There is more to life with TurboRenault.co.uk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • This section contains the archived boards. They should be read only. If you want a thread resurrecting please message admin and we can move into the live section

Toe angle

ravydavy

New Member
Noticed the car was very unstable above about 80 kmph ;) so just took it for a geometry check.

The technical manual thing say toe should be -30 (-15 each wheel I take it?) but the hunter machine had the correct setting as +30. All of the other settings mirrored renos.

Anyhoo..car feels much more stable at + toe. Has something been lost in translation?
 
It's the other way round I think.

+ = Toe in
- = Toe out (unstable at speed)

The front before adjustment was -10 L/ -6 R as was rather scary.

Not sure why the technical manual says -30 toe? [smilie=doubt.gif]
 
This has been an area of long running debate. The formal doc has always said -30 and certainly the cars came like that along with the fronts scrubbing their insides out that bit faster. Some other records plus info found in tracking machines has had +30 with a suggest that perhaps Renault changed their minds. Some have reported positive results of going to +30.
 
Looks like the Reno manual is a typo then.

No way a car should be like that at speed intentionally [smilie=icon_eek.gif]
 
Ha! Shows how shit the ph2 clutch and flywheel is. Pointless upgrade for the sake of a bit of noise.
 
Very interesting James. :approve:

PH2 owners: even Renault think the Ph2 FW hold the car back! :s

Oldskoolbaby":1m38wkb6 said:
Ha! Shows how s**t the ph2 clutch and flywheel is. Pointless upgrade for the sake of a bit of noise.

Agree Brett. Although I spose as Renault intended the car to be a GT car that transmission noise was an important consideration.
 
Back
Top