Stock Miata autocross alignment specs?

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Anyone out there with a stock Miata care to share your alignment specs? I think it's about time to set up my Miata for the occasional autocross I bring it to. Especially since I found out I'm running zero front camber.

I've read a few articles but I was hoping to hear from people I know what has worked for them.

Thanks!

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

I felt that the "Icehawk" alignment isn't aggressive enough. I'm running 1.6* front camber (maximum that I could get because I'm JDM slamm3d y0) and 2.5* rear camber, 1/8" toe out in the front and 1/16" toe in in the rear.

Chris Brown · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:52 pm

this is what i'm running.

front (left/right)
camber: -1.5/-1.5
caster: 4.6/4.9
toe: 1/16" out per side

rear (left/right)
camber: -2.0/-1.9
toe: 1/16" in per side

it's hard to say how these setting stack up against other's due the other factors like tire pressure and shock settings. i can tell you that butlers car seemed easier to catch than mine. i never drove vails, but from the way he described it, his rotated much more frequently than either mine or kevin's.

Dustin Fredrickson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:03 pm

Pieced this together from Miata.net when I spec'd mine, and from time spent on the alignment rack:

First, be sure to start at front drivers side, to passenger, then to rear, at least if you care to weight the car for the driver. There is a pretty big difference in the alignment from just weighting the drivers seat with the stock springs, so I'd recommend doing it if you're really trying to do it right.

Front Camber: max negative you can get (~-1.2 for mine with driver seat weighted)
Front Caster: max while maintaining camber (~5-6 as I recall)
Front Toe: 0

Rear Camber: 0.5 more negative than front (~-1.7 in my case, I could have gone over 2.0 but wanted to keep the f-r delta to ~0.5)
Rear Toe: 0

With Azenis, this setup will tramline, but is a good compromise for a car you want to feel the road in anyway.

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Dustin Fredrickson wrote:

Pieced this together from Miata.net when I spec'd mine, and from time spent on the alignment rack:

First, be sure to start at front drivers side, to passenger, then to rear, at least if you care to weight the car for the driver. There is a pretty big difference in the alignment from just weighting the drivers seat with the stock springs, so I'd recommend doing it if you're really trying to do it right.

Front Camber: max negative you can get (~-1.2 for mine with driver seat weighted)
Front Caster: max while maintaining camber (~5-6 as I recall)
Front Toe: 0

Rear Camber: 0.5 more negative than front (~-1.7 in my case, I could have gone over 2.0 but wanted to keep the f-r delta to ~0.5)
Rear Toe: 0

With Azenis, this setup will tramline, but is a good compromise for a car you want to feel the road in anyway.

What would be a good compromise with improved straight-line stability and less tramlining? Just add in a little toe-in all around, or would I need to back off on the camber somewhat?

-1.2F, -1.7R, 1/32" in all around sounds like a good starting point for an "occasionally autocrossed" alignment. Maybe back off to -1.0F -1.5R?

Vincent Keene · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:25 pm

Dustin Fredrickson wrote:

Front Camber: max negative you can get (~-1.2 for mine with driver seat weighted)
Front Caster: max while maintaining camber (~5-6 as I recall)
Front Toe: 0

Rear Camber: 0.5 more negative than front (~-1.7 in my case, I could have gone over 2.0 but wanted to keep the f-r delta to ~0.5)
Rear Toe: 0

With Azenis, this setup will tramline, but is a good compromise for a car you want to feel the road in anyway.

This is the alignment we have on ours as well.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:31 pm

Might want to drop a note asking Eric the setup he and Aro had on Tim's 10AE. Can not argue with their results.

Plus they drove it all over the country...

Ashraf Farrag · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:00 pm

MikeWhitney wrote:

Maybe back off to -1.0F -1.5R?

That's pretty close to how my M1 is setup (street/track and seemed to do okay at the autocross last month) without adverse tire wear for street usage.

Spec printout from Digital Chassis.

A friend (on his M2 Miata) used specs close to what Wes runs on his M1 Miata and didn't observe adverse tire wear, either. His specs are listed after mine in the above thread.

Regards,
--Ashraf

Eric Peterson · **Joined:** Mon Sep 01, 2003 10:24 am **Posts:** 494

Mike,

I'll be glad to throw my 2 cents in later, but won't have the time for at least a few days. If you can share some info on your car it will have an impact on the setups you may want to run (e.g., shocks, front bar, roll bar, etc.). Or, if I run into you at daycare we can talk there, too.

Thanks,
Eric

Keith Vail · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:51 pm

My car has more front camber than most so take these with a grain of salt. I think Chris said my settings indicate that my car rotates more than the others is because I have the smallest front sway of any of the guys that I run with at 7/8 in. Here is my alignment specs:

Front camber: -1.8/-1.9
Caster: 4.7
Toe: 0

Rear camber: -2.4/-2.4
Toe: 0

I have had some people say I must be cheating to have gotten that much camber but from others it is all in the tolerances that factory bolts allow from car to car. Hope that helps some. BTW I was running OTS Koni SA yellow and Addco 7/8 front sway.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:54 pm

Mike,

I won't go into alignment since you know the theories at least as well as I do and I have no Miata experience.

Tramlining may be mostly a function of the tires and lack of toe in.

FYI the Firestone wide ovals (aka Bridgestone RE750's) tramline a lot on my Mustang UNLESS I run at least mid 30's tire pressures on the street. OEM and other tires were happy with the OEM 30 to 32 psi. This is with just over a degree of negative camber and about an 1/8 in of toe in. (essentially OEM specs).

Back in the day my Datsun Z and my Lotus Europa would tramline when the stiff autocross tires developed a typical autocross wear pattern. We won't even talk about what the Lotus was like on the street with Hoosier Autocrosser bias plies driving to/from events :lol:

FYI the ONLY autocross the Lotus ever went to on tires other than the competition tires was the 1986 Nationals. Even those had been to/from Charlotte for the Divisionals.

Dick

Dustin Fredrickson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:41 pm

MikeWhitney wrote:

Dustin Fredrickson wrote:

Pieced this together from Miata.net when I spec'd mine, and from time spent on the alignment rack:

First, be sure to start at front drivers side, to passenger, then to rear, at least if you care to weight the car for the driver. There is a pretty big difference in the alignment from just weighting the drivers seat with the stock springs, so I'd recommend doing it if you're really trying to do it right.

Front Camber: max negative you can get (~-1.2 for mine with driver seat weighted)
Front Caster: max while maintaining camber (~5-6 as I recall)
Front Toe: 0

Rear Camber: 0.5 more negative than front (~-1.7 in my case, I could have gone over 2.0 but wanted to keep the f-r delta to ~0.5)
Rear Toe: 0

With Azenis, this setup will tramline, but is a good compromise for a car you want to feel the road in anyway.

What would be a good compromise with improved straight-line stability and less tramlining? Just add in a little toe-in all around, or would I need to back off on the camber somewhat?

-1.2F, -1.7R, 1/32" in all around sounds like a good starting point for an "occasionally autocrossed" alignment. Maybe back off to -1.0F -1.5R?

You are welcome to take mine for a spin to see if it is objectionable. Removing camber is the last thing I'd do. I think a little toe would help, but I think the square profile of my Azenis 215's are probably the biggest culprit. I will be doing both tires and an alignment soon - don't intend to change the alignment specs, but WILL go to a more forgiving (on the street) tire.

Graham Jagger · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:53 am **Posts:** 1718

DickRasmussen wrote:

Mike,

I won't go into alignment since you know the theories at least as well as I do and I have no Miata experience.

Tramlining may be mostly a function of the tires and lack of toe in.

FYI the Firestone wide ovals (aka Bridgestone RE750's) tramline a lot on my Mustang UNLESS I run at least mid 30's tire pressures on the street. OEM and other tires were happy with the OEM 30 to 32 psi. This is with just over a degree of negative camber and about an 1/8 in of toe in. (essentially OEM specs).

Dick

That's interesting Dick. On the Z06 I'm running the FS WO for my street tires. 30lbs on all 4 corners. I have -1.5, with 0 toe front and -1.0 with 1/8 total toe-in on the rear. I get little to no tramline issues with it. Now if I put the GY F1 Supercars back on then it shows up. But I believe your Mustang is heavier and the balance is more to the front. I'm at 52/48 or 51/49 front/rear.

That works well for a street/track alignment. Anything above -1.5 or adding toe-out in the front causes me grief. And not having toe-in in the rear hurts out of corner acceleration and high speed braking.

It is interesting that the Miata uses more negative camber in the rear. I'll assume since you don't have torque issues. You don't worry about straight line grip and get the benefit of less oversteer on an AX course?

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

Graham Jagger wrote:

It is interesting that the Miata uses more negative camber in the rear. I'll assume since you don't have torque issues. You don't worry about straight line grip and get the benefit of less oversteer on an AX course?

Conventional wisdom from people smarter than me is that the Miata loves rear camber. I haven't noticed any adverse wear on the back tires and it looks like the car has been stepped on.

The alignment specs that I ran last year in ES are almost as identical to what I'm running in CSP. I'd prefer a couple more tenths of a degree of front camber, but the bolts are set at their maximum, and that's all that I can get with the current ride height.

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Eric Peterson wrote:

Mike,

I'll be glad to throw my 2 cents in later, but won't have the time for at least a few days. If you can share some info on your car it will have an impact on the setups you may want to run (e.g., shocks, front bar, roll bar, etc.). Or, if I run into you at daycare we can talk there, too.

Thanks,
Eric

Thanks O Guru of Miata alignments for chiming in

It's a bone-stock 99 10AE that I currently have no plans to do anything to except an alignment in the hopes of making it handle a *little* better at the occasional autocross without killing street ride. So stock swaybars and OEM Bilsteins.

I've got a new set of Azenis RT-615s on it now to replace my square 5-year-old SO3's that I finally wore out. I don't care at all about street wear (since I've been putting about 4k miles a year on it) but I'd prefer to retain some straight-line stability and avoid tramlining if possible.

I'm not sure if Brad ever even had it aligned before I bought it -- I'll check the paperwork.

THSCC Forums

Stock Miata autocross alignment specs?

Who is online