Quote:
Originally Posted by thisismikeyb
You keep repeating the same statement, which no one is disagreeing with, and you don't seem to understand what I'm saying, I will try to elaborate.
If your car started at -0.6 degrees of camber, to achieve -1.8 degrees you would have to dial in -1.2 degrees, which you did by effectively lengthen your LCA.
SoCalCarGuy's car started at -0.7 degrees of camber because he is lower, to achieve that same camber he only had to add -1.1 degrees, which means his LCA should effectively be shorter than yours.
With that in mind, if you were to lowered your car to match, and used the same LCA setting you have now, I'm guessing your front camber would be closer to -1.9 degrees. Since the lower your car goes, the more negative camber you get. Which should be the same effect when you are taking corners at the track, and compressing your front suspension. Your front axles should be further stretched due to your LCA's being longer.
Additionally, there probably is not enough suspension travel to cause a situation where SoCalCarGuy's front hub extend past yours. This again is because your LCA should effectively longer than his. Which would mean his front wheels should not be pushed out as far, and his camber arc should be inside your camber arc. ie: less aggressive.
|
This is where I disagree with you. With a Macpherson strut as you get more compression/lowering and the LCA goes up past parallel to the ground (so it has a upward angle from the body to the knuckle) the camber actually decreases (you can see some simulations of this
here and
here). This is why we try to run as much static camber as possible, to mitigate the loss on compression when going around a turn. It's also why Macpherson strut cars like ours typically benefit from a stiff front sway bar, because it minimizes the roll, and thus negative camber loss.
When I look at my suspension as it currently sits (I'm lowered by 5.5mm, a bit less than 1/4") my LCA is angled just slightly below being parallel to the ground. At a lowered amount that the H&R springs give, the LCA is very likely already pointing at an upward angle. Therefore, when my suspension is under compression, and the LCA is at the same angle as SoCalCarGuy's, my camber is less than -1.8deg, and my arm length is shorter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thisismikeyb
Now the other common thing between Kies' 335ix and SoCalCarGuy's 440ix is they are both I6's, which as we know are inherently balanced by design. Could it be due to the I4's needing to have balanced crank shafts, that the lower portion of the block is wider to accommodated that? This currently is my theory to why you have not had an axle fail, but SoCalCarGuy and Kies did.
|
The block widths could potentially be different, but it also looks like BMW makes up for that with different
supporting bracket PNs. Note that the I6 and I4 gas engines use the same bracket (and the I4/6 diesels also use the same as each other). I would think if that was significant they'd have multiple axle lengths/versions, just like they do for rear axles.