[FC] FC front alignment just to be sure... camber... oops now rear camber

[Merv Krull]

oops... I made another assumption that you were speaking of the front wheels.... sorry about that!
Camber adjustment for the rear wheels on an FC or any EM is more a matter of spring height than anything unless there has been some damage to the crossmember. Desired camber on the cars is 1.5 degrees positive and for the FCs it is only 3/4 degree positive. This is at "curb height" which means no cargo or passengers, full tank of gas. Notice they say "desired" because with a swing axle the science is less than exact. If you have a "way negative" camber (the top of the wheels are leaning in), you need new springs. While you are in there, consider new bushings as well.
My thoughts are that for a truck that will carry loads fairly often, I would go for the 1.5 to 2 degree positve camber. My GB is so close to 0 when empty, I plan to add about an inch of spring height. Someday....
In the meantime, I need to get the front of my Gb down about 2 inches to level the rascal out. 
my 6 cents... good luck!
Merv Krull
Salmon Arm, BC

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Wells 
  To: Merv Krull ; corvanatics at corvair.org 
  Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 5:41 AM
  Subject: Re: [FC] FC front alignment just to be sure... camber...


  Merv and Ron,

  Perhaps I have it all wrong, but I thought that empty Rampsides exhibit positive camber in the rear and move negative as load increases.
  Regardless, the bottoms of my front tires are farther apart than the tops by a noticeable amount. The way that the a-arms are attached requires shims be removed to move the top of tire out. My Greenbrier has no shims and the tires are vertical. it drives well and the tires wear normally. I crawled under and began installation of a front sway bar last night and could not find anything bent, broken or otherwise causing the alignment issue. The nuts that need to be loosened to remove the shims are at least 7/16 and are tight. I am having trouble getting any torque on them, due to their position.

  Thanks for your thoughts,
  Bill Wells

  Merv Krull <krupross at sunwave.net> wrote:
    Right you are Ron! Everywhere I googled camber came up with exactly the 
    opposite of the Webster definition.... go figure!
    Webster and I stand corrected.
    Which means Bill will need to ADD shims to get reduce the negative 
    camber....????
    thanx
    Merv Krull
    Salmon Arm, BC
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: "Ron" 
    To: "Merv Krull" 
    Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 5:36 PM
    Subject: Re: [FC] FC front alignment just to be sure... camber...


    > So, you'll have to go to:
    > http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=4
    > and check the picture!
    >
    > RonH
    >
    > ----- Original Message ----- 
    > From: "Merv Krull" 
    > To: 
    > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 5:20 PM
    > Subject: Re: [FC] FC front alignment just to be sure... camber...
    >
    >
    >> Webster's 7th says, "a setting of the wheels of a vehicle closer together 
    >> at the bottom than the top"
    >> Way too negative would mean that it must be quite noticeable like on a 
    >> tractor.
    >> I believe the intent is that once weight is placed on the system, it will 
    >> tend to flex to a straight position....?
    >> up to four cents
    >> Merv Krull
    >> Salmon Arm, BC
    >>
    >> ----- Original Message ----- 
    >> From: "Ron" 
    >> To: "Merv Krull" ; 
    >> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 7:51 PM
    >> Subject: Re: [FC] FC front alignment
    >>
    >>
    >>> Isn't your "just to be sure..." reversed?
    >>>
    >>> RonH
    >>>
    >>> ----- Original Message ----- 
    >>> From: "Merv Krull" 
    >>> To: 
    >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 7:34 PM
    >>> Subject: Re: [FC] FC front alignment
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Hiya Bill and all!
    >>>>
    >>>> Did a previous owner (PO) align it that way on purpose? or is there a 
    >>>> problem that needs to be attended to? how many shims are there? all the 
    >>>> shop manual has to say is, "loosen the upper support shaft to cross 
    >>>> member bolts, add or (in your case) remove shims equally as required 
    >>>> and retighten bolts. It may be necessary to remove the wheel to secure 
    >>>> these bolts." ... sounds easy from the writer's point of view.... I 
    >>>> will bet he never had to do this procedure... from the illustration it 
    >>>> looks like the nuts are out in the open on the inside of the rail. I 
    >>>> would think that you could trap the head of the bolt with a box end 
    >>>> wrench (preferably six point) from the inside of the shock tower.
    >>>>
    >>>> Camber should be positive 1/2 degree + or - 1/2 degree with both sides 
    >>>> within 1/4 degree of each other.
    >>>>
    >>>> Just to be sure, negative camber means that the top of the wheels are 
    >>>> further apart than the bottom of the wheels.
    >>>>
    >>>> Anyone with a carpenter's square know what the gap will be at the 
    >>>> bottom when it is set at 1/2 degree, assuming a perfectly level floor? 
    >>>> I think it is about 3/32 of an inch difference between the top of the 
    >>>> rim and the bottom of the rim based on a perfect 14 inch rim.... ???
    >>>>
    >>>> toodles
    >>>> Merv
    >>>> Salmon ARm, BC
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
    >>>> From: "Bill Wells" 
    >>>> To: 
    >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:36 PM
    >>>> Subject: [FC] FC front alignment
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Folks,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> What is the easiest way to get to the upper A-arm nuts for alignment 
    >>>>> purposes? Other than pulling the crossmember, of course.
    >>>>> I have a 61 rampside that has mucho negative camber and I want to 
    >>>>> remove the shims present to decrease this. I have been unable to find 
    >>>>> anybody in my area who will undertake an alignment.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>> Bill Wells
    >>>>>
    >>>>>