CaptainMike

I'm running the RE 050A Pole Position in 225/45/17 and 255/40/17, a much grippier tire than the OEM compound and size combination, though not quite up to the RE 01R.'s (I have driven them all back to back on AP2's) I have 1.6F and 2.0R neg camber and I run 33 PSI F and 30 PSI R at autoX. That's what I get the fastest times at. seems soft but the clock doesn't lie. YMMV

c32b

Captain Mike, is your suspension stock?

BTW whats the rationale for the softer rear pressure setting?

CaptainMike

This is on a stock suspension though I am planning on going to KWV3's and probably a front sway to try and be a bit competitive in SCCA BSP class. 30 PSI is where I get the maximum rear grip in slaloms and tight transitional maneuvering. I could probably increase rear camber, but the car is my daily driver and I am not yet to the point of having dedicated R-comps. I spend enough $$ on tires as it is. I'd drop the front pressure as well, but I find it starts reducing steering feel more than I like (steering feel is a weakness of this car off the shelf IMO). All the surfaces we run on are pretty sloppy asphalt, clean, grippy concrete would probably require bumping the pressures up a bit all around.

FF2Skip

If by "increasing camber" you mean increasing negative camber and you are still refering to a change to front camber as mentioned in your very first post, then you are wrong. It will not increase understeer with all other variables staying the same. Since you reference high-speed corners specifically after adding negative camber, my guess is that your entry speed is too high and you're plowing into the turn(s).

c32b

Thank you for your input but I have tried the car stock on a control corner at the same speed in same weather conditions with varying tyre pressure, before and after adding negative camber. It is purely my opinion that increasing camber on the front ( i have increased the camber on the rear by the same amount) seems to magnify the higher speed understeer i experienced.

I hope you did not read too deeply into my "reference...specifically after adding negative camber" to mean i only tested high speed corners after adding negative camber because that would be incorrect.

My opinion of an AP2's balance will be purely that and not empirical in any sense. Whether its wrong or not, you may decide for yourself.

I will probably experiment with tyre pressures and toe settings to see if I can sharpen things up.

On a side note, I am quite disappointed with the stock AP2 suspension as i've been used to much firmer settings (both spring and damping) on my earlier car. I think this car could really shine with a nice set of coilovers.

FF2Skip

I'm curious, when you added more negative camber in front, why did you add more to the rear? Also, in changing the front camber, did you notice a decrease in available caster? If you believe you have exhausted those two measurements, add some toe out in front to add to your "turn-in."

As with anything else on the 'net, one can only read what is keyed. sorry I wasted your time.

FF2Skip

"Stock" is a range, not a finite number. And the range on the S2000 is quite liberal for most of the measurements.

c32b

I added F and R camber to balance out the overall wear on my tyres. As for castor, i did not check the figures but thats a good point. I should be going back to the alignment shop to see the data.

I'll probably see if some additional toe out helps.

It's alright to clarify if you think I missed out a point, no harm done.

FF2Skip

There seems to be a discrepancy. You made a change to supposedly accommodate tirewear and not performance. Also, the rears will never last as long as the fronts on this car if you're actually driving it.

Take it to your alignment shop and let them make suggestions. Most alignment techs know how to get a car to turn or hold the road. It's a totally different story as to whether or not they actually want to go through the hassle on the S2000.

Btw, where are you driving that you are "locking up" your brakes so much sooner?

c32b

Hi, I've always believed that when you drive hard and tire wear begins to show more usage on the a certain section then you need to alter your camber settings to suit your usage characteristics. It's worked for me in my previous car which was traditionally supposed to run less camber on the rear but I followed my usage pattern and handling feel to equalize F and R camber and the results were very good.

With a rwd I agree that the rears will probably go off first. How long have you seen the rears take for the OEM RE050 ?

Part of the fun of having a car to me would be trying out differing settings according to feel. Unfortunately, I may not have access to the expertise you have which could save the hassle of trial and error.

Just a quiet stretch of deserted roads far from populated areas in the dead of night. You can call it touge if you like haha