New aligment specs.. still feels vague

-
mbaird

mbaird

mbaird
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
9,341
Reaction score
6,555
Location
Boise, Id
Just got my barracuda aligned to the following specs but the car doesnt feel quite as planted or stable as it should.
Any recomdations ?

20180808_090922.jpg
 
Too much ride height possibly? If the car does not sit level, (too high in the front) it will feel 'floaty' in the front end. I have seen new gas filled shocks change the ride height too. it takes some time for them to settle down.
 
Car looks a little high in the front in your Avatar. I watched my alignment guy adjust ride height by measuring from the bottom of the wheel arch to the deck. That could vary by a half inch. FSM has correct method.
I used similar specs for my 68 Barracuda and it tracks like a freight train. What kind of tires on the front? Check the tire pressure? Too high? Mine are 215-60x15 radials and I prefer slightly nose down.
 
Caster and Toe-in look pretty good, but it looks like Camber is positive. I prefer to -.25 to -.75 degrees of Camber. Are all the front suspension and steering components in good shape?
 
I do have my ride height set a bit high for tire clearance and stance.. Those slots have the wrong offset so I plan on going back to stock steelies and poverty caps.
The tires are 215/70 14 Michelins and I might have are inflated to around 39lbs... I meant to bring them down to 32.
 
Cowbell, it needs more Cowbell!

Blue Oyster Cult - (Don't Fear) The Reaper 1976 [Studio Version]cowbell link in description
 
That's a tall tire you have up front too. Don't know how that help or hurt things
 
Try it on different road surfaces... surface vs highway....crowned vs flat and keep it out of the groove
 
I had it tracking tighter last year so I think it is the alignment specs .... I put a new motor in it recently and dropped the K-member and suspension out the bottom.
 
Should NOT have positive camber! Needs to be zero or negative a bit, and more positive caster would be helpful. Also, is the rear axle bent? Shouldn't be 1/2 negative back there
 
replicaracer43 said:
Also, is the rear axle bent? Shouldn't be 1/2 negative back there
Click to expand...

That does seem like quite a bit. Mine were off a bit too, but mine were only -.02 degrees on left and -.1 degree on right. .5 degrees of rear camber does seem like a bit more than what could be considered normal. I don't know that worn bearings could even account for that much.

Could one of the back tires been low? You'd think passenger side would have shown positive camber then.
 
I set tire. pressure high if the car is going to sit idle so it hould have been high if anything.
New Moser axles and green bearings
 
I used the Skosh chart Street Performance specs..
I will try the Max Perf. specs and see what that gets me.
alignment-specifications.jpg
 
Another alignment won't make that much difference.
At least make sure Camber is negative.

I would forget all about the nose-high stance and mount some steel wheels in place right away and get the car 'stanced' and aligned properly.
 
I work at a dealership and one of the techs I know is doing it so we have access to the rack.

I already have new 15x8 Stealies for the back . Just need to order a few sets of SS radials for the back. 1 set for this car and another for the 4sp Swinger...
 
The spec for camber is -.5 to + .5 so Making the camber negative will not have an effect, IMO. Look at the toe. That's in DEGREES. It needs more toe in and it will be fine.
 
I bet it drifts to the right with those settings
 
I agree with Rusty. Needs more toe. Shoot for .5 degree neg camber. .60 to .120 toe and keep the caster in the 2.5 to 3 range and you should be good.
 
RustyRatRod said:
The spec for camber is -.5 to + .5 so Making the camber negative will not have an effect, IMO. Look at the toe. That's in DEGREES. It needs more toe in and it will be fine.
Click to expand...

Camber spec for what is -.5 to +.5? Because that's not the factory spec, and it's not from the SKOSH chart which is what should be used with radials.

Camber for radials should be no more than 0 and preferably -.25 to -.5* for a basic street car.

And the toe is just fine. That .25* of toe works out to .113" of toe in with a 25.9" tall tire like the OP has, which is just under 1/8".

grimreaper said:
I agree with Rusty. Needs more toe. Shoot for .5 degree neg camber. .60 to .120 toe and keep the caster in the 2.5 to 3 range and you should be good.
Click to expand...

Again, that toe reading is just under 1/8" toe in when you convert from degrees to inches. It's just fine.
 
Last edited:
Disagree... camber should not be positive for radial tires. But I think the ride height is a significant issue. I run 215/70-14s with the front DROPPED 1/2 to 3/4 inch from spec.

IME 2nd gen. Barracudas are very twitchy on the freeway if they have a nose-up stance -- it's aerodynamics. Get that nose down.

I'm curious what .13 degrees works out to in inches of toe... Offhand I would guess it's not that far off...
 
mvh said:
Disagree... camber should not be positive for radial tires. But I think the ride height is a significant issue. I run 215/70-14s with the front DROPPED 1/2 to 3/4 inch from spec.

IME 2nd gen. Barracudas are very twitchy on the freeway if they have a nose-up stance -- it's aerodynamics. Get that nose down.

I'm curious what .13 degrees works out to in inches of toe... Offhand I would guess it's not that far off...
Click to expand...

Yeah the toe is just fine. It's a little less than 1/8" toe in.

Here's a calculator that can be used to convert from degrees to inches of toe. Just needs the tire height and the angle for one tire. It assumes they're both the same angle, so in this case I entered .125* because one side was .12* and the other was .13*.
Convert Toe Degrees to Inches
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top