Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonS82
I agree and that is in the plans as well. My thought is that the coilovers will allow me to run more negative camber (hoping to get close to -3.5) in the front since it is limited by the spring perch hitting the inner fender well on the stock struts. Ill be combining that with a roll center kit as well. I'm still undecided on a fr sway just due to the info on this thread. Almost seems like Subaru got it right the first time, imo, but I haven't tried one myself so who knows for sure. Maybe run a smaller front bar and rely on the roll center kit to help prevent roll?
There's two things going on with coilovers vs "big springs" as far as more negative camber is concerned - spring to tower clearance and lowering. I think we need to separate them. This is mainly a MacPherson/Chapman strut matter.
That coilovers give you more room for negative camber is not only good from a static camber point of view; it also puts the geometry such that camber gain in bump / camber recovery in roll improves slightly.
But whether with coilovers or "lowering springs", lowering works the other way, with camber gain in bump (from the new static ride height)
decreasing. I have a feeling that so many people whose cars have strut suspensions run such large negative camber values is at least partly tied to this effect as well as to a lack of roll center correction.
OE bumpsteer tends to get hosed with roll center correction, so RC correction is reason in and of itself to plan on doing bumpsteer correction as well.
Norm