Wheels and Tires Discussion about wheels and tires for the S2000.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

A very stupid question, for Jim.

Thread Tools
 
Old 06-20-2003 | 09:06 PM
  #1  
dolebludger's Avatar
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,060
Likes: 1
From: Durango, Colorado
Default A very stupid question, for Jim.

Jim:

As I have already said my question is stupid, this will save all the other posters the effort of telling me so. But here it is.

If (as I am told) the rear tires on the S2k wear because of toe in (meaning that the wheels are angled in at the front, making them "scrub" as they go down the road), and the fronts wear on the inside because of negative camber (meaning they are tilted out at the bottom), what would happen if the wheels/tires were set "straight up and down" on the front and parallel on the rear? Clearly, tire wear would be even and less, but what would happen to handling?

I'm not a tech, I'm a driver. You have previously advised me to reduce to rear toe in and the front negative camber, in the interest of increased tread life, but at the expense of getting oversteer. Well, if what I am getting is oversteer, I'd frankly like some more of it, as a driver! So the nature of my question is, what is the absolute minimum toe in on the rears and aboslute minimum negative camber useable on the s2k, without being deadly, of course.

And please let me thank you in advance for you answer, and assure you that my next set of tires (comming soon) will be purchased from you.

Thanks,
Richard
Old 06-20-2003 | 10:02 PM
  #2  
MrForgetable's Avatar
Gold Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 15,959
Likes: 6
From: USC
Default

i would say the best and safest absolute minimum neg. camber and toe in is probably the stock camber and toe in.
Old 06-20-2003 | 10:50 PM
  #3  
dolebludger's Avatar
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,060
Likes: 1
From: Durango, Colorado
Default

MrFortettable:

Well, I'd like to think so, but remember --- these are the folks that brought us rear tire wear out in 6k to 12k miles driving conservatively. These are the folks that apparently were (and are) attempting to make a TIRE do the job of suspension deficiencies. And, these are the folks who never built and sold a front enginge, rear drive car before --- ever. Don't get me wrong. It's one great car, except for one thing. It eats tires! With a car this good, there has got to be a better way ---- a solution.

Thanks,
Richard
Old 06-20-2003 | 10:57 PM
  #4  
dolebludger's Avatar
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,060
Likes: 1
From: Durango, Colorado
Default

MrUnforgetable:

Sorry I spelled your screen name wrongly. This board wouldn't let me edit.

Sorry,
Richard
Old 06-21-2003 | 10:15 AM
  #5  
Jim@tirerack's Avatar
Former Sponsor
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,319
Likes: 7
From: South Bend
Default

There are no deficiencies in the suspension. They use that much toe in to keep people safe in the cars. Honda would rather the car understeer than oversteer. You can increase the tread life by changing the toe in to the minimum allowable within Honda spec.

Jim
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
THE GEWYIST
S2000 Brakes and Suspension
4
04-04-2012 05:09 PM
piston_honda
S2000 Racing and Competition
21
08-17-2010 10:38 AM
Boost76
Wheels and Tires
2
04-01-2010 11:49 AM
SilverS2KAZ
Wheels and Tires
3
07-30-2004 09:20 AM
dolebludger
Wheels and Tires
0
02-05-2004 04:07 PM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:41 AM.