Camber issue after lowering

The alignment guy said he could get camber to -1.9 deg and the closest he could get was -1.5. I was told toe would be an issue so I had adjustable toe arms put on. 2002 C4S , put on H&R and Bilstein's that go with the lowering springs, I think B8. Anything else I need to do? Thanks.

I’m a little confused. What did did your alignment settings for camber and toe come to, both F and R ? What did you want them to be ? What is the intended use of car and what tires are you running ? Any other mods besides the damper/spring and adjustable toe arm (assuming those are in the rear) ?

The car is for street use. No track, occasional get on a little bit but not much. Tires are cheap sumi something. They were new when I bought so left on. Trying to get to the rear to -1.5, currently at -1.9. Thanks.

I wouldn’t worry about it if the toe is good, toe is what kills tires. Likely if the eccentric is maxed you will have to go to adjustable upper arms and I really don’t think that would be worth it.

Tires are 225/40 zr18 front and 295/3 zr18 rear

Agreed with zbomb. Number looks OK to me. Toe being off will feather the tire. Camber being off will wear to whatever side, in this case the inside. The -1.5 predisposes it. But the performance gain is worth some miles shorter tire life. (invoking the 'it's not a Toyota' rule) I had the same problem when I took mine in for the first alignment. He couldn't get the camber to -1.5. I drove it for a year, likely more aggressively than the PO, had it realigned. This time he was able to adjust it in. I attribute this to old bushings in the LCA. I'm not worried about it wandering from -1.5 to -2, if it is doing that. The car handles great, doesn't pull, crab, or track. No clunks. I'll have it checked again in August or so when it's back from Georgia and I've installed the Ohlins. Unless you've got some weird handling, don't worry about it. It's in better shape now than when you bought it!

Okay, I will tell him to leave at -1.9 and wrap this up. Thank you both for the quick responses.

I thought you had ordered the toe arms for the rear?

I have B8's on H&R springs and got to -1.8 degrees of camber in the rear. I have no issues with tie wear as others have mentioned, that's the byproduct of incorrect toe.

Got back, new bilstein struts, h&r springs, mounts, and adj toe arms. Busy winter. I hopefully will be done for a while. Definitely handles better back road. Thanks all.

Looks good but the ride height looks wee bit wonky with the rear slammed and the front...not. Maybe it’s an angle thing... Maybe add some spacers, rear wheels look really inset in the wheel wells.

I don't know if the slope or not. Why would it not level out if the springs and struts are suppose to work together? All new stuff. Is there another setting? All set with spacers. I worked on my son's Miata this weekend, worst part of the job.

Spacers just slide on... not sure what issue you had but a 20MM would likely help bring that tire out. Are those factory wheels ? As far as ride height, maybe the slope or my eyes playing tricks. In any event, good looking car !

Yeah, his were just a PIA. The design was lousy and whoever put them overtightened them. I had a set on Boxster that weren't a problem. They did look nice. Yes, they are original wheels.

I went through the same stuff with my C2. I put on adjustable upper control arms, but I believe it was the adjustable toe links that made the biggest difference in tire wear, even though we could get the toe into spec with the stock ones.

Just looks like a worn/lower profile rear to my eye.

Measured fender lips. The rear is a 1/4� lower. Any tricks to make up that 1/4�? Do they make anything that goes between the mount and the body? Could it be I put in Porsche mounts and front and FEBI in rear? Thanks.

Bump

Give H&R a ring and have them confirm what the static ride height should be. Likely not the answer you’re looking for but with your setup ride height is not adjustable, it’s set by design of spring.

I just went and measured mine with H & Rs and its 117 front and 121 in the rear. Wheel size 225 40 18 and 265 35 18 I would start by using the accurate method of measurement and then compare to these values.

I can�t even get under there. Is it possible the springs went in backwards, front in back, back in front? I doubt it but thought I�d ask.

No the springs are a very different shape front to back.

Maybe a tank of gas will help. This picture is from this morning. Looks like it might be leveling or maybe I�m just beat and delusional optimistic.

Quotes source post: 17299455

I have the same suspension on my C4S, and it sat low in the rear too. I cut down hockey pucks to half height and then drilled a 1� hole through the center. Instant lower spring mount spacers for the rear. It leveled the height out pretty well, and there is no discernible change to ride or handling.

But wouldn't the mount not contact the body. I would think it there would be a tightening issue since the mount is not making contact. Sorry, I tend to over think. I was thinking washers on the studs if needed. Maybe the studs don't make contact, I am just guessing. Why I come here. Thanks.

Washers under the bolts r a bad idea. not enough thread and machined plate would be a possible fix if u could do it. The spacer under the spring is the way to do it.

So a spacer under the washer that the rear spring sits on? That makes sense. Could probably get those from bilstein and add a couple on each side. Thanks

Well if u r 1/4" low then u would say u need a 1/4" of spacer.

Quotes source post: 17299808

No no - the spacer is located just above the lower spring mount. The bottom of the spring rides on it. No hardware changes.