Negatives Associated With 309 Wishbones

[skeggyrik 3]

The car needs wishbones, tired ball joints, one fialed the MOT. Thinking of going with 309 wishbones for the neagtive camber. I'll have to go with 309 shafts too as I understand it, which isn't a huge worry as I've got wobbly gearstick syndrome which, from trawling the post indicates tired shafts anyway.

 

Other than a slight decrese in straight line traction are there any other neagtives associated with this practise in your collective experiences?

 

Also are there any tracking issues I need to know about? Does negative camber alter the way in which the car should be tracked once they've been fitted?

 

Thanks

 

Just to add the Gaz coilovers arived today!

 

Rich

[Ahl 4]

Less grip under braking?

More tendancy to follow cambers/whitelines etc. Thats what I find anyway.

 

My tyres don't seem to wear unevenly, if anything they are more even!

[Anthony 1,003]

Only real problem I find is that it tramlines slightly more on rutted roads, but otherwise it's all good.

 

With regards tyre wear, I find that with 205 wishbones I wear the outside edge of the tyres to nothing, whereas with 309 wishbones they wear evenly and hence I get alot more miles form a set of tyres.

 

As for tracking, just get them to set it up straight ahead (zero toe) and that'll be fine for road and occasional track use

[Butler 0]

You may have to manually do a rough tracking setup yourself before you drive it anywhere as the tracking will be a huge amount out.

 

Tie a piece of string around the car, touching all 4 wheels to give you a rough guide.

Edited September 5, 2006 by Butler

[skeggyrik 3]

Excellent, thanks for those. I'm going to go the 309 route.

It sounds worth it for the better tyre wear alone.

I was concerned about the implications on tracking, will ensure I tell them to set it up with no toe in when I get it tracked once it's all back together.

[tom_m 0]

Tie a piece of string around the car, touching all 4 wheels to give you a rough guide.

 

its only a rough method i know, but surely this method will still leave you toeing out since the rear track is an inch narrower than the front in the first place?

Edited September 6, 2006 by tom_m

[maturin23 10]

I've got wobbly gearstick syndrome which, from trawling the post indicates tired shafts anyway.

 

I'd check the nut/bolt is tightened up enough where the gear linkage connects to the subframe - far more likely to be that than your shafts. Not saying don't change 'em, but in the meantime you might be surprised how much of an improvement in the shift quality you might get.

[Ahl 4]

I did my tracking with a tape measure on the brake discs when I put my 309 wishbones on.

Its a little fiddly but actually quite accurate provided the discs have retaining screws and aren't too corroded.

 

I checked it the next day with some old Dunlop gauges I keep at my work and sure enough it was parallel as I had set it.