Page 1 of 1

Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:06 pm
by bobkart
I was surprised to not be able to find these online . . . if someone has a source, please share it.

I was able to get my alignment shop to print these. The first is what you get (along with before/after readings) when you have an alignment done. The second page gives a bit more detail, in terms of narrowing what's specified as a range of acceptable readings down to one 'preferred' number.

This information can serve as the basis for having your alignment done to slightly different specifications. I suspect some will ask 'why change them?'. Different values can yield different efficiency and/or performance characteristics. Less toe (for example) can lead to less rolling resistance, as can less camber (typically). Some handling performance is of course given up with such a change.

Image

Image

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:15 pm
by LeftieBiker
Thanks for posting that.

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:20 am
by Oilpan4
You want as close to zero toe in as possible.
The alignment shop can look up specs for pretty much any vehicle to include the leaf.

I asked them to get as close to 0 toe in as possible and they delivered, about 6 arc minutes of negative toe in.

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 1:00 pm
by bobkart
Oilpan4 wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:20 am
You want as close to zero toe in as possible.
The alignment shop can look up specs for pretty much any vehicle to include the leaf.

I asked them to get as close to 0 toe in as possible and they delivered, about 6 arc minutes of negative toe in.
Thanks for weighing in Oilpan4 . . . that matches my understanding . . . did you notice any effect on handling?

Regarding camber, did you do anything different there? Probably there's less adjustment range for that, but reducing it (closer to zero) would also seem to help reduce rolling resistance.

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:51 am
by Oilpan4
My alignment was still ok.
I took it in because I noticed uneven wear on the front tires when I bought my leaf.
The trick is to take it in before it gets bad. If you notice improvement in handling that means you waited a year or 2 longer than you should have.

With some things you can reduce rolling resistance like going to 0 camber, but that increases the rate which the tires shoulder wear out. Is it really worth ending your tires run say 10,000 miles earlier just to get a increase in range that may not even be measurable?

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 11:30 am
by bobkart
Certainly the pros/cons need to be weighed against each other, and often they are difficult to quantify.

Thanks for your input.

Image

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 10:44 am
by powersurge
I have found the Leaf to be very fragile when it comes to alignment. In 5 years and 60K miles, I have had to have it done 4 times after medium potholes.

On other cars, I have needed no adjustment even after big jolts....

I go to FIRESTONE for lifetime alignments.

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 4:28 pm
by Oilpan4
I better take mine in again, it's been about a year and a half.

Re: Wheel Alignment Specifications

Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 8:54 am
by derkraut
I've had my 2011 SL since June, 2011; and I've never had to have the wheels aligned. But, with our weather here, I guess we don't have all that many potholes. When driving in the local area, I know where the potholes are, and manage to dodge 'em most of the time. ;) .