[Cloud9blue]

Just wondering what could caused the problem with uneven camber that my alignment shop had problem adjusting.

The car was upgraded with front and rear m3 control arms, along with polyurethane rear subframe bushings, BMW performance springs/shocks/front sway, and front Dinan camber plates.

The shop who did the alignment wasn't bring the passenger side front camber to the 1.6 degree that I requested. Even with the strut maxed out to the outside of the car, the passenger side front camber is still at 2.6 degree. The driver side however is at 1.6, just as it should be.

Wondering if you guys can shed some light on this. Thanks in advance!

[SeanS54]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

Just wondering what could caused the problem with uneven camber that my alignment shop had problem adjusting.

The car was upgraded with front and rear m3 control arms, along with polyurethane rear subframe bushings, BMW performance springs/shocks/front sway, and front Dinan camber plates.

The shop who did the alignment wasn't bring the passenger side front camber to the 1.6 degree that I requested. Even with the strut maxed out to the outside of the car, the passenger side front camber is still at 2.6 degree. The driver side however is at 1.6, just as it should be.

Wondering if you guys can shed some light on this. Thanks in advance!

My guess is the dinan camber plates are installed incorrectly.

The "L" is for left (driver side) and the arrow needs to point forward while the "L" is inward toward the engine.

The "R" is for right (passenger side) and the arrow needs to point forward while the "R" is inward toward the engine.

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by CalBear_335i

My guess is the dinan camber plates are installed incorrectly.

The "L" is for left (driver side) and the arrow needs to point forward while the "L" is inward toward the engine.

The "R" is for right (passenger side) and the arrow needs to point forward while the "R" is inward toward the engine.

That's what I thought at first, but the guy who did my suspension had install the same plate quite a few times before. Can't imagine him screwing this up.

However is there any other way to adjust the camber other than sliding the top strut mount?

[CALWATERBOY]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

That's what I thought at first, but the guy who did my suspension had install the same plate quite a few times before. Can't imagine him screwing this up.

However is there any other way to adjust the camber other than sliding the top strut mount?

Dinan? God Almighty! Try Ground Control plates.

And try this:

Raise wheels to normal ride height - check that measure to verify
Be certain all wheels are level, within 1/16"
Loosen all suspension strut & arm nuts & bolts to relieve stress/binding
Tighten just snug
Torque
Align

How's she look now?

[StealYourFace]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

That's what I thought at first, but the guy who did my suspension had install the same plate quite a few times before. Can't imagine him screwing this up.

However is there any other way to adjust the camber other than sliding the top strut mount?

So if Dinan camber plates were installed "the wrong way" you could actually get more neg camber that the -.7 they advertise?

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by StealYourFace

So if Dinan camber plates were installed "the wrong way" you could actually get more neg camber that the -.7 they advertise?

I really doubt that's the case. Geometrically speaking, you can only gain positive camber with the plate installed in the opposite way, which clearly isn't the case here.

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by CALWATERBOY

Dinan? God Almighty! Try Ground Control plates.

And try this:

Raise wheels to normal ride height - check that measure to verify
Be certain all wheels are level, within 1/16"
Loosen all suspension strut & arm nuts & bolts to relieve stress/binding
Tighten just snug
Torque
Align

How's she look now?

Did not want to deal with the potential NVH issue with adjustable plates like GC or Vorshalg... Dinan plates are straight forward to install and reuses the stock rubber encased top mount. Trying to keep the car as an acceptable DD here.

Don't have the resource to perform something like that on my own, but will have a suspension shop that deal with race alignment to take a look at the car next week. However, I really want to narrow down the potential source of the problem myself first.

[Cloud9blue]

Here the alignment specs. Note that everything is good except for the driver side front camber.

[cvc 22349a]

Could that be a misprint? My guess is that should read -1.6 like the other side if everything is installed correctly. I don't see how you could get to -2.6 w/o adjustable camber plates. How's the car drive? Have them recheck at their cost. fwiw, I have GC street plates and wish I'd had gone with Dinan and oem mounts for my DD..

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by cvc 22349a

Could that be a misprint? My guess is that should read -1.6 like the other side if everything is installed correctly. I don't see how you could get to -2.6 w/o adjustable camber plates. How's the car drive? Have them recheck at their cost. fwiw, I have GC street plates and wish I'd had gone with Dinan and oem mounts for my DD..

Definitely not a misprint, as both my installer and myself can confirm with the strange camber but looking where the top strut bolts are sitting. One degree difference between the two is slight. But if you compare the front wheels at both sides carefully, you can tell the driver side has more negative camber.

The car drives perfectly though. Track straight and everything is much tighter/stable than the stock ZSP suspension. I don't mind -2.6 camber, especially since it looks like I can probably dial in another half degree on the other side to bring it to -2.1 on the passenger side. If you not tracking it heavily, front tires wear so much slower anyway, comparing to the rear that has to deal with all the torque from a tuned N54. But just want to make sure nothing is bent in the front, which could lead to worse problems down the road.

Could it be issues with the new m3 control arms? I bought the TRW ones (the actual supplier who makes the control arms), which looks to be exactly the same as the ones from BMW. The only noticeable difference is the grounded off ///M logo and of course the lower price tags.

Can't imagine would be a bent front subframe from pothole or such, as the caster would likely to messed up as well. But you can see caster angle at both sides are fine.

Both me and my shop are totally clueless at the moment The only possible explanation that I can come up with is the bolts between the M3 control arms and the subframe wasn't properly adjusted by the previous alignment shop (due to scheduling problem, my shop had to use a local tire/alignment shop instead of the performance alignment shop they usually go to).

But I have to give prop to my shop though; they are willing to cover the cost of my 2nd alignment if the issue can indeed be fixed.

I don't know why you would want THAT much camber, especially up front, on a DD. But I agree though, the issue is in the install.

Originally Posted by cvc 22349a

I have GC street plates and wish I'd had gone with Dinan and oem mounts for my DD..

Care to explain your experiences with those plates? Just curious.

[CALWATERBOY]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

Did not want to deal with the potential NVH issue with adjustable plates like GC or Vorshalg... Dinan plates are straight forward to install and reuses the stock rubber encased top mount. Trying to keep the car as an acceptable DD here.

Don't have the resource to perform something like that on my own, but will have a suspension shop that deal with race alignment to take a look at the car next week. However, I really want to narrow down the potential source of the problem myself first.

What NVH? Got no NVH. Do have ability to go to -2.5°, maybe more.

[CALWATERBOY]

Originally Posted by FCobra94

I don't know why you would want THAT much camber, especially up front, on a DD. But I agree though, the issue is in the install.


Care to explain your experiences with those plates? Just curious.

'Cause it's a MAJOR pleasure!

[Cloud9blue]

Calwaterboy, I made this thread to find clues about my suspension issues, not brag and bash on camber plates...

[Cloud9blue]

My mechanic asked if my front subframe has been dropped before. While I am more or less certain that hasn't been done before, the dealer did have for a week a few years back to diagnose a faint rattle at low speed, which they never figured out.

Here is my question, does E90 had alignment pin for its front subframe? Can it be slightly misaligned? My tire wear for the last 30k suggest there was virtually no camber related wear at the front, as expected with stock alignment.

[serotoninsteve]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

Definitely not a misprint, as both my installer and myself can confirm with the strange camber but looking where the top strut bolts are sitting. One degree difference between the two is slight. But if you compare the front wheels at both sides carefully, you can tell the driver side has more negative camber.

The car drives perfectly though. Track straight and everything is much tighter/stable than the stock ZSP suspension. I don't mind -2.6 camber, especially since it looks like I can probably dial in another half degree on the other side to bring it to -2.1 on the passenger side. If you not tracking it heavily, front tires wear so much slower anyway, comparing to the rear that has to deal with all the torque from a tuned N54. But just want to make sure nothing is bent in the front, which could lead to worse problems down the road.

Could it be issues with the new m3 control arms? I bought the TRW ones (the actual supplier who makes the control arms), which looks to be exactly the same as the ones from BMW. The only noticeable difference is the grounded off ///M logo and of course the lower price tags.

Can't imagine would be a bent front subframe from pothole or such, as the caster would likely to messed up as well. But you can see caster angle at both sides are fine.

Both me and my shop are totally clueless at the moment The only possible explanation that I can come up with is the bolts between the M3 control arms and the subframe wasn't properly adjusted by the previous alignment shop (due to scheduling problem, my shop had to use a local tire/alignment shop instead of the performance alignment shop they usually go to).

But I have to give prop to my shop though; they are willing to cover the cost of my 2nd alignment if the issue can indeed be fixed.

So you see a difference where your top strut mount bolts are sitting relative to the opening in the body?
If yes, then there is something wrong on top.
If no, then you need to look down.
I dont think the subframe can be mounted missligned,
At least when yes you would loose the camber on the left that you gain on the right.

[CALWATERBOY]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

Calwaterboy, I made this thread to find clues about my suspension issues, not brag and bash on camber plates...

Dude....you'd best have a close look at those camber plates.

Also, try loosening all bolts & nuts - place wheels @ normal ride height - retorque. That part about normal ride height? Somewhat important.

[CALWATERBOY]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

My mechanic asked if my front subframe has been dropped before. While I am more or less certain that has Been done before, the dealer did have for a week a few years back to diagnose a faint rattle at low speed, which they never figured out.

Here is my question, does E90 had alignment pin for its front subframe? Can it be slightly misaligned? My tire wear for the last 30k suggest there was virtually no camber related wear at the front, as expected with stock alignment.

Whelp, if you've dropped a subframe, you'll see it can't be misaligned when you re-install. Them bolts're pretty strict guides.

[avocet]

Originally Posted by AlpineCloud9

Definitely not a misprint, as both my installer and myself can confirm with the strange camber but looking where the top strut bolts are sitting. One degree difference between the two is slight. But if you compare the front wheels at both sides carefully, you can tell the driver side has more negative camber.

So you can actually see the top of the strut is in a different position on one side vs the other by observing where the nuts are in relation to where they mount in the chassis?

Pics please. This sounds like it is the area you should focus on.

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by avocet

So you can actually see the top of the strut is in a different position on one side vs the other by observing where the nuts are in relation to where they mount in the chassis?

Pics please. This sounds like it is the area you should focus on.

Yep! I will try to get a picture later today. Have an alignment appointment with a highly recommended shop on Wed, hope they could find out what's going...

[Cloud9blue]

Alright there are the pics. Pretty explanatory, but just to be clear first one is the driver side (the one that is maxed out on positive adjustment but still sitting on -2.6 camber). The 2nd one is the passenger side, which is @ 1.6, which what is expected with m3 arms and dinan plates.

You can easily see where the bolts used to sit and how far out did the driver side strut was brought out by the tech who did the alignment. Also noticed how little of the camber plate you can see from the strut opening on the driver side in comparison to the passenger side.

[Cloud9blue]

Pictures are up? Any insight is much appreciated!