Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wheel Alignment Specs Needed

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wheel Alignment Specs Needed

    WANTED Toe/Caster/Camber specifications needed.
    Does anyone have a copy or have access to the wheel alignment settings for all four wheels on the M1163? My tires are tearing up real bad!
    Skyhawk

  • #2
    I could use the specs for my m1161 , same problem, tearing up tires.

    Dave

    Comment


    • #3
      I talked to Alan today (he is the guy who was training the boys at Pendleton back when the program was going on).
      He said that there are no published specs for alignment. The rear should be set with zero toe-in with the steering locks set. As for the front just an 1\8” toe-in. Not sure of camber. They were never intended for highway travel, just quick missions.

      Comment


      • #4
        Rasmusrentals
        Senior Member
        Rasmusrentals Thanks Greg much appreciated. Paul
        Skyhawk

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm waiting for an off-road alignment tech appointment to do some testing on a PM next month before I can give analyzed numbers. He has initial target figures for combination street and off-road, based on similar AWD independent setups and general experience with the type (4-wheel independent Ford double-wishbone type). However, he wants to see geometry and how the ITV actually changes dynamically on each corner, range of adjustment, bump-steer, etc, before he makes any recommendations. If all goes well, I'll have a target spec sheet to post in a few weeks that is based on real-world suspension response.

          That said, I did an initial parking lot front and rear toe-in adjustment myself (1/8" both), then I had a temporary 4-wheel alignment done by a new (to me) shop that seems to feel and handle well for my request of street (USA) and occasional off-road. Probably for liability reasons (other shops would not even do an ITV alignment for street use), that shop verbally reported settings as:

          TEMPORARY:
          Front Caster: 3.75° (L); 4° (R)
          Rear Caster: (unknown but "set equal")
          Camber: -0.5° (all)
          Toe: 1/8" (0.5°) IN total (front and rear)

          He only said he had to play a lot of games with A-arm shims to get it there, and toe-in on both ends was for braking stability when suspension bushings flex under load.

          The difference (I am hoping) is that these were guesstimated targets, whereas the off-road shop will check geometry and test articulation in order to verify that stuff like toe doesn't change the wrong way during hard braking, a big highway bump, etc. I haven't done a higher-speed panic stop to know how the stability changes, for example, but but limited driving around town has been stable and no signs of "squirreliness" so far. I agree with Greg that these were likely assembled only to ensure the tires were pointing the same general direction. 😉

          Comment


          • #6
            W427
            Senior Member
            W427 Very interesting David. Thank you. Keen to hear what the off-road tech says. I guess we need to make the point that Ride height settings changes wheel alignment so your Ridetech system must be in top working order before aligning the wheels. Interesting mine can only repeat RIDE height to +/- 3/8” and I’ve noticed Growler must be on flat ground to adjust accurately.
            David you mentioned about lowering your RIDE setting. My concern here is softer ride and reducing stability. Do you think that will be a concern?
            Thanks for the info
            Paul
            Skyhawk

            Comment


            • #7
              Agreed that mine also varies Ride height a bit, and is one reason I want an analysis, so the change in alignment is minimal at the selected height. Of course, the same applies to regular suspension travel while driving, and settings should maintain reasonable alignment then also. Hopefully I won't find that mods are necessary to correct any geometric weirdness. I'm certainly not looking for a sports car, but the PM can be very responsive at mild road speeds.

              Given the short-coupling of the PMs, reduced Ride height was to lower the center of mass for improved stability during side-loading, e.g., avoidance maneuvers. These things do stand rather tall at normal height and I don't need that height to clear anything on the street. Keeping in-mind the weird effects of change in alignment versus ride and stability, and that rolling the body reduces; manually lower your height between Ride and Transport height and take a short drive around the parking lot. Tell me what you think.

              Comment


              • #8
                I’m new to air suspension and am still working it out. I find that to lower height you have to soften the suspension which makes the vehicle wallowy at freeway speeds. This nullifies any gain in stability achieved by lowering the centre of mass.
                I too find the PM steering responsive i.e. turn very gently once rolling. Let’s see what the tech has to say
                Skyhawk

                Comment

                Working...
                X