Sprintamx
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2016
- Threads
- 11
- Messages
- 372
- Reaction score
- 245
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
- Vehicle(s)
- 2016 Shelby GT350
- Thread starter
- #1
I'm working towards setting my car up with a 305/30 square setup, MPSC2s, camber plates and rear subframe alignment bushings. An alignment will be necessary, of course. I intend to set the specs more for track use, and leave them there (yes, tire longevity on the street will be compromised). This will still be primarily a street car, and I don't plan on any more mods at this point. Other than the camber plates and bushings, the suspension / body mounts are stock.
I'm prepared to go with the owner's supplement R specs, but I'm interested if others have found a better balance with more or less camber, toe, etc. I've had my car on track several times (Tech Pack / MPSS)--with whatever the alignment was from the factory--and the handling was good. No surprises; no real detriments for basic lapping work. While I wanted some improvement in mid-corner rear stability, and better rear stability over relatively tight high-speed curbs (think WGI Bus Stop), the car was definitely solid and capable enough in all sorts of situations that I could easily say you only really needed to worry about brakes and tires for a good track day.
I will say that based on my experience with other platforms, going with toe-in on the front as recommended in the supplement is different. I've always gone with toe-out in Porsche and BMW race cars; but I've never worked with a Shelby / Mustang before.
So, for those that dialed in more camber and toe-in (or toe-out), do you recommend based on your experience staying at the R specs, or pushing out a bit further? For example, maybe -2 camber up front, instead of -1.75? With the camber plates, more negative camber will be easy, but will it be advisable or smart?
I've read the few other threads where owners have reported their settings and preferences, but I'm looking for maybe some fresher data and experience, hopefully.
Thanks all,
Aaron
I'm prepared to go with the owner's supplement R specs, but I'm interested if others have found a better balance with more or less camber, toe, etc. I've had my car on track several times (Tech Pack / MPSS)--with whatever the alignment was from the factory--and the handling was good. No surprises; no real detriments for basic lapping work. While I wanted some improvement in mid-corner rear stability, and better rear stability over relatively tight high-speed curbs (think WGI Bus Stop), the car was definitely solid and capable enough in all sorts of situations that I could easily say you only really needed to worry about brakes and tires for a good track day.
I will say that based on my experience with other platforms, going with toe-in on the front as recommended in the supplement is different. I've always gone with toe-out in Porsche and BMW race cars; but I've never worked with a Shelby / Mustang before.
So, for those that dialed in more camber and toe-in (or toe-out), do you recommend based on your experience staying at the R specs, or pushing out a bit further? For example, maybe -2 camber up front, instead of -1.75? With the camber plates, more negative camber will be easy, but will it be advisable or smart?
I've read the few other threads where owners have reported their settings and preferences, but I'm looking for maybe some fresher data and experience, hopefully.
Thanks all,
Aaron
Sponsored
