• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

940 align

jerryc

Active member
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Location
SF Bay area
Hey guise :)

95 945T.

Background, it has lowering springs, Koni's, and slotted camber mount holes. I had it aligned a while ago at a shop that used a trammel bar for front align only; it pulls slightly to the right and is 'darty' or too quick to respond to steering input.
I just had the specs checked on a Hunter electronic machine.

I'm putting in poly diagonal arm bushings, so can modify caster at that time.
--- first, what is the best lube for those? I've seen Super Lube mentioned. I also saw on BITOG that it doesn't matter, but all the mfrs seem to say Not to use petroleum lubes.

So, Actual specs on the Hunter.
Camber, L -- neg .8 R neg 1.4 I will move the R to the same as L (can't match L to R as the slot isn't long enough) stock is pos .2 -.8 but I wanted to have some neg

Caster, L 5.9 R 5.1 (spec'd is 4.5 - 5.5)
I'm thinking of a spacer behind the bushing on the right, to move it out a bit to more closely match the L. Can't shorten the L. Is there any reason not to use a spacer behind the bushings that I don't know about? Will the assembly tighten down correctly with that added space?

Toe, this is where I need most advice I think. L .1 deg, R .11 deg toe OUT, not in. I was surprised at this. Hunter spec said it should be .05 -.19 deg IN.
How does that match to 1/32? The book I have says 1/32" IN. The Hunter had specs is deg, but the book has it as 1/32".

Any thoughts on toe as related to the toe setting after changing the camber (more neg) and caster (more pos) or go with close to the stock setting for the toe?

Thanks, and I hope everyone has been good.
Well not Too good.... :-P
 
Your car pulls because of the difference in camber. I wouldn’t run more than 1 degree negative camber. It will wear the edges of the tires and cause the car to follow groves in the road. Toe out is just plain wrong for a RWD car, unless, you are autocrossing it or some other type of high performance, quick turn in driving. No wonder it darts around.

1/8”-3/16” total tow in will make the car stable and still turn in well.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Roy. I did the 'camber mod' to two of my cars a couple years ago and the results have been good overall, with even tire wear. No extra wear on the outside edges, which used to be pretty common on my hi-perf racing machines. :lol:
I'll keep it to the .8 deg neg camber.

I was surprised that it had positive toe, I did not realize the other guy had set it that way. That explains a lot.
 
Put in poly bushings, and a spacer on the side with less caster to push it out a bit. What a difference. Not perfect but that 3mm of spacer had more effect than I thought; I almost went with two spacers.
Now to the align shop.
 
I'm with Roy completely. I've got mine set at -0.8, been very stable and happy with it. The toe out will absolutely make it darty as well.

Camber in spec should help with the pull along with the caster. FYI as well, there are 3 different lengths of radius rods, don't recall if they are still available, but that was to set caster correctly for the specific vehicle. Maybe yours has the wrong one on one side?
 
The toe IN specs I've read & used are 1 to 2mm. I have no idea what these machine companies set their machines to....... I've always used the stacked bricks, metric tape pulled to the center grove, then roll the car back and forth in my 2 car length garage shop. In years past I had the 940 set to 1mm, and at times it felt a bit vague with that little toe IN. I like it better with the 1.5mm which it has on this last rendition. It it didn't drive so damn well I'd break down and have the machine check my work..... but I also fear the Square D ham fisted alignment tech nightmare..... hence the home schooling.
 
Back
Top