Car in bits again...
AO Silver Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hampshire, UK
I expect the rear camber doesn't help that "loose" feeling, but I appreciate with the wider track of the 164 the strut tops can't go any further outboard. The camber translates into "camber thrust", which is fine when its equal on each side, but go over a bump or irregularity and it isn't. The absolute nono for a rear or mid-engined car is to dial in toe out at the back. Toe-in will promote some stability, but may increase wash-out understeer. Zero or a dash of toe in at the back and likewise at the front is supposed to be the safest set up, with a dash of toe-out if the understeer is getting out of hand.
Its always possible that in spite of the increased spring rate at the front, the net result is still an acceptable natural resonant frequency (i.e. its not shaking your fillings out), but the back might be too soft compared to the front. After all, unlike a 164, a greater proportion of the vehicle mass is being carried closer to the struts. Perhaps increasing the spring rates at this end of the car might help?
This is all fine tuning and should not in any way detract from the enormous achievement of getting the 6C on the road. More (longer) in-car footage please!
Alfanauts are GO!!!