EUROJulian

Nope.

We know that there is something wrong with the suspension since is wearing the tires prematurely. This is ider adjustment problem, mechanical problem or suspension operates out of engineered range.

We also know that explanation given as bushing "faliure" is unlikely correct. We can`t assume at this point that the car is mechanically fine, since it has unadressed yet problem...

P.Williams

iTrader: (1)

Fair enough, EuroJulian. I should rephrase. There does not appear to be any problem with the Daizen camber kit, in that it has not failed as NTB seems to suggest. Second, if Nazty's car has only been lowered 1.25" as he has stated, the correction potential of 2 degrees offered by the Daizen kit is more than adequate. As I previously stated my car was lowered 2" in front and with the Daizen kit set at a full 2 degrees correction, my car was able to be aligned perfectly.
While there may be a mechanical issue involved, it does not appear to be the fault of the components we've singled out in the discussion of this topic. If any of the other stock components were damaged or modified, that of course, could cause serious alignment problems. However, if the car was fine before the modifications, and the only changes made were the springs and shocks, Daizen camber kit, and wheels and tires; all other potential factors have remained constant and should not be preventing a proper alignment. This is the basis for my previous statement.
That said, it appears that this is most likely an issue of the actual alignment that has been performed. NTB already has a poor track record nationwide, as I pointed out that they've had excessive complaints filed with the Better Business Bureau. They have either lied to Nazty, or are not qualified to be diagnosing the problem, as the upper arms with camber kit are just as they should be. Not to mention, I certainly hope that NTB is not actually blindly sliding the alignment bolts all the way in to try and eat up the negative camber. This does not take into account cross camber. It may be necessary to add a bit of negative camber in order to correct the cross camber. If your cross camber is out of whack, you most certainly will suffer excessive tire wear and will most likely feel at least a slight pull. Also, toe settings have not been mentioned throughout this thread. Improper toe settings are even more likely to affect tire wear than camber. Until Nazty receives a second opinion from a different shop, I personally see no point in continuing to search for the culprit.
Get an alignment at a different shop. Don't pay for it until they hand you the alignment print-out. This will show you the appropriate ranges for all settings. what your car was set at for each of those settings, and what they adjusted everything to. If anything is now not within the acceptable range, it will be noted. At this point you can better pinpoint what is causing your tire wear problem.

-Pete

NAZTY97

I'm tooo tired to post in detail the alignment specs ( just got thru dj'ing for 4 hrs ),....but the failure as they described it was when the car was loaded, the control arm was able to move, thus they asked me if I had a clanking noise when I turned the wheels, which I do. Secondly, NT&B is the second shop to align my car. The first was a shop in Austin who after aligning my car, the tires were eaten to threads in a matter of a month or so,.... and now NT&B has aligned my car, and the same exact thing.

Iffffffffffffffffffffff the top bushing is put in backwards, would that cause it to lean to far in??? I guess, is it even possible to put them in at an improper orientation?

I haven't slammed anyone's product, I am simply stating the facts, that I purchased "x" equipment, got it installed at "y" location, car aligned at "z" location and have non-stop problems costing me a *****load of money on tires. NT&B has to use the laser alignment tool since the probe on the standard alignment tool cannot see for the bumper since it's lowered. The car's camber in the rear almost always defaults to -2.6 and they were only both times, two different shops, able to adjust it to -2.1 degrees ( left ), while the right can be adjusted with in spec. You can visibly see the left rear wheel leans more than the right. There has been no modification to the parts in question, and no visible damage.

CleanSC

If the right tire is within spec, why are you replacing that one, too?

Isn't only the left tire wearing prematurely? Also if the left side is that far out of range there is definitely something loose, damaged, bent, or moved on that side.

I think it's time to visit a chassis shop and get a definitive answer.

NAZTY97

The right can be gotten with in spec, but both rears wear prematurely to the inside,... just the left wears a bigger path.

Specs:

Front Left Camber -1.4 **
Front Left Caster 2.5
Front Toe .06

Front Right Camber - .1
Front Right Caster .9 **
Front Right Toe .01

Rear Left Camber -2.2 **
Rear Left Toe .26

Rear Right Camber -1.2
Rear Right Toe .25

Now the bullshizzle here is when they lowered the car ( complete lift ), the values changed to which I think are fraud:

Front Left Camber -.6
Front Left Caster 3.1
Front Toe -.03

Front Right Camber - .9**
Front Right Caster 2.8
Front Right Toe .02

Rear Left Camber 1.6
Rear Left Toe .21

Rear Right Camber -1.7
Rear Right Toe .20

No adjustements were made,... so I'm thinkin' there's alignment issues with possibly the machine,...not sure....

EUROJulian

I still do not see ride hight and tire size/ rim offset data. For what I see now on the printout capture:

Data provided by Hunter and loaded in the aligner are not accurate and this is part of the problem.


Factory settings for front camber are (92 SC400):

Positive 1 deg +/- .5 deg

Factory settings for rear camber are:

Negative 1 deg +/- .5 deg

Next thing I would recommand your vehicle be aligned loaded to its normal driving weight.
Since your road hight is not standard and wheels I assume are wider than standard 225/55R16 your alignment settings should be "customized".
Camber settings should be brought as close to zero as possible for longer tire life.


Now, I`m confused as far as bushings go. If there is a play in ctrl arm accompanied by clunk noise from the front suspension there is clearly i mechanical problem which need to be corrected prior to alignment and instaling new tires.

P.Williams

iTrader: (1)

This just seems to get more and more strange. So, it's both driver's side tires that are wearing and can't be aligned? If that's the case, I'm with CleanSC. You may have chassis damage that's not noticeable to the naked eye. Are you the original owner of the car? Is it possible that the car was involved in an accident at some point?

SDSC300

hmmm did he rule out the possibility that a front bushing is in the rear and a rear is in the front on the drivers side?

P.Williams

iTrader: (1)

Whoa, I didn't even consider that. Actually, the bushing size is the same for both the front and rear upper control arms. They are interchangeable. I don't know why Daizen sells both a front kit, and a rear kit. The only difference is the description on the box, and the instruction sheet. However, is it possible that the shop that installed the kits set less camber on the driver's side? The standard installation adds 2 degrees positive camber. The instructions illustrate how you can adjust that by rotating the shells to add less camber. Daizen provides an example diagram which shows that if the shells are pressed in at a 45 degree angle, the amount of correction is approximately 1 degree.
I set my fronts at 2 degrees and the rears at 1.5 degrees, since the rear wasn't lowered quite as far. Is it possible that ProTech was thinking along the same lines, but inadvertently set the passenger side at 2 degrees and the driver side at 1 degree? Your first set of alignment specs seems to support this, as there is approximately a 1 degree variance between the left and right sides.

NAZTY97

well that sounds sensible... i sent a copy of this thread to the owner of ProTech. He's a good guy, so as he is already informed, I just gotta get to Austin ( the suckazz part of having work done in another city ).

We'll see what they think once they get the car.

jcm3

the tokico illumina setup you have lowers about 1.25 on supras. When i transffered my suspension from the supra it dropped an additional inch. So you've lowered about 2-2.25". Thats why the camber kit isn't helping as much. i had the same prblems in the rear..so i removed some weight from the back to help alleviate the load on the tire.

EUROJulian

Yup, my point exactly jcm3, possibly there is more drop than camber kit can handle among other issiues .

We never got ride hight messurments from Nazty at each corner of the car. It would show actual drop right the way.

Nazty please messure distance from lower ctrl arms pivot points centers (centers of the bushings) to the ground at each of the four wheel. Post the results...

P.Williams

iTrader: (1)

I support the last two posts. Looking at those photos of your car, it has definitely been lowered more than 1.25". It looks about equal to the Supra TT Eibach Pro-Kits and Bilstein shocks that I had installed, which lowered closer to 2". While I was still able to have the car aligned properly with the Daizen camber kits, if they were only set to around 1 degree correction on your car to match a supposed 1.25" drop, they may not be providing enough correction. Pro-Tech may need to press out the camber correction bushings for all 4 arms, and reset them to match the actual drop.

Khaos

iTrader: (1)

Any updates Nazty97?

NAZTY97

Ok,... as best I could do under a lift at NT&B that didn't have a good point of reference. I measured an approximate 4.25" off the ground in the front, and 8.25" in the rear.