[sjthompson01]

I can't decide if I need t do anymore adjusting to my alignment. I put the nf210's on I have 225 50 16's falcon 912's. We did the alignment at acura. It is reading

LF camber 0.1 FR camber -0.7
LF toe 0.00 FR toe 0.02

LR camber -1.3 RR camber -1.5
LR toe 0.19 RR toe 0.41


The only spec out is rear right at 0.41 but should I get the others closer or add here or there? Its free for me to go up there to do it but my xb is drifting to the right rotating the tires today to see if that helps

 

[TARDIS]

You shouldn't need to align the rear after installing the NF's...

 

[sjthompson01]

Forgot to check before but the rear right tow is out pretty bad by the specs rotated tires today doesn't drift as bad but it seems as if turning right is a lot easiermthean left its like I need to rest my hand on theleftmofmthe wheel to keep it from drifting.

 

[TartanJack]

The rear has a solid beam between the rims with 2 front pivot points and the shocks/springs on the 2 back corners. As such, it can't be adjusted, really.

 

[TrevorS]

I installed Eibach Prokit springs (similar front drop to Tanabe' NF) and I chose to install front camber bolts so I could optimize, however, judging by the spec, it really wasn't necessary ! As far as rear camber is concerned, it is what it is. The lower your drop, the further off the rears will be !

 

[sri3850341]

i'm confused, the rear is a solid axle, how do you have camber? Someone please explain....

 

[sri3850341]

! As far as rear camber is concerned, it is what it is. The lower your drop, the further off the rears will be !

it is what it is??

 

[sjthompson01]

Noooooooooooooo....... Lol it can't be true! Lol yeah I know I'm stuck I will just rotate regularly andnim going to get camber bolts just match the front up exact

 

[TartanJack]

Here is a shot to show how the rear suspension is set up.
My own car (meant to show the mufferless exhaust):

The rim is mounted to an axle flat mounted to the end of the beam. Though obscured by the exhaust, spring, and shock, it is there. As you can see, there aren't any pivot points to change the rear wheels' alignment. In fact, if one unbolts the shocks, the entire beam could swing down, keeping the rear wheels still attached where they are.
The aforementioned hinge point is (roughly) behind (in the picture, forward in relation to the vehicle itself) where you can read "HOTCHKIS" on the sway.

Also, as it is a big beam, I'm still not convinced how the rear sway actually works- but, it does. I understand on an independent suspension, but not on this solid beam . . .

 

[TartanJack]

And here are 2 shots from the Toyota TRD rear sway install they also give relevant info.
This one shows how the wheel attaches to the structure:

This one shows the pivot well ) just behind the 1:

With how the rear suspension is built, raising or lowering the rear won't change the alignment one-bit, it only rotates it higher or lower. Any change would be because of the slightly different angle of the beam-mounted wheel in relation to the rotational plane.

 

[sjthompson01]

I'm not going to be an *** herenlol but I did install my own springs lol so I know how the rear is set up. I have heard people talking about shims and such for the back and wasn't sure if they workednornif anyone actually uses them I am just going to leave the back alone since the toe must have been like that before. Thanks for the input though also how are the sway bars working out for you how much of a diference does it make on the ride comfort? I'm not much of a roadnracer lol but like the tight turns every now and then

 

[TartanJack]

I'm not going to be an *** herenlol but I did install my own springs lol so I know how the rear is set up.

That's fine. I was just illustrating for readers who don't know what's under there and to help understanding of this thread/subject.
As my other ride (had over a decade) has independent suspension on all four corners (double wishbone/shocks-in-coils), the strut front and beam rear is still new-to-me. There are tweeks that I don't know or quite "get."


As for the sway. It plants the rear in cornering. Not sure how, exactly, but it makes a notable difference even with the solid beam. I wasn't expecting much, but others raved over it, so I risked "the price of entry." My "test road" is a particular stretch in the North Carolina mountains with both sharp corners and is 3 lanes wide (1 down and 2 up), so I get to "play" on it more than a normal mountain twisty. I was shocked at how much difference it did make.
As for ride comfort, it's more neutral. I didn't notice any change. Of course, I'm used to a fairly stiff Miata, so my threshold is much higher than most.

 

[TARDIS]

The rear of my 2011 is a bit off as well for what its worth. I just think that's how some came from the factory in Japan.

The sway bars are a fun addition. They tighten up the ride and get rid of a lot of the body roll you feel. The lower you go the less you notice them due to simple leverage but they made it a tighter ride for sure.

 

[TrevorS]

With how the rear suspension is built, raising or lowering the rear won't change the alignment one-bit, it only rotates it higher or lower. Any change would be because of the slightly different angle of the beam-mounted wheel in relation to the rotational plane.

There would be no change in alignment if when at the factory spec height it had zero toe and zero camber. However, the factory spec is -1.9* to -0.9* camber and 0.0* to 0.33* toe. When the rear is lowered, the rear axles rotate causing the measurements to change -- hence the alignment changes. In my case, after lowering on Eibach Prokit, my left rear is -1.4* camber, 0.38* toe, and my right rear is -1.6* camber, 0.13* toe. Only one measurement is out, and both are on the more negative camber side of the spec. A slightly deeper rear drop such as NF would probably still be within the camber spec, but Sportline or DF would be well into negative territory.

 

[TartanJack]

Thanks.

 

[TrevorS]

I'm still not convinced how the rear sway actually works- but, it does. I understand on an independent suspension, but not on this solid beam . . .

The rear wheel knuckles mount to a pair of trailing arms with uni-body "frame" pivots something like 6" or so ahead of the torsion beam. As the wheels get pushed up by the road and down by the springs, the beam (an inverted "U" in shape) flexes to allow quasi-independent wheel motion. It's this flex that the sway bar opposes.

 

[TrevorS]

Thanks.

Welcome !

 

[TartanJack]

I wasn't sure if there was toe or camber built in, though thought there may be. The xB is designed to be lowered a bit, just as the brakes are designed for bigger rims. So, such would have been factored in.
What I was trying to say is that, unlike in a normal multi-point adjustable suspension, lowering does not automatically crank up the camber. In a normal adjustable suspension, the top gets pulled in and the bottom gets kicked out. But, in the xB2, the whole unit simply moves up and down. That's what I meant by "doesn't change one bit."
What you said about camber and toe was what I was alluding to with:
Any change would be because of the slightly different angle of the beam-mounted wheel in relation to the rotational plane.


The thanks was mainly for the part on the sway. That's the best explanation I've heard or read. It makes sense to be, even if the beam wouldn't seem to flex that much. It is the only explanation that actually has a rational force for the sway to counter.

 

[TrevorS]

I wasn't sure if there was toe or camber built in, though thought there may be. The xB is designed to be lowered a bit, just as the brakes are designed for bigger rims. So, such would have been factored in.

Pretty sure the TRD springs would land the rear alignment at least approximately within spec, as with ProKit and NF.

What I was trying to say is that, unlike in a normal multi-point adjustable suspension, lowering does not automatically crank up the camber. In a normal adjustable suspension, the top gets pulled in and the bottom gets kicked out. But, in the xB2, the whole unit simply moves up and down. That's what I meant by "doesn't change one bit."
What you said about camber and toe was what I was alluding to with:
Any change would be because of the slightly different angle of the beam-mounted wheel in relation to the rotational plane.

Just want to make sure people realize lowering the xB2 really does increase the negative camber (both front and back). The fronts can be corrected with camber bolts, but not the rears. There are plenty of photos around the net demonstrating this, some people even deliberately matching the front camber to the rears for purpose of appearance. However, even if that's done, the front toe is also impacted by lowering. An alignment should be done anytime the vehicle height is changed.

The front toe factory spec is -0.09* to 0.09*. After installing my ProKit, the left front was -0.09* and right front was -0.07*, both pretty much on the edge. Normal for them is 0.00 to +-0.01. Front camber remained within spec (-0.9* to 0.6*) with left 0.0* and right -0.4*.

The thanks was mainly for the part on the sway. That's the best explanation I've heard or read. It makes sense to be, even if the beam wouldn't seem to flex that much. It is the only explanation that actually has a rational force for the sway to counter.

Yeah, torsion beam rear suspensions have been around awhile, but I guess we enthusiasts don't tend to take them very seriously ! Here are a couple links.

Torsion beam suspension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Twist-beam rear suspension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TartanJack]

I know what you mean. One of the things about the xB2 and the cause of my use of the term "industrial sports box" is because of the suspension design. It isn't something normally associated with performance or well handling vehicles. It is more of economy-car/small truck design and is a more industrial (as opposed to a sophisticated) engineered design. Yet, Toyota has refined, refined, and refined it until it works far better than it should. It is an industrial suspension that actually handles more like a sports car, esp. once "corrected" with better springs, a rear sway, a strut bar, and the like. Really, it seems to have been designed and optimized for the TRD parts, then "softened" with what they installed stock so that non-sports-driving owners would be "happier" with the softened ride and more "normal" handling characteristics.
(Heah, most people are "used to" bad handling cars and drive them accordingly, getting in more trouble with a properly handling one. So, they are engineered to be more "safe" in the hands of a bad driver . . . ")

I've even had that confirmed on a now dead-and-gone forum where such was discussed by some engineers, one/some of whom worked with Toyota.

The xB drives FAR better than it should!