear issue is the amount of toe-out that happens under braking. Setting to zero improves this quirk.

Setting to zero will NOT make the inner edges wear quicker!
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: Glasgow
Help Rear Tyre wear

Hi,

I'm pretty new on here and really glad to find this thread.

I've got a 2006 159 2.4SW.

I've done 22000miles in the last 8 months and am shocked by the rear tyre wear i'm getting.

The fronts have been wearing fairly evenly and did about 14000 miles; but the rears are wearing excessively on the outer edge and only lasted 8000miles.

I had a 4 wheel alignment done at Mcconnechy's to try to sort the problem, but after 6000 miles, the rears are going the same way again (down to about 3-4mm on outside compared to 7mm inside).

The alignement readout is as below: New / (old) in degrees.minutes

NSF - camber -1.00 (-1.03)
Caster +4.12 (+4.12)
Toe -0.06 (+0.33)

OSF - camber -0.49 (-0.51)
caster +3.59 (+3.59)
Toe -0.09 (+0.35)

Total front toe -0.15 (+0.42)
Steer Ahead - -0.12

NSR - camber -0.49 (-1.02)
Toe +0.11 (+0.09)

OSR - Camber -0.36 (-0.44)
Toe +0.13 (+0.33)

Total Toe +0.23 (0.42)
Thrust Angle -0.01 (-0.12)

Can anyone please advise what is wrong with these so that i can get it sorted? Going through rear tyres every 8000 miles could get very expensive given that i do 500 miles a week.

I've even been back to Mcconnechy's who claim there is nothing wrong!

Any help would be hugely appreciated.
alba_159 is offline  
(Post Link) post #30 of 415 Old 11-04-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
It's nearly at the end of your figures.
You appear to have now sorted the positive toe-in at the rear.
It was set to (I assume +) 0.42 and now you have + 0.23.
If it's not a Ti the spec is 0.26 +/- 0.07.
So you now have it adjusted slightly past the mid point and more importantly away from the setting that was causing tyre wear on the outer edge.

When you had it set to 0.42 the wheels were pointing to far in which was scrubbing the outer edge.

To better understand; arrange your hands as if you were about to clap but put your fingers closer than the rest of the hand. then move your hands away from you and you will see that the back of the hands are hitting the road first and scrubbing. (I've been sitting here waving my arms to work out what your settings meant)
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: Glasgow
Chris,

Cheers for your reply.

I understand that +0.23 means the fronts of the tyres are pointing towards each other less than they were before, but the tyres are still scrubbing their outer edges.

The toe is obviously within the specified range then and can't be causing the problem.

Do the Camber angles look ok to you?

I presume a positive camber angle means that the tops of the tyres are closer together than the bottoms, thus promoting scrubbing of the inside edge?

Can anyone else advise what settings they are using and the rear tyre wear they are experiencing? I'm sure no-one else is getting as little as 8000 out a set of rears.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Cheers
alba_159 is offline  
(Post Link) post #32 of 415 Old 13-04-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
Alba
I was reading your figures. It says that the "Old" setting was 0.42 and now you have 0.23.
On this basis you have fixed the problem.
So I don't understand why you are still asking for help.

Are you saying this was some previous adjustment and you have been running with it 'fixed' for some time?
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: Glasgow
Chris,

Yes, sorry if i didn't make that clear.

This adjustment was done about 6000 miles ago after the tyres were replaced.

I understand that part of the problem was that the 'toe-in' was too much; but i was wondering if anyone knows whether the camber angles are still causing me problems as i am still getting the same wear pattern (i.e. outer edge wearing much faster than inner 2/3 of tyre as outlined in my original post).

I presume that positive camber angles (As i have) are pointing the tops of the tyres together and therefore encouraging the inside of the tyre to wear more and the outside less. But i am getting the opposite wear pattern. So should i be increasing or reducing the camber angle in order to prevent the uneven wear which i am still experiencing.

Cheers for all your help so far.
alba_159 is offline  
(Post Link) post #34 of 415 Old 14-04-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
I think chasing the Camber setting might be unnecessary.
Go for an up to date alignment first. You may have knocked it or the original check was flawed.
Some outlets only charge if the setting is wrong.
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: -
Sorry I'm not totally understanding the figures.
Everyone is saying go to thevalignment guy and say set to zero?
Is that front and back.

The confusing thing is all the other numbers 0.26 -0.07 etc
So what exact figures should I give to them on a 2.4 2008 jtdm
MBadger is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United Kingdom
County: -
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marzy View Post
contacted Peter Cambridge to seek his advice as to whether I should have the tracking adjusted and remove the Toe In.

He stated that if I had the Prodrive Settings for the S then I should keep them exactly as they are and not adjust them. Turns out the tracking was spot on anyway despite wearing the inners so, looks like a feature of having the Prodrive set up is some uneven wear, damn!

Peter actually states that if I remove the toe to zero at the front there would be more wear on the inner edges and the car would not be so precise on the turn in to a corner!

Mind you, new tyres have transformed the handling again, gone is any nervy twitchy feeling on uneven roads and tramlining has also dissapeared. Much more planted and smooth through the wheel.

If anyone wants the Prodrive tracking settings for a 2.2 Brera S then just PM me.
So what does Peter set his to ?
Everyone seems to say zero but I'm confused
MBadger is offline  
(Post Link) post #37 of 415 Old 10-05-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
I'm sure Peter has his own way of setting them up very precisely but for the rest of us we have to use High Street companies.

The settings I published are the front Toe-Out. I thought through the posts I'd covered all the details but here goes again.

The factory settings say that the front wheels should not be parallel but pointing slightly away at their leading edges. This is called Toe-Out. If it were measured in millimetres you would crudely do it by measuring the width between the front of the rims (at their leading edge, across the car) and then the width at the rear of the rims. It might be (for instance) 1455mm at the leading edge and 1453 at the trailing edge giving 2mm Toe-Out.

Now we do it by measuring the angle of the wheels. And the new setting is Minus 2' +/- 5' per wheel

The measurement is in 'Minutes' which are one sixtieth of a degree. So the target is to set them at two sixtieths of a degree (2'). The rest is the tolerance (because nothing is perfect). So the tolerence is plus five sixtieths or minus five sixtieths. Put another way, the setting can be anything from Minus 7' to Plus 3'

You can probably see from this that a setting of Zero Degrees will be ok.

Don't forget this is each wheel and some places still measure total Toe-Out across both wheels (which is just double the above figures)

If still in doubt show them this piece.

And don't worry about what Marzy said about zero making the tyres wear worse on the inner edge (he is the guy saying that a heavy car will handle better).
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
colins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Please I ask for the correct/recommended setting for rear wheels of 159 2.2 JTS? Thanks in advance.
colins is offline  
(Post Link) post #39 of 415 Old 15-05-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
EDIT In answer to Colins above

These settings for the REAR wheels

For Non Ti...
+13' +/- 7'

For Ti...
+11' +/- 7'

Note the positive figure maening at the rear it's Toe-In

These settings for each wheel (double if measuring total Toe-In)

Last edited by Old Engineer; 16-05-11 at 11:06. Reason: In case anybody does not read the post above
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United Kingdom
County: Devon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Engineer View Post
EDIT In answer to Colins above

These settings for the REAR wheels

For Non Ti...
+13' +/- 7'

For Ti...
+11' +/- 7'

Note the positive figure maening at the rear it's Toe-In

These settings for each wheel (double if measuring total Toe-In)
The handbook goes one step further and specifies total rear toe-in, i.e both wheels at 26' +/- 7'.

As an aside I checked my 2.4 Lusso as soon as I got home (at about 300 miles) and although the settings were not far out, set it to 0.00' front and 20' total toe-in rear and 45' negative camber, all close to the manufacturer's tolerance, but biased towards the settings that I would choose out of preference for this sort of car. Over 33,000 miles tyre wear has been perfectly even - the first set did over 25,000 miles. I do not experience any motorway wander and have acceptable turn-in.

The Ti may be slightly different because the lower profile tyres may have a slightly flatter tread profile, and less compliant sidewalls. Generally toes and cambers should follow a predictable pattern from car to car - the main reasons for different settings will be camber (which can influence toe) and scrub radius.
George K is offline  
(Post Link) post #41 of 415 Old 17-05-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
Thanks George K. My Ti on 19 inch is set the same way because I've kept the 13' on the rear. I think it does make the initial turn-in slightly more crisp with the front end set to zero. Although I am willing to experiment!
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: I would rather not say
County: -
I am planning to do the steering alignment on my 159 1.9 JTDm with 16 inch wheels. I have already got a reply that „zero“ is the best option, but should it be "zero" on 16 inch wheels? How should I explain all this to a mechanic and what changes he must make in comparison to settings he has in his system? Is this a big problem with 16 inch wheels as well?

Many thanks in advance.
cona is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United Kingdom
County: Devon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Engineer View Post
Thanks George K. My Ti on 19 inch is set the same way because I've kept the 13' on the rear. I think it does make the initial turn-in slightly more crisp with the front end set to zero. Although I am willing to experiment!
On my Honda Integra DC5 hill climb car I run 10' toe-in to try to reduce torque steer (used to be 20' out - turn-in not affected at all) - am planning to increase this to 20-30' in, as the problem is still significant. Can report back if anything useful emerges - obviously tyre wear is not high on the agenda!!
George K is offline  
(Post Link) post #44 of 415 Old 18-05-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
What setting do you have on the rear? I think you can get better turn in if the rears have more Toe-In. The weight transfer on to the rear outer wheel as you lift off the brakes and turn is crisper.
But of course, if you are on a track and going for position you might want more stability when braking too late and turning too early!
Old Engineer is offline  
(Post Link) post #45 of 415 Old 18-05-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by cona View Post
I am planning to do the steering alignment on my 159 1.9 JTDm with 16 inch wheels. I have already got a reply that „zero“ is the best option, but should it be "zero" on 16 inch wheels? How should I explain all this to a mechanic and what changes he must make in comparison to settings he has in his system? Is this a big problem with 16 inch wheels as well?

Many thanks in advance.
Just ask them to override the alignment machine settings with this for 'front Toe-Out' Minus 2' +/- 5' per wheel (double for total Toe Out) .
All other settings should be as loaded on the machine.
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United Kingdom
County: Devon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Engineer View Post
What setting do you have on the rear? I think you can get better turn in if the rears have more Toe-In. The weight transfer on to the rear outer wheel as you lift off the brakes and turn is crisper.
But of course, if you are on a track and going for position you might want more stability when braking too late and turning too early!
Surprise, surprise, I have 20' toe-in at the rear. Hill climbing is done on cold tyres, so I need something very benign for my aging reflexes. Turn in is very crisp through quite high bump damping at the front; lift off hardly makes any difference, unlike the standard car which is far too exciting (due to crazily rising rate rear springs and over stiff damping). The DC5 circuit racers have very different settings, with lots of toe-out front and rear - would terrify me between walls and trees, but with hot tyres on a wide open circuit it might be OK. Torque steer and the driver are my only problems.

Apologies to all others for hi-jacking this thread. To make up for this, just to report that an absolutely standard 2.4 159 Lusso was competing last weekend and did surpisingly reasoanble times - but irrespective of tyre pressures, the front sidwalls were marked nearly all the way down to the rim!
George K is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: I would rather not say
County: -
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Engineer View Post
Just ask them to override the alignment machine settings with this for 'front Toe-Out' Minus 2' +/- 5' per wheel (double for total Toe Out) .
All other settings should be as loaded on the machine.
Many thanks Old Engineer!
cona is offline  
Status: -
AO Member
 
colins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Someone kindly please advice if its correct to say that the REAR camber setting for non-TI 159 is -0°40' ±18' EACH SIDE? Thanks in advance.
colins is offline  
(Post Link) post #49 of 415 Old 05-06-11 Thread Starter
Status: Still engineering
AO Silver Member
 
Old Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Esher
County: Surrey
Images: 12
There you go...
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Tyres.pdf (31.0 KB, 308 views)
Old Engineer is offline  
Status: Loving my red Brembos!
AO Member
 
perksy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: United Kingdom
County: Staffordshire
I have a 159 JTDm that came fitted originally with 17" wheels.

Since buying the car I have lowered the suspension by around 20mm all round and fitted 19" TI wheels. Do you think I should now use the Ti wheel geometry settings?

Also, what is adjustable on the 159s? Just the toe settings or camber as well?

I'm thinking of booking the car in here in the next couple of weeks because they have very modern computerised kit.

Thanks in advance.

James
perksy is offline  
Reply

Go Back   Alfa Romeo Forum > Supported Alfa Romeo Models > Technical & Vehicle Assistance > Alfa 159, Brera & 946 Spider

Tags
alignment , camber , caster , correct , data , post , steering , wheel

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome