Wishbone Angle

[Andy 105 1 Cars]

A technical query. I have just fitted some Bilstein B6 challenge dampers and Eibach 7001 springs to the front of my 1.9 Mi16 engined 205. I am absolutely delighted with the result but now have a small but nagging doubt which centres on the wishbone angle at rest which is now just about horizontal . Total weight at the front is standard , because , although the Mi16 engine is slightly heavier than the 8v, I have put the battery in the boot, offsetting the 10kg or so from the extra mass of the engine. Now, lots of folk on here use this arrangement, so I guess it is o.k, but I thought I would seek others views. I had looked at the Eibach 7024 spring for the 206 which would probably increase the ride height by 15mm and help with the wishbone angle. Am I right to be slightly concerned or should I stop fussing and go and drive the wheels of the thing!!

[Tom Fenton 1,541]

I stop fussing and go and drive the wheels of the thing!!

I'd vote for this

The theory is about increasing camber in roll if the wishbone at rest is in the right portion of its arc of movement to do so.

In practise on the road I doubt you would be able to tell the difference.

The 205 geometry in terms of camber isn't great as standard anyway.

[Andy 105 1 Cars]

Thank you Tom. Fussing has just ceased

[A1AXX 26 2 Cars]

I don't actually think horizontal is too bad I have to admit.

 

When I've looked into RC correction before as I done the full RC kit on my previous Clio 197.

 

The wishbone angle on the Clio was actually horizontal after the kit was installed! Angled well up before due to extra low height.

 

I'm not an expert, but it seems a rule of thumb is that above road level is good (so anywhere around horizontal) and below road level is bad for the point of intersection, roll centre. You'd find when you look at them they will be fairly angled up in that case.