Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Simple question;

Is there such a thing as too much castor? If you can get up into the 11-13 range is it worth it? Can you run significantly less camber as a result or is it pretty negligible once you get past a certain point? Does too much castor bugger up the inside wheel geometry significantly after a certain point when it's turned?

No drive shaft angle issues, no scrubbing on the front of the guard issues. I have none of them.

I have installed a set of GTR adjustable upper arms in a gtst and it has shifted the top outer mount back a good 15-20mm. So bulk castor when combined with the 8 degrees i had to begin with.

cheers

Dave

edit: I can't spell

Edited by BHDave
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/181669-can-you-have-too-much-castor/
Share on other sites

again i stand to be corrected but your upper control arm governs your camber not castor. Surely with 13 degrees castor you would struggle to turn it i think

I have these upper arms. Note that the position of the mounts is parallel as opposed to staggered with the out side forward on a stock arm. If you rotate one end the castor is either increased by a ridiculous amount over stock or reduced by a small amount depending on which way you fit it (noting that the inner and outer mount lengths are different so there are only 2 ways it can go in). left straight i'd say it gains atleast 2 degrees, haven't got it aligned yet to confirm the angle. But i can increase the castor further by rotating the outer end. Installed pic Hopefully this link works.

By winding them in and out it effects camber, so it does both, though i'm interested in castor at this stage.

Booster, definately installed right. I don't know if the stock gtr and gtst upper arms are different as i have never looked at a stock gtr upper arm beside a gtst one. During install i had the stock arm sitting on the ground next to the aftermarket one and as noted above it was either lose castor or gain castor. I went for gain because i've always understood more is better, but how much more?

I have tried various caster settings from 4.5 degrees to 13. At 13 I had rubbing issues and settled on 8 or 9 I think. For the street I find this perfect. When it was at 13 I found it annoying to drive as it takes more effort to go off centre and strongly wants to return to centre when you are going around a bend. That said, turn in was brilliant.

Speaking to John at UAS about the slot car, he said he went up as high as 13 but settled on 11.

to be honest too much caster means you end up sacrificing camber. in the begining I loved caster and yeah it's great but it's not substitue for neg camber. in the GTR with 255 fronts I can't get more than about 8 degrees neg caster as the front of the tyre is just about touching the guard liner. Also it limits how much camber you can run as of course the arms are pulling against each other to some degree. I would say get as much caster as you can until it begins to limit the static camber you have. if you want some track work I reckon you want the camber up around 3+ of neg.

I did the same thing when I got those arms, the problem with mine was, as they're staggered arms, I put them in the wrong way and it gave heaps of castor and bugger all camber. When I had the arms maxed out (short as possible), the wheel aligning machine read about 16deg castor and about 1.5deg camber, so really sacrificed static camber.

I'm fairly sure that GTR and GTS-t arms are the same though, maybe one's a bit shorter than the other from stock, but I'm fairly sure the offset of the arms is the same for both. My adjustable GTR arms seemed to be pretty damn similar to my stock GTS-t ones anyway.

Edited by salad

There are two completely different circumstances where castor will & will not help you.

1. You are one of those drift type people. In which case loads of castor is good. It gives you strong self aligning torque (for when you let go of the wheel) & more -ve camber at large amounts of lock. All of which is good.

2. You have a track car, or atleast want to do hillclimbs/club days etc. In this case caster is much less important & certainly not at the expense of camber. Simply put more castor gives you more camber when you turn the wheel. However if the car if handling well you wont use much more than about a quarter of a turn of steering lock. The amount of extra -ve camber castor generates at these angles is negligible - particularly is you have an R32 which only has anout 3 degrees castor to begin with.

2. You have a track car, or atleast want to do hillclimbs/club days etc. In this case caster is much less important & certainly not at the expense of camber. Simply put more castor gives you more camber when you turn the wheel. However if the car if handling well you wont use much more than about a quarter of a turn of steering lock. The amount of extra -ve camber castor generates at these angles is negligible - particularly is you have an R32 which only has anout 3 degrees castor to begin with.

This is the answer to the second question i hadn't gotten around to asking yet :( Obviously the caster is going to have minimal effect at small steering angles, at which point the camber has to be there to work the tyres properly. I would assume increasing both camber and caster would see the dynamic camber way too high on slow tight corners too.

Thanks for the input everyone.

Quick question for salad; When you put the arms back in the right way what did your camber increase to?

Edited by BHDave

when I had those arms in the GTR (installed the correct way) I could only get arond 2 and a half degrees neg as I had so much castor. with my new noltec arms I can get about 3 and a half.

I would just like to say Dave, I believe that your question is not stupid, and very valid.

So I guess the question now is, whats the equlibrium point? What is the best match of castor to static camber? (as a general rule of thumb)

I just did my alignment today and my caster reading is 5.4 deg for both sides. Camber is 2.1 deg front & rear. Currenly all my arm are adjustable pillow ball type for both camber & caster all round. The handling is so far acceptable but i wish to have a setting for canyon or back road type of driving with slight understeer since i still haven't learn the art of drifting.

Appreciate some feedback...Cheers!

Just a quick update and more insights into what happens to the front end geometry of a skyline when you change things around.

So i swapped the arms around this morning so that they are staggered forward again. I also double checked and yep, the outer on the arms sits 5mm further forward than stock so i will have lost caster.

But i did gain camber, somehwere in the order of -.5-1 degree by eye

And here's the funny part, as it rotated the upright so much the height of the car dropped by about 10mm due to strut alignment changes i guess. I had to wind the coilovers back up. bonus 10mm extra travel before i hit the bump stops :)

Edited by BHDave
yes you can it makes the car very unstable mid corner. basicly just a prick to drive fast. i pulled mine back to 7 degrees. (was 8.5-9) much better now

Do you reckon i should adjust my caster to 7 deg since i find the steering is kinda light on high speed corner. Mine is now at 5.34 deg with 2.1 camber.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 10.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 馃槂  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
  • Create New...