McPherson stuts will gain NEGATIVE camber untill the lower A-arm is 90 degrees reletive to the center line of the strut (center of the lower ball joint and upper strut mount. After 90* is will gain POSITIVE camber. Simple geometry. Thats why some McPherson strut cars that are lowered too much handle like shit, because the lower arms are beyound or close to the 90 degree point and theres little to non negative camber gain or in extreme situations positive camber gain. Also your CG and your roll centers become further away creating more leverage moment for sway. This is also why serious racers and/or engineer/geeks use or make roll center adjusted ball joints. Then you have to worry about bump steer, but we wont go into that. Some kiddies in here will get a head ache and just throw their ignorant hands up and claim none of this is important.

~Mike..............

That's true, but the changes are minimal and are not enough to compensate for the body roll, so as the car rolls the tire looses camber. Unless the angle between the arm and the strut is fairly extreme there's practically no change, and most cars don't run a very big angle there, especially when lowered.

I just went through this in my head in a thread I started about ecessively lowered FC front suspension causing only camber gain on compression.

the actual point of camber gain and loss can be figured out this way.

Now, in practice any camber gain in a strut front end is minimal and largely negated by bushing flex, chassis flex typically (typically takes out 1 deg) and your caster affects the negative camber as soon as you turn the wheel. We usually do get camber loss and so have to run very high static negative camber.

I run 3 1/4 deg negative and that gives me normal tire wear with Auto-X and daily driving- now in the winter I am starting to wear the inside a bit, better attack some on ramps :P

Our rear semi trailing arm gains more negative camber on compression and thus can run less static negative camber. In the rear I run -1.5 and -1.7 (stupid subframe link).

:uhh: anyone, anyone :Wconfused

I think your tires will stick out in the front, should clear the inside.
Rears, I'm not sure, inside clearance is good, you may stick out again.

^ yup- you'll need wide fenders up front, and roll the inners on the back.

Cool, thanks my vert is at the shop getting prepped for the kit and paint, so before it gets painted I need some front fenders.

one last question, should I get +20mm or +25mm front fenders?

some fenders are bigger than advertised, some are smaller, its hard to get accurate dimensions from the mfg'ers.

your best bet is finding someone who has a specific fender and seeing how their fitment looks and shop around for others, a wealth of knowledge is better than counting on a fiberglass fender producer to give you precise measurements.

case in point, my 30mm rear flares off ebay are truly a 30mm, but there are "30mm flares" from raceonusa that are more like a 50mm flare.

i was wondering how well
front 17x10 front 35
rear 17x10 rear 35
would work or will i need to roll the fenders, also with this set up, will i be able to just use a wider tire in the rear to compensate for the width so my car isnt more prone to oversteering, *pretty much will this after handling since there the same size* thanks for the help any info will help!

the frotn wont fit at all. in order to fit a 10" wide wheel, you'll need an offset of like 5 or something.
the rear will fit great, and you will only have to roll the fender with something larger than a 255 (right?)
go for 17x8 25-35 up front if you dont want wide fenders.

I already have an origin body kit so i was thinking origin +20mm or +25mm front fenders.
Don't think anyone is rocking an origin wide body.

would this fit my FC?

18x8.5 +38 Front
18x9.5 +45 Rear

thanks!

no.
you'd need / want 10mm spacers

all around with rolled fenders right?

Just want a quick reply to this, 17x7.5 with a offset with 45, would this stick out or in the fender wells? if its too much in would a 5 mm spacer bring it to a offset of 40?

17x7.5 with 45 will be fine!

i have a quesstion, ok i was trying to go with 17x10,12mm front and 17x10,35mm rear and wanted to know how well it will work and how it will handle if that doesnt fit, should i just go with same offset but 18x9.5 all around? thanks

9,5x18 et30 All round will it work with som fender rolling?

Anyone know what dimensions this guy is running?

http://static.nettby.no/users/d/e/n/...s/DSC00312.jpg

17x7.5 45mm WILL NOT FIT IN FRONT! You'll need at most about a 35mm offset, or 10mm spacers.

You WILL NEED widebody fenders to run 17x10's in front with decent rubber (I'm assuming you're not wanting a stretch since you mention handling). A 17x10 12mm offset will be awfully close to the suspension in front, and will probably need a small spacer (5mm should do). Then you'll need about 50mm widebody fenders to clear the wheels. 275/40/17's will fit nicely on those, but they're taller than stock, making potential rubbing issues worse. Tripoint ones should work. You'll need less than that 35mm in the rear, 25mm is about as high as you can go, and you'll probably need some small overfenders to clear the tires if you want to run some 275's back there. It'll handle and accelerate somewhat slower than before, as the extra mass and inertia from the wheels and tires will dull the responses, but it should give more grip. You don't need wheels that big unless you've got lots of power. If you've got an NA it'll really slow it down. Something like a 245/40/17 on a 17x9 will take less radical fenders in front to fit and will fit under stock rears, and won't dull the handling as much, and if it's NA then a 225/45/17 on a 17x8 is a good choice and will fit under stock fenders all around. .

I bet these tire stretchers have a HUUUUUGE fan base....






















Between the ages of 14-18!!!!!1

17x10 +12 on 225/45 stock fenders OMG and this was back in April of '04
Attachment 700026
Attachment 700027
Attachment 700028

Those fenders aren't stock. They've been rolled/stretched and it would seem that the tire's touching them, making the car essentially impossible to drive becuse the slightest bump will send the tire crashing into the fender, and they'll be preventing you from turning much/at all.

for some reason a stock metal fender that is rolled isn't stock anymore. I wasn't aware of non-stock metal fenders for FC.
18x10 all around +17 front offset +0 rear offset 215/40 and 225/40
Attachment 700029
Attachment 700030

and both cars are daily driven. the white FC survives in seattle. obviously its not impossible. don't go dukes of hazard over bump and you won't having anything crashing at all haha. Get outta the lifestyle of 45-series tires.

Yeah, those might work for you non-HP making guys but, when you make 500hp those rubberbands will pop.

hahaha yeah man 2004 in full effect! thats the pic that made me realize I wanted the 10's all around but also that I wanted wide tires all around instead of the stretchy look.

those pics prove a 17x10 +12 will fit up front. my 17x10+12 fno1rc were 23 pounds each, wtf. AND the +25 rears were 21 pounds each.

I'd rather see people use a Enkei RPF1 18x9.5 front and 18x10.5 rear, or 17x9 all around, etc. than the fno1rc in 10" all around. I dunno how heavy the fno1rc is in 18x9.5 but that does still have th ebent spoke concave look and might be a better choice, I dunno.

285/30r18 out back on a 18x10.5 RPF1 under a 30mm wide fender would be pretty damned badass if you ask me. definitely.

so you're saying a ported engine is still stock? last time I checked it was "modified" which is the definition of not-stock....

I enjoy my 45 aspect ratio lifestyle, I don't really like the look over oversized wheels. that being said, I see those wheels as being a waste of money seeing how the tires are so thin (not wide). I don't really see the point