Rear adjustable Camber Arms

[dcaron9999]

My rear camber is maxed out at about -2.3*, and I wish I could get a little closer to my front -3.5* camber, say around -2.6* to -2.8*. I assume it would help provide a little more grip when powering out of turns at the track.

Earlier this year, I installed M3 rear guide rods and adjustable rear toe arms, which has stiffened up the rear end nicely, to complement my M3 RSFB's, and Swift Spec-R springs.

My current toe settings are 0 toe in the front, and 0.07* total toe in the rear.

Wanted to know if anybody has tried one of the following adjustable camber arms for the 128i/135i E82/E88 (08-13). What are your thoughts? Also wondering why vendor #1 has two arms versus four arms for vendor #2.

#1 - http://www.redline360.com/megan-raci...ar-MRS-BM-0210

#2 - http://www.hpashop.com/Rogue-Enginee...amber-link.htm

[135TX]

My experience with megan racing products is that they are very cheap and lower quality, rogue is a well known and solid brand, so it would be a gamble with megan versus a pretty sure thing with rogue.

As for the 4 vs 2, the megan is just the camber link, where as the rogue I believe includes both camber link and guide rod.

I recently picked up some toe arms from Rogue and will be installing them soon....

If you get the rogue sell me your m3 guide rods

[Kgolf31]

More camber in the rear will not help with power down.

[135TX]

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

More camber in the rear will not help with power down.

I know it's been posted before but was wondering what your alignment specs are these days?

Thanks Kyle

-Casey

[Kgolf31]

Originally Posted by 135TX

I know it's been posted before but was wondering what your alignment specs are these days?

Thanks Kyle

-Casey

I'm around -3.6* up front at 0 toe.

Rear I'm at -1.9* with about 14 minutes of total toe.

[chris82]

I'd go Rogue Engineering, you don't want that Megan junk for such a part.

[dcaron9999]

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

More camber in the rear will not help with power down.

What do you recommend will help put power down earlier besides wider + stickier rubber - more rear toe-in?

Im looking at eliminating e-diff intervention via INPA, if I manage to find suitable laptop+cable set it up this winter.
I hate how it still cuts in and out out of tight corners, even with my torsen LSD...

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by 135TX

My experience with megan racing products is that they are very cheap and lower quality, rogue is a well known and solid brand, so it would be a gamble with megan versus a pretty sure thing with rogue.

Originally Posted by chris82

I'd go Rogue Engineering, you don't want that Megan junk for such a part.

Not all parts from Megan are inferior. For example, their adjustable toe arms are actually made by Hardrace and use a ball joint that is similar to the ones in the M3 and other high-end OEM cars. Megan does not make any of its parts but just rebrands them from other companies. Can't comment on their camber arms though.

[135TX]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

Not all parts from Megan are inferior. For example, their adjustable toe arms are actually made by Hardrace and use a ball joint that is similar to the ones in the M3 and other high-end OEM cars. Megan does not make any of its parts but just rebrands them from other companies. Can't comment on their camber arms though.

Wow interesting, i must say I am surprised.

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by 135TX

Wow interesting, i must say I am surprised.

Many of their branded parts may indeed be junk however.

[Kgolf31]

Originally Posted by dcaron9999

What do you recommend will help put power down earlier besides wider + stickier rubber - more toe-in?

All the above and a big toe for throttle application

+ toe though

[Jonathan@BimmerWorld]

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

More camber in the rear will not help with power down.

Very true! The rule of thumb is usually a one-degree difference front to rear (e.g. -3.5° front and -2.5° rear). That said, my personal experience is that -2.0° (±0.2) is ideal for the rear when running a good amount of front camber. Equal amounts front and rear will also make the car harder to rotate.

Outside of alignment, the best way to ensure you can put power down early is by adjusting rear spring rate (whether softer coil springs or anti-roll bar) and limited-slip differential lockup/ramping.

What specific handling issue are you trying to chase down?

[dcaron9999]

Originally Posted by Jonathan@BimmerWorld

Very true! The rule of thumb is usually a one-degree difference front to rear (e.g. -3.5° front and -2.5° rear). That said, my personal experience is that -2.0° (±0.2) is ideal for the rear when running a good amount of front camber. Equal amounts front and rear will also make the car harder to rotate.

Outside of alignment, the best way to ensure you can put power down early is by adjusting rear spring rate (whether softer coil springs or anti-roll bar) and limited-slip differential lockup/ramping.

What specific handling issue are you trying to chase down?

Every now and then, I wind up with oversteer when coming out of corners. I have been extra careful with modulation of power out of turns, but I will sometimes get too early on power and the rear end will come out rather violently.

Out of tight turns, with a steady throttle, I can feal the car surge forward as I finish unwinding the steering wheel, as if the rear brake pads release the rotors. Even with DSC Off, I hate how e-diff still cuts in and out, out of tight corners, and this with my torsen LSD too.

Im looking at coding out the"e-diff" intervention via INPA, if I manage to find suitable laptop+cable set it up this winter.

[Bullitt]

On the track, the 135i needs at least 265 or 275 tires in the rear especially at higher boost levels. Some of the fastest 1ers (including 1M's) I've seen at the track run a staggered setup with as much rubber they can possibly fit.

There was at least a couple 1M owners here who tested both a staggered and square setup, and they noted that the staggered setup was clearly faster on a consistent basis according to their logs and lap data.

A minimum of 275 or 285 tires all around may be necessary for a square setup to be undoubtedly faster for the 135i. Unfortunately, a lot of work is required for that...

255 square is great however for autocross where there are slower and sharper turns.

Disabling the e-diff intervention sounds useful if you want less traction and more slip angle when applying throttle in the corners...which sounds like the opposite of what you want?

[_Ryan_]

Originally Posted by dcaron9999

What do you recommend will help put power down earlier besides wider + stickier rubber - more rear toe-in?

Im looking at eliminating e-diff intervention via INPA, if I manage to find suitable laptop+cable set it up this winter.
I hate how it still cuts in and out out of tight corners, even with my torsen LSD...

I use a VM in virtualbox and the standard cable you can get online.
By using a VM (for me on an SD card) it doesn't really matter which laptop I use to do the work.

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by 135TX

My experience with megan racing products is that they are very cheap and lower quality, rogue is a well known and solid brand, so it would be a gamble with megan versus a pretty sure thing with rogue.

As for the 4 vs 2, the megan is just the camber link, where as the rogue I believe includes both camber link and guide rod.

I recently picked up some toe arms from Rogue and will be installing them soon....

If you get the rogue sell me your m3 guide rods

Originally Posted by chris82

I'd go Rogue Engineering, you don't want that Megan junk for such a part.

My research indicated the opposite in this specific application, that the Megan Racing arms are better quality than the rogue ones.

[135TX]

Originally Posted by Nugget

My research indicated the opposite in this specific application, that the Megan Racing arms are better quality than the rogue ones.

For the toe arms or camber arms?

[tuj]

Originally Posted by _Ryan_

I use a VM in virtualbox and the standard cable you can get online.
By using a VM (for me on an SD card) it doesn't really matter which laptop I use to do the work.

Can you go into more detail on how to disable the e-diff? I'd like to upgrade to an LSD but I really don't want to if the e-diff will still be cutting in.

[dcaron9999]

Originally Posted by tuj

Can you go into more detail on how to disable the e-diff? I'd like to upgrade to an LSD but I really don't want to if the e-diff will still be cutting in.

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showp...&postcount=138

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=859474

[dcaron9999]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

On the track, the 135i needs at least 265 or 275 tires in the rear especially at higher boost levels... A minimum of 275 or 285 tires all around may be necessary for a square setup to be undoubtedly faster for the 135i. Unfortunately, a lot of work is required for that...

The 265 or 275 require a 9.5" wheel.

The $ part is precisely why Im running a square 18x8.5 EP street tire setup with stock rear wheels at the four corners.

I recently bought four used 17x8.5 style 68's which will be mounted with Dot R-comps or full R-comps for the 2016 season.

Originally Posted by Bullitt

Disabling the e-diff intervention sounds useful if you want less traction and more slip angle when applying throttle in the corners...which sounds like the opposite of what you want?

Partially agree with you, but would you rather have a predictable rear end that you fully control via the accelerator pedal, or a battle between your pedal input and the e-diff computer interaction, both working against each other trying to control rear wheel spin?

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by dcaron9999

Partially agree with you, but would you rather have a predictable rear end that you fully control via the accelerator pedal, or a battle between your pedal input and the e-diff computer interaction, both working against each other trying to control rear wheel spin?

I personally dislike the e-diff and plan to disable it. With an LSD, the system still tries to minimize certain levels of slip and power oversteer by adding more grip to the rear. I do prefer to have full control of slip angles with the throttle but I'm afraid it will be at the cost of less rear grip.

My diff is a 3.08 and I can only imagine the e-diff interference is greater on your 3.46 along with your tune and 255 rears. More rubber in rear would be ideal for your setup but of course cost is always a consideration.

You mentioned more rear grip was desired when powering out of corners. From what I've gathered, disabling the e-diff will offer better predictability and yaw control with an LSD but there will be less rear grip on corner exit. However, it seems rear grip loss will be more progressive due to the lack of interference, which would be a good thing in my book. I am eager to test for myself.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by Nugget

My research indicated the opposite in this specific application, that the Megan Racing arms are better quality than the rogue ones.

IIRC, the bearing is the weak point in the Rogue Engineering ones, and you want to get that replaced with an aurora bearing.

Ohh, nvm I am talking about the Toe arms, for this specific application I'd still trust a product from RE over Megan, that's me