Tony-Bones

Obviously the OEM settings are redundant once the car is lowered....... Nice drifty..... Did you modify the front hubs to remove the Ackerman angle?

I assume your going -30mm.... If yes then the camber will migrate negative to around -85'....... Front camber on your drifty is a bit deep, what castor are you running?

Thanks...... As you may know it's been a difficult year.

Historically the suggested rear settings work fine, it reads to me the camber or toe angles are displaced, a simple geometry will take care of that.

Got it......

Stick-on weights are the way to go, knock-on being more accurate is rubbish.

I'm still around.

The problem is the difference in the castor angles.

I would say the geo needs to be measured again.

When the wear is that confined and violent it will not be the toe angle, it's the camber angle. The OEM position is positive, generating the wear, over time the coils sag moving the camber more negative, reducing the complaint.

The spoke are repairable, if it helps.

Have the geometry measured.......

Sorry to have missed you, unfortunately my daughter was taken ill and ended up in hospital... Pleased to read the guys looked after you.

If this was by email, give them the mail.

Eibach make an adjustable front upper ball joint, fit's the entire IS range.

Have you had the geometry re-set?

Lexus got the geometry positions wrong on the IS200/300/SC, i rewrote them some years back and the data can be found here in the clubs knowledge bank.

For various reasons the tyres can cause that.... Have them moved side-to-side

Historically the wim settings stop the wear..... Something must still be wrong or they have not set the chassis correctly.

All the managers/ assistant managers and the staff we train are aware of the relationship, if you get a fitter on the phone or indeed a new manager they won't be so wise. If a purchase is made from our site we arrange everything from there.

Several years ago LOC admin approached me in regards to the historic inner front tyre wear problem. I rewrote the front calibration positions to stop the wear. Lexus UK are well aware of the problem and our solution but they are not allowed to deviate from the official Lexus settings.

I owe a lot to LOC and those who know what wim is will understand, but due to my work commitments i haven't been as visible here as i was in the past. So for the benefit of new members i would like to open a little geometry window so that new members get a better understanding of this geometry lark that has plagued the IS200/300/sc. First thing we need to do is understand those angles..... What are they and surely they work on everyone's car and that's the manufacturers law? The simple answer is that there is no such thing! Seeking the perfect set-up is dependent on variables that exceed even the most experienced in the industry, F1 with millions invested each season still cannot deliver 'matter of fact' positions, so what do you do? how can anyone establish the perfect set-up. First lets look at the manufacture Geometry within new models tends to be an extension of previous established positions, minor tweaks to accommodate suspension travel, wider tyres and so on is often visible and do fall into the 'safe zone', but attempt to manufacture a completely new Geometry then things can go very wrong, as it did for the Nissan 350Z and the new Peugeot 1002. So now your modified Taken from the above the car had recognized Geometric positions and is now modified... suspension, tyres, turbo but now things just don't feel right, well maybe understanding the 'forces' involved within Geometry not just the name of the angles could help. Toe: exerts no force unless violated to the maximum since the chosen position 'Dynamically' is 0 Camber: exerts a 'conical' force and will want to roll into the lowest point of the imaginary cone, the force adds security to straight line travel and compensates for body roll.... excessive camber will make the steering heavy and lazy (turn out) due to the 'compressive' force generated from the angular position of the imaginary cone. Castor: exerts a non-reactive longitudinal force assuming the positions over the axle are within manufactured tolerances, on cornering the Castor contributes toward displacement of the steering axis and the position of the 'scrub radius' this force is very important. KPI/SJI: exerts a very high force toward directional stability, this force is immediately detectable if any attempt is made to deviate from straight line travel... the force is generated by 'inclining' the pin during any steering action, this inclination lifts the vehicle and adds weight on the pin, in reply the equilibrium through the rack will return the steering so the KPI can relax. How to develop your own positions First consider your reasons, what do you expect from the car and to what end, is tyre wear an issue, are the modifications cosmetic or deliberate? The four examples shown reflect the most common consequences of modifying a car, in particular lowering, the forces displayed need to be examined in your own example and explored. It could be easy to assume now that all things 'Geometrical have been covered? Further reading:- Scrub radius Ackermann theory Delta curve Bump steer Thrust angle Camber curve Over/under steer Tyre slip angle/resistance/trail Lock angles Cradle symmetry Memory steer Castor trail

+1 for Abbey, they are very good, just be carefull with price.

I'm not sure why you think a common problem with a proven solution on the first generation IS series can be compared with a one off problem on an RX300, a completely different vehicle. Not really I was only pointing out the fact that someone had been to this place that's being recommended and not getting the results he hoped for.. ;) It's not a perfect world, if the owner's not happy "tell us" and we would deal with it. Your car will need a custom set-up due to the mods, stock settings will handle pants.