Chevy Impala SS Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone know the alignment specs on 95 SS?
I had a local shop line it up after the front end rebuild & just wonder if their machine specs were correct. Are there regular specs or "improved" specs? Anything else I need to suggest. It's a stock weekend driver and monthly SOLO II car.
Thanks for your help
babyhauler
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
The specs in their "machine" depend on the manufacturer of the machine. I use a Hunter. Note that Chevrolet does not even list rear camber and toe for our cars. Perhaps not a bad idea since they are not easily adjusted.
I have not been able to get columns to align on these posts, so you will have to use your imagination to see these in columns.

9C1 Wheel Alignment

Chevrolet Hunter internet
Left Camber 0.00 ±1.0 0 ±0.80 -0.25 ±0.25
Right Camber 0.00 ±1.0 0 ±0.80 -0.25 ±0.25
Cross Camber 0.00 ±1.5 1.0 0.25
Left Caster 3.25 ±1.0 3.5 ±1.0 4 ±.0.50
Right Caster 3.75 ±1.0 3.5 ±1.0 4 ±.0.50
Cross Caster 0.50 ±0.7 0.50
Individual Toe 0.08 ±0.1
Toe Total 0.16 ±0.2 0 ±0.2 0 ±0.06
Steering wheel angle 0.00 ±2.5
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
These are the accepted specs for the B-bodies.
http://b-body.net/Technical/Suspension/AlignmentSpecs.html

However, my car came with a different set of specs. When I switched to the above specs, the care handled with more understeer and a pronounced pull to the right anytime I was not on level pavement(almost all the time)

When I went back to the old specs it felt much better and had no right pull. It has a slight left pull on level pavement, but when do you run into that on the street?

My specs. This is on the sheet that came with the car. I don't think all are adjustable.
Code:

Question for the Gurus. Is it better for the tires to track straight, or have a technically "perfect" alignment that pulls?
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The specs in the column marked internet in my post above are the ones from the B-body site posted above. Interestingly I just set my second car to the above specs and it pulls slightly to the right. The first car has no pull and tracks just fine.
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks
I'll find mine & post them if different.
babyhauler
 
O

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
From what I understand, there was a question about the "official" GM specs for Impala SS since the alignment numbers were the same ones given for the Caprice. I remember waaaay back on the original Impala SS LiSSt, someone posted revised specs that were supoosed to be an improvement over the factory numbers. The GM specs apparently didn't take into account the much wider wheels and tires on the SS. Maybe someone out there can pull those up? I'll snoop around on the net and see if I can find them and post them.
 
O

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
OOPs! Wayne already posted them. These are the specs I was talking about. You should take a close look at all the front end hardware and make sure nothing is worn out before you try these "improved" numbers.
 
A

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
The problem with the pull to the right does occur with the IGBA specs on some cars. I try to do 2 things when setting up the front of an Imp with the 50 or 45 series tires. Add a little toe, about 10deg, this helps the car track forward better, and stagger the caster about .5 favoring the right side. It is almost impossible to compensate for road crown, unless you have a center lane all the time ;) but this helps. I also run about -.50 camber to take up a little for the ruts in heavily travelled roads, and it doesn't seem to have an ill affect on tire wear.
HTH, Scott
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Sorry, In my case the car that pulls right is a 9c1 with 235 70x15 brand new Goodyear RS-As at 35 psi. Tried changing the wheel position, but it made no difference. Rotating the wheels by hand did not reveal any hanging brakes - I'm going to check the bearings next.
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>and stagger the caster about .5 favoring the right side. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It looks like that was done in my case. The guy who owned it before me, said a tech spent 1/2 a day working them out so that it would track straight. It does do that.
 
9

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by atlSS96:
The problem with the pull to the right does occur with the IGBA specs on some cars. I try to do 2 things when setting up the front of an Imp with the 50 or 45 series tires. Add a little toe, about 10deg, this helps the car track forward better, and stagger the caster about .5 favoring the right side. It is almost impossible to compensate for road crown, unless you have a center lane all the time ;) but this helps. I also run about -.50 camber to take up a little for the ruts in heavily travelled roads, and it doesn't seem to have an ill affect on tire wear.
HTH, Scott
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I had to bring this back up. My question about the above information is: Are you working from the stock alignment specs? Or are you working from the modified IGBA alignment specs?

I'm noticing a lot lately, I have to position the wheel a fair amount in one direction or another in order to compensate for the crown or slope in the road. This takes place on mostly secondary, city roads. Supposively, this car has a stock alignment. This car never drives the same from one day to the next, it gets annoying.
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Brad,
I am working from the IGBA specs. I set mine using the "stagger the caster about .5 favoring the right side." I didn't get quite .5 degree, but it made the car track a lot better. Ran 5300 miles in the first two weeks of August with no tire wear issues. On some roads I could drive hands off for up to a mile. Other roads it was hands-on all the time. I guess that is as good as it gets.
I failed to realize that Babyhauler was asking about the SS specs and the wider tires they use in his original post. Sorry Babyhauler that is not my situation.
Terry
 
9

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Follow-up, here are the spec's my car was set last:

Left Front Camber -0.2
Right Front Camber -0.2
Left Front Caster 3.8
Right Front Caster 3.8
Left Front Toe 0.0
Right Front Toe 0.06

I'm sure you notice the cross-caster is set to 0. Not what I desired until I read what I gave him more carefully. If you are on a PERFECTLY flat, straight road, the car drives fine. Anything else, it is very disappointing to drive. I'm having to correct the steering more than I did before.

One question though, the toe was set out on the right right side, is this recommended?

Here are the spec's from previous alignment:

Left Front Camber 0.5
Right Front Camber -0.1
Left Front Caster 3.4
Right Front Caster 3.7
Left Front Toe -0.05
Right Front Toe 0.02

With these specs, the car drove somewhat better. Still required a bit of corretion on crowned roads.

I wish someone would post what their actual alignment settings exactly from the shop. The tolerance is always written, but what is the actual setting is what I'm looking for.
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Boy, this post is stretched out.
I have ordered new steering linkage stuff this week. I should get it installed by Christmas, I hope. I'll try to remember to post my new specs after it's done. Good or bad, if it's bad, then I'll go back & get 'em to change it. I also ordered new rear lower arms & upper bushings. I want to change that first, before the steering stuff.
babyhauler
 
P

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
i have eibach springs in my 95 9c1 now,.. it sits about an inch an a half lower than an ss,(stock).. i have 275-45-17 kumho ecsta's,.
Is there a better set of specs for a lowered car? it has been mooged etc,..
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top