Camber specs question

[JWhite]

Did some poking around, but not exhaustive, in the forum thinking a similar question must be out there but didn't see it.

In any event, my left rear trailing arm was bent such that the camber was 3.x and the toe in (or toe out ,I forget which) was nearly 1/2 inch! An expensive new Left rear trailing arm is now resulting in near perfect toe, but a left rear camber of 2.2. This is vs a right rear camber of 1.5.

Garage says the specs are < 2.0 camber. He is a bit concerned that the left and right ar .7 off. He feels they should be closer. He is not yet sure why they are off.

I tend to think these guys are pretty straight up, but am looking for some confirmation. This is a NEW L rear trailing arm and is resulting in a 2.2 camber.

It's a 1997 Z3 1.9., with 88K, that I will use as a commuter car. Is 2.2 vs 1.5 a problem that I need to throw $$ at?

Thanks for any information
JWhite

[Dudesky]

I don't know too much about this, but was the car weighted correctly on the driver's side? Did he compensate for the amount of gas in the tank? Can he dial it in better to get closer? A difference between left and right will tend to pull the car towards the side of the more positive camber. But that won't happen at all times, since camber changes with driving conditions. But your mechanic is right- that is a fairly large discrepancy. What does it feel like when you drive it?

[Storamin]

Has the car ever been in a wreck/off road excursion? Stock you shouldn't be getting those numbers... The thing with the stock parts is that the camber isn't adjustable.

Have you had any suspension work done lately?

That e30 rear end is a royal pain in the ass...

[JWhite]

The tech had ' mod the left rear mounting point to get left rear control arm in spec'.

Final numbers

Caster :Camber : Toe

RF +4.1 : -1.7 : +5/32
LF +3.5 : -1.8
RR : -1.5 : -3/32
LR : -1.6


I think the garage is pretty solid.

JWhite