Castor Camber Plate Recommendations
- Thread starter Sompin2do
- Start date
What a stupid comparison... A stock modified McPherson setup compared to coil overs. No crap you need them then. Fords settings are to keep the car tracking straight and NOT eat tires. Caster is ok to change out of factory settings, like someone has mentioned (for holding into the grooves), but other then that.. you go messing with toe settings too much or camber (especially camber), you will eat tires like none other. "Performance driving"stangbear427 said:
If it's driven on the street as a daily driver, it's not worth the money in tires to set it to your "Performance driving" specification. 
I just spoke with another alignment 'specialist'; no b.s., he has set up 4 complete suspensions for my father, and told him of this question. He said that for ultra high performance driving, i.e., super high speed stability, positive caster (I think he said + caster) helps, but he also said that this will in fact cause excessive inside front tire wear.
I mentioned the whole spherical bushing issue, and he agreed somewhat, but if the stock ones work ok, why f with it he said...
In short, not necessary for street driving, but a benefit on the track, with the downside of high tire wear (which isnt a concern on the track at all)
I mentioned the whole spherical bushing issue, and he agreed somewhat, but if the stock ones work ok, why f with it he said...
In short, not necessary for street driving, but a benefit on the track, with the downside of high tire wear (which isnt a concern on the track at all)
stangbear427
Active Member
Hey, somebody narrowmindedly said they weren't necessary on a street car. I have coilovers on all four corners of my streetcar, so obviously this isn't true so it's a perfectly relevant example- I wasn't making a comparison. Besides that, I drove my two GTs daily for ten years without CC plates, and noticed a significant improvement in steering control and response. Laugh all you want- far too many Mustang experts disagree with you for your opinion to be worth dog poop... and I'm not the one with a Saturn. I've also had a significant increase in life span of my tires with performance settings, because that's how I drive it. Simply lowering it and realigning it back where Ford said it belonged wasn't appropriate for how I drive it, not satisfying nor financially efficient. Maybe for you they are- you sound like the people I pass on the exit loop every day. Arguments like "why spend money on a V8? You can only drive so fast on the road" come to mind.PoopDawg said:What a stupid comparison... A stock modified McPherson setup compared to coil overs. No crap you need them then. Fords settings are to keep the car tracking straight and NOT eat tires. Caster is ok to change out of factory settings, like someone has mentioned (for holding into the grooves), but other then that.. you go messing with toe settings too much or camber (especially camber), you will eat tires like none other. "Performance driving"
Toe settings, with or without coilovers, is one of the main reasons for CC plates. It has nothing to do with adjusting toe, only with keeping it where it belongs. This is an even bigger factor on the street than on the track, where your suspension isn't as likely to encounter bumps, holes, or other irregularities while turning. "Dynamic alignment accuracy is the ability of your Mustang to maintain its static alignment settings during hard cornering. This accuracy is not possible with the stock rubber strut mounts because they deflect, allowing the camber and caster settings to fluctuate, which changes the effective toe setting." Which according to you shouldn't be messed with. Driving without good plates equipped with spherical bearings IS messing with it. Unless you drive like my grandmother, in which case, why drive a Mustang?
9 Deuce GT said:
Hope this isn't directed at me. I've been doing this for quite a long time. Just because my current car is stock (the way I want it to be), doesn't mean I know nothing.
As for the Saturn comment? Sorry you can't afford a nice daily driver that gets 35 MPG on 87. hahah Don't hate.
I know this from experiance. You make bias opinions based on your experiance with coil overs... Which change the angles and load points of your suspension, and different settings might work better for you. But if you're still using the stock setup, stock settings are just fine for any street car that rarely goes or never goes to an autocross or road course.
And sure, the solid bearing will help in deflection and holding the settings during hard cornering.. But you give up suspension compliance and road noise for them. Inwhich I wouldn't want to give up on a street car, that once again, never seens track time.
stangbear427
Active Member
PoopDawg said:
I have a '91 AWD 5spd Subie, which gets 30mpg on 87 around town when the 'stang is under construction and plows through snow like an Arctic Cat. Why would I want to drive that boring heap every day when I have a race prepped GT to drive? Sorry you can't afford the gas to drive a truly fun car every day. Don't worry, no hate intended. Everyone has different priorities, right?
Actually, I had them before the coilovers. This is my second suspension in this car, the first one is now in my wife's LX, with vastly inferior Hotchkis plates. I was rounding off tires like crazy, so we went to more aggressive settings. While they still lasted way fewer miles than they were rated for, my tire life almost doubled and they began to wear evenly. Now, with the coilovers, it's even more extreme because the car will pull 1g on street tires and so I do it every chance I get. I can't imagine how they would look with normal correction the way I drive it now. I'm not saying everyone needs CC plates, I'm only reacting to the blanket statement that they are an unnecessary waste of money on a streetcar- that isn't true. Everyone drives differently and with different setups... and again, different priorities.
89CopCoupe
Banned
PoopDawg said:
You make good points too "dog poop"
Seems the older I get, the more interested I am in a comfortable ride vs. "maximum performance" as well ...
Guess that's why ol' farts drive a Caddy (could be hemorrhoids
)I think moderation in regards to a lot of mods is the way to go with a car that sees street use quite often.
However, if you build a truly ballz-2-the-wall-racer, why not throw comfort out the window .... along with the rest of the interior ... maximizing performance ya know
stangbear427
Active Member
Because I drive it four hours to visit my inlaws, for starters- the interior, AC, and stereo stay. I noticed absolutely no additional NVH from the spherical bearings in my CC plates whatsoever. NONE. For that matter, I didn't notice any from my lower control arms with spherical bearings at both ends either. My Tremec, shifter, and 3.73 rear on the other hand, can be obnoxious. (for the record, the solid bushed suspension DID precede the tranny, shifter and gears) Funny how those three mods are extremely common in Mustangs, yet those same people will shy away from spherical bearings over NVH. The older I get, the less I get it. I have started thinking a 5.0 Lincoln Mark VII might make for a nice traveling car though... maybe I'm getting old after all.
89CopCoupe
Banned
stangbear427 said:
Sure, but do you think the martini's played any roll in this
It's good that your NVH didn't change with the modifications
For me, everytime I add a 'stiffer' aftermarket performance enhancer I notice more NVH ... usually slight and worth the upgrade, but the difference is apparent if I'm looking for it ... but I grow accustomed to the change quite easily too.
Based on underhood appearance alone the CC plates are worthwhile.
I'm not picking any side here, as I feel that you both are making valid points ... it is just a matter of preference ... what you deem necessary for your car and driving style, he views as a waste of money. Both of you guys are right in my opinion ... right
stangbear427
Active Member
I think the quality of the parts make a big difference too. I have heard cheaper control arms that did make a lot of noise, and someone in here said one brand of CC's rattled, etc. The Viper T56 and a Pro5.0 is way quieter than my TKO/Pro5.0 is, and it's rated for more power. Costs twice as much though, so I generally chalk it up to getting what you pay for, although not without exception. I suppose for someone who just wants a balls out racecar, paying more for better NVH levels would seem like a waste of money. It's all a matter of perspective. 
ON that thought- if there was a scattershield made for the Viper T56 when my T5 blew, I wouldn't have a noisy TKO now either.
ON that thought- if there was a scattershield made for the Viper T56 when my T5 blew, I wouldn't have a noisy TKO now either.
stangbear427
Active Member
No, but the Layered B-52's may have89CopCoupe said:Sure, but do you think the martini's played any roll in this
QDRHRSE
New Member
As long as you stay away from aluminum C&C plates they are all pretty good. I run a K Member and coilovers so I have to have them. I wonder why nobody metions D&D stuff. Their stuff is pretty damn good and priced well too. I have steeda's myself- only because they came with the car.
89CopCoupe
Banned
stangbear427
Active Member
Steel is generally stronger than aluminum, less likely to bend or crack. More important with coilovers, but worth thinking about for the hair-splitting types either way.
89CopCoupe
Banned
True, but also, aluminum absorbs vibrations better than steel does ...
I will buy either material if they are designed and manufactured properly.
I will buy either material if they are designed and manufactured properly.
ram360
Founding Member
stangbear427
Active Member
That's the industry rumor. I don't know anyone who'se tried. However, Griggs plates look like alumimum to me, and three bolt as well, and they sell them for coilovers- so maybe it's fine. They are the most NASA looking plates out there, and Griggs has the best reputation there is. Unfortunately, their website SUCKS and no details were available so I can't confirm any of this.
Similar threads
