Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

There is a TINY amount of camber adjustment available in the standard upper inner bushes. Not enough to allow 2 degrees. If you have that much neg camber then either one side has sagged to a low ride height (lower = more neg camber) or something is bent.

You need to get it to a suspension specialist to see what is wrong. If you really need to dial out a couple of degrees, then you need adjustable upper arms and radius rods.

You need to get it to a suspension specialist to see what is wrong. If you really need to dial out a couple of degrees, then you need adjustable upper arms and radius rods.

Radius rods adjust caster, just the rear upper control arms would be require ;)

Radius rods adjust caster, just the rear upper control arms would be require ;)

Not sure about that - at the rear the radius rod is an upper arm at about 45 degrees to the upper control arm so if your adding length to the upper arm, you will also have to add some length (but less) to the radius rod. I'm just thinking aloud tho.

Usually adjustment of a little more then a degree with the upper control arms will require no other modifications. The R33s and R34s have plenty of toe adjustment from factory so most of the time adjustable toe rods aren't required, the factory non-adjustable traction arms should be fine too.

I've played around with one or two before :P

Edited by Hank Scorpio

On the rear we usally call it a traction rod, in lieur of radius rod which is reseerved for the front only. It's called a traction rod because it controls the rear upright in traction ie; tension in a longitudinal direction due to accelleration and braking.

Cheers

Gary.

Pfffft. Traction arm is a made up name. Just because people use it doesn't mean it makes as much sense as they think it does.

Is a radius rod called a traction arm when it's on the front of a FWD chassis? Didn't think so.

S'got nothing to do with traction. Has got to do with torque reaction and longitudinal location in equal amounts.

If the adjuster is not already at the limit of the adjustment, yes. What do you have currently? If only a single side is a long way out there could be some damage. FWIW the more you lower the car the more neg camber you get, so since the standard adjusters have very little travel you need to be adding something adjustable if its much different from stock height.

Yeah - take it too a good shop even if there's nothing left on the adjuster you will find out what you need to do next.

So if I took it to wilkonson suspension would they be able maybe adjust it a little bit?

:O

I feel so hurt!

But yeah, one of the boys over at Wilkos should be able to help you out :thumbsup:

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 years later...

this thread comes up first all the time on the google search of "how to adjust camber on a skyline R33"

out of all the talking no one actually instructed on the "How to" part.

on the factory camber adjustment bolt, there is a oblong washer connected to a bolt with a hole and some lines on it. which aligns to a notch on the subframe.

can someone please explain how to adjust it? ie, if you move it up 2 lines in what direction achieves what +/- camber angle?

would be appreciated, thanks.

Edited by SilverECR33

this thread comes up first all the time on the google search of "how to adjust camber on a skyline R33"

out of all the talking no one actually instructed on the "How to" part.

on the factory camber adjustment bolt, there is a oblong washer connected to a bolt with a hole and some lines on it. which aligns to a notch on the subframe.

can someone please explain how to adjust it? ie, if you move it up 2 lines in what direction achieves what +/- camber angle?

would be appreciated, thanks.

I took my car to a shop. I am -2.5 degrees on the driver side rear wheel and -1.11 on the passenger side. There are no adjustments they could do to get the thing straight and they also ran out of time trying to find the cause. This is probably due to me adjusting my suspension height my self with a finger spacing though.

can someone please explain how to adjust it? ie, if you move it up 2 lines in what direction achieves what +/- camber angle?

There is a TINY amount of camber adjustment available in the standard upper inner bushes.

Already done. You're welcome.

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

    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
×
×
  • Create New...