New SpecE30 Camber plates

#1

These are the best design for use with OEM diameter springs and Bilstein struts. FULL thread engagement and single oval washers under the adjustment bolts.

only $359

http://www.vmwerks.com/proddetail.asp?prod=spece30cc

#2

They look nice. I like "Street strong, race proven, tough as a German tank." However, it fails to mention what the maximum camber you can gain out of these is (in stock configuration, meaning, not using two bolts instead of four per Irelands plates)?

#3

We are outfitting motormunchers car with them later this week. Comparing them to the plates that are on my non-specE30 it looks like 3.5deg plus neg camber seems reasonable. I think the spring perch is a bigger concern with respect to interference.

Walter

EDIT: all cars are different which is why I try not to list max adj numbers.

#4

These camber plates look very nice. I was checking the SE30 rules and I can’t find anything about substituting the upper spring perch. Maybe I overlooked it somewhere?

#5

Those are OEM BMW perches…

#6

Modified OEM perches…

Nice looking set up!!!

Will the pass muster on the rules?

I am betting no…

#7

TheRedBaron wrote:

The max camber attainable is limited by the upper spring perch hitting the shock tower. That happens with my GC plates well before I run out of adjustment and I’d guess that the same would apply with these plates.

#8

[quote]RULES
9.3.8.1. Any adjustable camber or camber/caster plate is allowed, unless specified in these regulations.

9.3.8.5. Any suspension setting (toe, caster, camber) not requiring machining or modification to factory parts is allowed.

9.3.8.9. Suspension bushing material replacement is permitted.[/quote]

The way I see it is, you can not use these as they are a modified factory part (9.3.8.5).
However you can use the Ground Control front strut tower mounts because they are not factory modified parts(9.3.8.1).

#9

Carter…
Doesn’t seem to be any modification to the stock perch

#10

"9.3.8.5. Any suspension setting (toe, caster, camber) not requiring machining or modification to factory parts is allowed.
"

The only work done to the strut top is the addition of the bearing which does not aid in any adjustment specifically. The plates do not offer a "competitive" advantage, only longevity.

It is a grey area so I agree we need Carter to weigh in.

BTW I believe these plates are on the Grassroots Motorsports car.

EDIT: There have been issues with the upper perch bending and the shaft is in danger of punching through.

EDIT: They are not on the GRM car.

#11

A nice piece but I too would have to say they are not legal:(

#12

Been away for a few days and I’m instructing for the Ferrari Club at VIR Full tomorrow - Wednesday. Early morning; got to get to bed.

Mike and I will look at it and will discuss it.

Carter

#13

I appreciate everyone’s input but it is not up to us. FWIW the current crop of plates lead to failed upper perches and the slim possibility of struts punching through. In the interest of safety I think that this innovative design be given a chance.

The ruels allow the replacement of the upper strut mount with an adjustable plate to allow camber adjustment. In the spirit of the rules the plates are legal. The only modified part has nothing to do with camber adjustment, it solves a safety issue.

#14

Carter,
Your post dropped in as I was typing mine.
I appreciate your time in looking into the plates.

#15

When installed properly none of the other current plates will affect the longevity of the spring perch. You just have to use your noodle when installing them so that the force from the shock shaft is properly distributed. The static and dynamic force of the suspension is transfered through the perch/bearing mechanism in these cars and you must support that properly.

The spring perch is not just a device that the spring sits in. If you are allowed to use aftermarket perches then whats to stop a floating spring perch from coming in. Or offset spring perch, or a camber plate that mounts to the top of the strut tower and has no spring perch at all. The reason you have to allow an alternate perch in classes where you can run coilovers is you are obviously forced to change the size of the upper locator. In this class we are not changing the spring size so there is no need to change the perch.

Camberplates will become more expensive if you allow changes to the perch. The OEM perch is the limiting factor in both allowable ride height and adjustment range and should be kept to keep the class simple. Currently any of the designs (even ones that I consider inferior) aren’t really at a functional disadvantage at this point. It’s nice because any manufacturer can make a useable plate so we have choices and they can all retail for for around 300 per set or less. That’s just as cheap as a set of M3 offset mounts and fixed plates when you add it up.

I’ve looked into having a plate that attaches to the top of the strut tower allready so that I can reduce the droop on my front shocks and further lower my car. I’d use a delrin floating cone to locate the spring in the shock tower. It’d be rather expensive to make.

#16

I agree in principal, but the plate is inline costwise with others and is a safer more durable design. The perch is not being changed for an aftermarket piece or general design, it is a gold irridited OEM BMW piece. I also understand the slippery slope argument that you give. As far as that is concerned all new designs are evaluated by the rules enforcement people individually. Personally I do not see this as a lead in to what you described since the design has nothing to do with obtaining extra camber etc.

#17
  • 1 for what Rob said. Very slipery slop once started. The next guy who modifies the stock spring pearch could offset it for more camber, to lower the car, etc. Keep it all stock.

Michael O.

#18

Seems the concern is that they’ve met 9.3.8.1. but the insertion of a bearing in the spring perch is being considered a modification to a factory part violating 9.3.8.5. I’m not sure I agree that this violates the rules.

The rules state that any suspension setting (toe, caster, camber) not requiring machining or modification to factory parts is allowed.

The modification of the spring perch is not allowing any adjustments. If you use these perches with a stock upper bearing, the setting would be stock, and non-adjustable. I could see how this might break the rules if they had used a stock upper bearing and modified it for camber, toe, or caster adjustment, but no stock bearing assembly is used in this setup - and therefore no stock part allowing adjustment has been modified.

Am I missing something?

#19

I don’t think that anyone here is claiming that they are trying to cheat with these plates. The reality is that they did machine and modify the factory part in order to get the camber adjustment. It may not be any more adjustment than the other plates on the market but it still is not allowed. If allowed on this specific case only, I can see others trying to use the same claim.

In addition I think that if you use these with the stock upper bearing you would end up with two bearings stacked on top of each other.

If allowed I would love to modify my upper pearch by offseting the hole a little and reinforcing them. Without checking any pearch that is not stock this could happen. It may not even be noticible to the eye without some good measuring stuff.

I would feel really bad if they were not allowed as I assume they took some effort to develope. But, I would be very suprised if these are allowed. Everyone can read the rules and ask questions.

#20

Max camber is determined by the interference between the spring perch and the body. the Spring perch diameter is a function of spring diameter. Offsetting the hole won’t do anything. Bench racing is fun but we’re not going to determine whether they are acceptable or not. FWIW this is all hot air.