For Those Of You Who INSIST Car Manufacturers AREN'T Compensating for Road Crown When They Align At The Factory!

>

cT = 1.0 - there's not a single mention of manufacturer compensation an any of those posts.

_____ Think MCFLY, think! It's exhibited in the behaviors of the cars themselves, as described by the posters! The mfgs arent going to announce it because most ordinary folks wouldn't grasp the concept anyway.

this is not mysticism - you don't need to make stuff up to explain something you clearly don't understand. every vehicle in that thread is not new, they've all been curbed, and have aftermarket tires. what's happening is to be expected given that some tires suck, cars get bent and worn, [and some non-factory techs don't know what they're doing].

But that newsgroup is about Honda and Honda is a Japanese car, and in Japan they drive on the right. Wouldn't their cars pull to the right ??

I have a relative who lives in London. Drives a Jeep. It's right hand drive. He spends quite a bit of time driving to visit his in-laws in Germany. How would the mfg compensate for that.

If a vehicle pulls to the left, or right, take it back to the alignment shop. One that is competent and will do a 4-wheel alignment.

Your theory is just a theory.....and unproven.

The mfgs arent going to

That article has nothing about what manufactures do. It's possible some manufactures do but if they did you ought to see it show up in the wheel alignment specs and I've never noticed any specs that were different for the right and left sides. I think that 50 years ago it was more common for service stations to purposely set the two sides up a little different to compensate for road crown but that was back when suspensions were rather crude and hardly anyone had power steering.

Ashton Crusher wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Back in the 70s when I was doing alignments, compensating for road crown was normal and the specs all showed it. HINT that wasn`t 50 years ago. KB

are these manufacturer specs or aftermarket specs? can you cite a reference?

and what location was this? freeways are typically not crowned, so i'm interested to see whether freeway driving was anticipated.

jim beam wrote in news:jagl7f$vcq$ snipped-for-privacy@speranza.aioe.org:

It was the Bear alignment specs as well as the FoMoCo specs themselves. Also almost NO road is not crowned. they all have to shed water. I am rural so more pronunced crowned roads here also. Much more caster in most modern cars also negates most noticeable crown effect these days due to heavy power steering. KB

i've just been looking at 60's and 70's mustang specs. i don't see it. can you post a link to somewhere that does?

no, freeways are typically not crowned - for single lane it works, but the curve gets excessive once you get much beyond two lanes. they are often slightly banked on curves, but most are flat on straights.

power steering doesn't affect direction.

jim beam wrote in news:jagmkk$3pd$ snipped-for-privacy@speranza.aioe.org:

No but it affects the ability to dial in more caster for stability. The more caster the less tendincy to follow the crown. KB

no, power steering is completely independent of any steering geometry.

no, other way around.

jim beam wrote in news:jaj4sq$jh5$ snipped-for-privacy@speranza.aioe.org:

@speranza.aioe.org:

uh no you are mistaken here. the more caster the more the wheels want to stay straight ahead. and ps allows more caster because it is easier to turn against the caster. more camber would increase the crown following effect though. KB

caster means it stays perpendicular to the surface. if the surface is flat, then steering is straight ahead. if the surface is sloped, it follows the slope because the caster wants to remain perpendicular to it.

manufacturers don't increase caster just because they're using power steering, they use it to make cars feel steady on freeways. excess caster means reduced contact patch on the road when cornering, so you need to not over-do it.

more caster.

/uneven/ camber can be a factor, but if your camber is uneven, you have other issues besides caster and crown following to worry about.

KB

snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

____________________

One thumb Up in the "I knew it!" column.

Thanks K!

__________________ Kev: Please, for your own sake and sanity do NOT attempt to validate this for Jim.

He is simply not going to believe it nor understand WHY there is a RANGE within which all alignment specs can be set up to achieve whatever crown compensation(for left hand drivers in England or right- hand drivers in most of Europe or the States) or driving feel is desired. You might as well be arguing with Bill O'Really on his Fox News show. LMAO!

Seriously, my 2008 Kia caster specs are positive 4.74deg PLUS/MINUS

1/2 degree. Make the left side 4.3 and the right side 5.1 and voila! You've created a pull to the left on a perfectly flat surface, and probably more than compensate for road crown on the right-hand side, as in the United States, and yet still within that RANGE specified by Kia. Do I need to draw Jim a picture??

Want to keep caster roughly identical side-to-side? Do it with camber instead: Kia's 2008 optima specifies +0.5 to -0.5 camber fro both left and right. Make the left -0.1 and the right -0.3 and you'll get some compensation that way without creating unequal steering return.

Take care Kevin, and Happy Thanksgiving!

-ChrisCoaster

_________________ I do agree with you THERE, Beam - power steering only hinders the alignment angle's ability to keep the car going straight - esp the way they're pumping it up today! Cars are starting to feel again the way they did in the early '70s!

-CC

so /you/ go ahead and cite manufacturer specs that confirm what you're trying to say. and no, a range isn't it - it has to be a specific difference between each side.

if the MANUFACTURER wanted one side 4.3 and 5.1 the other, they'd SPECIFY it as something like 4.0 - 4.7 one side and 4.7 - 5.3 the other. but they DON'T because that's not what they DESIGNED it to be.

your logic on this is like giving some guy two bottles of beer and him arguing about having only one bottle of beer. yes, he's got a bottle. but he's also got a second one as well. simply refusing to acknowledge the existence of the second doesn't make it go away - it makes his denial either delusional or dishonest.

innews: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

so you can easily cite a manufacturer data reference then! i'll hold my breath while i'm waiting because i'm so confident you have a bunch of them lined up and ready to show me.

You've created.........not the manufacturer

Say no more