Redpill me on negative camber.
>>13873741
its gay
>>13873741
on the street/everyday driving, a slight bit of neg camber will give you loads of positive grip. too much will wear your tires quick.
>no negative camber
Shit
>too much
omfg stance fags goooo :((((
Why don't you just read a write up on suspension geometry and red pill yourself. /o/ is full of idiots.
>>13873741
on a dd? retarded
on a track car? it's ok as long as it's analized and studied in order to provide the wheels with maximum grip. anything more than that and it's retarded again.
>redpill
Fuck off
>>13874260
retard detected
>>13874343
he's right
>>13873741
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0oi9SHJPvg
This guy explains some of the basics
>>13873741
I can't tell if this is some random old chap or Henry Surtees
>>13874325
No.
>redpill
/pol/ pls go.
>>13874354
Nothing wrong with negative camber on DD
>>13876782
retard detected.
Most cars have slight negative camber for balance stability reasons
Track/performance cars may have more negative camber by a couple degrees
45 degrees of negative camber looks retarded, creates incredibly amounts of instability because of minimal surface contact and wears the shit out of tires. Your stanced Civic is not an F1 car, shut the fuck up.
>>13876838
>balance stability
I need sleep.
>>13876795
Why would I give up better handling and fuel economy just for you
>>13876838
What about locosts?
>>13876849
>better handling and fuel economy
Because public roads aren't a race track you dumb fuck. If you mean like a degree or two then sure, but the kind in OP's pic is way too much for a DD.
>>13878846
What about them?
>>13878855
Not an issue because motorcycle tires are designed specifically with angled operation in mind.
>>13878876
Is that why they're not flat?
>>13878846
Locosts are low cost. Which means the rear will be solid, and the front won't have any adjustability, even if it's double wishbone.