I've managed to get the print out scanned. Comments and observations please!

[ATTACH]25370[/ATTACH]

Steve

well the obvious one is that the Rear Camber is around +1 deg 'out' from the OE settings;

Actual +2.18 deg Left and +2.14 deg Right

Old OE setting + 1.45 deg

New (current) OE setting +1.20 deg

No wonder your tyres wore as they did. :eek:

Thanks.

Anything to explain why my steering is off centre?

Steve

Front axle toe is slightly out of balance by the looks of things (more on the right than the left) but the steering wheel out of alignment is more likely to be them not setting it straight before adjusting it and not checking it again afterwards...

well the obvious one is that the Rear Camber is around +1 deg 'out' from the OE settings;

Actual +2.18 deg Left and +2.14 deg Right

Old OE setting + 1.45 deg

New (current) OE setting +1.20 deg

No wonder your tyres wore as they did. :eek:

Is that right?... or am I reading it wrong. Surely the left set of columns is the "before" showing values for left and right wheels and the right set of columns is "ater" again showing left and right wheels. If so then the camber is still out of tolerance on both, the left significantly more than the right????

Is that right?... or am I reading it wrong. Surely the left set of columns is the "before" showing values for left and right wheels and the right set of columns is "ater" again showing left and right wheels. If so then the camber is still out of tolerance on both, the left significantly more than the right????

the 'old OE setting' and 'new OE setting' as as per the manual (not related to the printout of the test); or am I now barking up the wrong tree.

I think you'll find that the settings are correct. The print out is showing measurements in centidegrees (degrees-1/100), so a rear camber of 1.75 +/- 0.50 degrees, is actually equal to 1 deg. 45min. +/- 30min. (i.e its the old OE setting).

Front axle toe is slightly out of balance by the looks of things (more on the right than the left) but the steering wheel out of alignment is more likely to be them not setting it straight before adjusting it and not checking it again afterwards...

I'd agree; a steering wheel being "off centre" is often due to toe "adjustment" by just winding toe on or off on one rod end.

Hmm... I was referring to the "actual" settings quoted of 2.18 and 2.14. If I'm reading the sheet correctly and the "Adjustment" column is the final settings they are -2.14 left and -1.70 right????

Or have I read the sheet completely wrong (it's nothing like the ones I had for the Mazda that show "before" and "After" in different tables above and below each other (must be the Italian equipment!)

If I'm reading the sheet corrrectly, what it says is "Rear camber normal range -1.25 to - 2.25 degrees Actual Left -2.18deg Right -1.66deg", which values are both within range.

If I'm reading the sheet corrrectly, what it says is "Rear camber normal range -1.25 to - 2.25 degrees Actual Left -2.18deg Right -1.66deg", which values are both within range.

Except that Skoda's current setting for Rear Camber is: -1°20' ± 30'

Except that Skoda's current setting for Rear Camber is: -1°20' ± 30'

-0.66 to -1.66 deg in metric.

Which makes the RHS right on the upper limit, and the LHS waay out!

-0.66 to -1.66 deg in metric.

Which makes the RHS right on the upper limit, and the LHS waay out!

:confused: :confused: :confused: Where did Metric vs Imperial come into it?

Degrees are degrees when measuring angles and there are 360 of them in a full circle; surely; or do I have to go back to school?

:confused: :confused: :confused: Where did Metric vs Imperial come into it?

Degrees are degrees when measuring angles and there are 360 of them in a full circle; surely; or do I have to go back to school?

Yes!

There are 60 minutes of arc in one degree. So 1 degree 30 minutes can be expressed as 1.50 degrees. Figures given in the data sheet are expressed in decimal (degrees 1/100).

I can see that the rear camber spec has been reduced, but its difficult to see a change of less than 1/3 degree making a major difference to tyre wear. As I said further up, the rears are within tolerance to the OLD OE spec and a bit out c.f. the NEW spec.

yes!

Ah ha; understood. Thanks.

You know I think having read through this lot again we've reached a consensus - The readings now are as per the two right hand columns and it is out compared to the new spec!

Ok, I think of the DMS system of angular measurement as an Imperial measurement, and DD as a metric one, but the physical angle is the same; all I did was translate the new spec rear camber values into DD like the OP's scan is.

Skomaz is pretty much right; I'd agree that the one rear wheel is way out on the current spec, and the other one is right on the limit!

I question their machine..... You cannot have SAI at 6 degrees one side and eleven the other?

If the steering position is off then it's either a push from the OSF camber (if the wheel is RHD) or they didn't set the steering position level in the brace during adjustment.

What the rear camber tolerances fail to display is any dynamics... with the positions being so near max OEM spec, you add the slightest load or 20mph of aerodynamics then the camber gain will exceed the tolerance.

I question their machine..... You cannot have SAI at 6 degrees one side and eleven the other?

If the steering position is off then it's either a push from the OSF camber (if the wheel is RHD) or they didn't set the steering position level in the brace during adjustment.

I bet its the latter.

What the rear camber tolerances fail to display is any dynamics... with the positions being so near max OEM spec, you add the slightest load or 20mph of aerodynamics then the camber gain will exceed the tolerance.

The manufacturer's figures are static figures and this is what the car should be set to. So long as you are within the static figures then the dynamic settings (which will of course be different) will look after themselves. Once the car is moving then everything will change (due to drag and tractive forces deforming rubber bushes etc etc). A 'tolerance' is just that - its a tolerance, and so long as you are within it you should be OK. (I know a perfectionist will want the car set bang in the middle of the tolerance range!).

Wonder if the car has damaged or worn rear bushes?

This would show the camber as fine when still, but if they have gone soft would allow movement on the move which I guess could cause it to go out a bit.

Wonder if the car has damaged or worn rear bushes?

This would show the camber as fine when still, but if they have gone soft would allow movement on the move which I guess could cause it to go out a bit.

It might change the camber or not, but it's a racing cert that it would change the toe, and possibly castor, settings.

I question their machine..... You cannot have SAI at 6 degrees one side and eleven the other?

If the steering position is off then it's either a push from the OSF camber (if the wheel is RHD) or they didn't set the steering position level in the brace during adjustment.

What the rear camber tolerances fail to display is any dynamics... with the positions being so near max OEM spec, you add the slightest load or 20mph of aerodynamics then the camber gain will exceed the tolerance.

Morning Tony - Didn't know you were a member on here as well as the MX5OC as I've not seen a post from you before!

Gents - if you didn't know your man here is a GOD amongst MX5 Owners whn it cmes to alignment issues...

Assumng it is Tony that is :eek:

Morning Tony - Didn't know you were a member on here as well as the MX5OC as I've not seen a post from you before!

Gents - if you didn't know your man here is a GOD amongst MX5 Owners whn it comes to alignment issues...

Assuming it is Tony that is :eek:

From what I have heard (in other posts); Tony IS your man.

From what I have heard (in other posts); [b']Tony IS your man bitch.[/b]

The manufacturer's figures are static figures and this is what the car should be set to. So long as you are within the static figures then the dynamic settings (which will of course be different) will look after themselves. Once the car is moving then everything will change (due to drag and tractive forces deforming rubber bushes etc etc). A 'tolerance' is just that - its a tolerance, and so long as you are within it you should be OK. (I know a perfectionist will want the car set bang in the middle of the tolerance range!).

Static, dynamic, tolerance or whatever the fact remains the tyres are wearing!

Recognizing the static figures may be wrong suggests a much better solution to complaint than "it's within" all should be well?

If we can agree on that then we could look at the dynamics, add a smattering of tolerance and conclude a solution don't you think?

What many fail to see is the manufacturers settings are "suggestions" not law. The human variables are to vast to suggest an absolute, matter of fact calibration for any car...... That's why there's not 21 drivers on the F1 podium after the race.

Another interesting fact.... Since we are talking static figures then why doesn't Skoda suggest a fuel load % at the time of the calibration?..... I think we can all agree an empty tank -V- a full tank will have a huge disparity between destination settings?