Author | Topic |
Location: Brisbane
Registered: May 2002
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Fri, 31 May 2002 08:13
|
|
Excessive camber on the rear wheels is usually a negative thing overall for handling. It is possible to lower an RA65/MA61 without suffering from excessive camber though - in a nutshell, you have to raise the rear subframe to compensate for the altered position of the wheels.
If you think about it, if you lower your car 3" the wheels are 3" higher (relative to the body). So if you move the subframe 3" higher, the suspension geometry will be exactly the same as it originally was! Hey presto, no more camber problems.
You can get an easy inch or so by removing the four big rubber bushes that insulate the subframe from the body, but beyond that you have to modify the subframe itself.
|
|
|
| Subject | Poster | Date |
|
Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Thu, 23 May 2002 22:54 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Fri, 24 May 2002 05:22 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
maxdamage75 | Fri, 24 May 2002 07:59 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Sat, 25 May 2002 13:44 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
RA23_Sean | Sun, 26 May 2002 08:12 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Chris_RA60 | Sun, 26 May 2002 09:00 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
maxdamage75 | Sun, 26 May 2002 13:48 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Sun, 26 May 2002 14:06 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
justcallmefrank | Sun, 26 May 2002 14:11 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
maxdamage75 | Sun, 26 May 2002 14:11 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
justcallmefrank | Sun, 26 May 2002 14:22 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
celicamad85 | Sun, 26 May 2002 21:41 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
maxdamage75 | Sun, 26 May 2002 23:41 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
celicamad85 | Mon, 27 May 2002 03:08 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Mon, 27 May 2002 08:24 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
RA23_Sean | Mon, 27 May 2002 08:27 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Mon, 27 May 2002 08:35 |
|
Suspension
|
Les | Wed, 29 May 2002 02:03 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Norbie | Wed, 29 May 2002 09:08 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Wed, 29 May 2002 09:24 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Wed, 29 May 2002 23:08 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Thu, 30 May 2002 04:43 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Thu, 30 May 2002 05:16 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
HooN | Thu, 30 May 2002 05:35 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
draven | Thu, 30 May 2002 14:27 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
justcallmefrank | Thu, 30 May 2002 14:33 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
draven | Thu, 30 May 2002 14:38 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Thu, 30 May 2002 23:33 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
justcallmefrank | Thu, 30 May 2002 23:40 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Norbie | Fri, 31 May 2002 08:13 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Stefan | Fri, 31 May 2002 08:29 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Fri, 31 May 2002 08:32 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Stefan | Fri, 31 May 2002 08:35 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Les | Fri, 31 May 2002 08:36 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
celicamad85 | Fri, 31 May 2002 10:11 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Stefan | Fri, 31 May 2002 13:19 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Mentor | Fri, 31 May 2002 13:52 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Stefan | Fri, 31 May 2002 13:57 |
|
Re: Attn: RA65 Owners
|
Mentor | Fri, 31 May 2002 14:23 |
Current Time:
Sat Jan 11 13:09:18 UTC 2025 |
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0084879398345947 seconds |