Thread: P11 Camber Curves with Different UCA Configurations

Measured the camber curves of couple different setups, Stock UCA's, Cusco UCA's, and lower mounting points. I measured these at the hub, the angle gauge was set to 0 at stock height then I moved the suspension from 50mm (2") rebound and compression. Car is about 1" lower then stock, these measurements treated that height as the static height. The reason I stopped at 2" compression is because the suspension was topping out with tires on and the third link would rub against the inside fenderwell.

Before we begin, I encourage you to read this page, to understand how to read this kind of a graph properly.

Lets start with Stock UCA vs the 10mm shorter Cusco UCA, which gain us about -1* of static camber:


Not only do the shorter UCA's gain more static camber, the camber curve also becomes more aggressive. Stock arms stay at 0* camber for quite a while, you have to compress the suspension almost 0.5" before any camber is gained. For stock soft suspension this might be fine, but not for stiffer spring setups.

Next I lowered the UCA mounting points, the new holes should be about 15mm lower and 5mm back.


Not only do the attachment points raise the roll center, they also alter the camber curve. The new location made the camber curve be a much straighter line. What's interesting is, the longer stock arms and the shorter Cusco's have a very similar camber curve.



Finally lets compare each UCA's stock location vs lower mounting point.

Stock UCA's show a tremendous improvement from being mounted lower and gain camber much faster:


Shorter UCA's also saw a very good improvement over stock mounting holes, I drove on this setup for a while and it simply transformed this car into something else. Front end had a lot more grip vs stock mounting location.

Is there a way to measure caster with each setup? That will also affect how the front end bites on initial turn in and alter steering feel in terms of feedback and self-centering when releasing wheel. I wonder if the caster is changing during the "dead" spots of the camber gain charts?

You can yes, I didn't want to spend the time on it without knowing the steering wheel angles though.

The angle gauge that I use lets you zero it out at any location, the way I measured it is set it to 0 at stock height, then turn the wheel full lock into one direction, note the difference, then turn the wheel in other direction and note the difference.

I did a quick test while measuring the camber curve, at static height I had something like +4* camber over static (inside wheel of a turn) and something around -0.60* camber gain for outside wheel of the turn. It's actually really sad, but our high KPI angle (~14.5*) plus barely any caster is to blame.

Good info Vadim, I went back to stock arms which I rebuilt the bushings with some bronze bushings turned to the right size. Working great so far and your mod with the mounting holes should give me back some nice camber.

Let me know if you get to check how much camber she is running with stock arms lowered and your current ride height. If I had to guess I'm at -0.50* right now on stock arms and lower mounting points, with Cusco's I was at around -1.60*

Just replied on my thread, but measurement were around 1.4 - 1.5 negative. I am about 2 to 2.5 inches lower than stock, would be nice to know how much exactly though.