Height Adjustment & Travel, Why parallel? Options

[Joseph Mills]

My 914 goes to the shop next week for alignment: 1.5 to 2 degrees neg camber front, 2 to 2.5 neg rear with 1/16" toe-out front, 1/16" toe-in rear. Tires are Hoosier A3S03's.

I have found a few posts that seem to indicate that when the A-arms and trailing arms are parallel to the ground, you have maximized your cars height. Is this in fact, correct?

If so, why is this level preferred? If you go below this height is suspension geometry adversely effected? How much wheel travel is left at this point?

Joseph
'75 914 2.0L AX bound

[Dave_Darling]

Limiting the camber change is one of the reasons for putting the A-arms parallel to the pavement. The smallest changes in camber occur when the A-arm movement is near where the arm is horizontal. Ditto the changes in toe, I believe. The suspension seems to be in the heart of its working range at that point.

I actually prefer a little bit of droop in the at-rest position of the A-arms. The tire that is having load taken off of it will have more camber/toe change that way, but the one that is being loaded will have less. Which I think outweighs the larger change on the other side. But how much "a little bit of droop" is depends on a whoooooooole lotta things. Spring rates, driving style, the pavement you're driving on, and on and on.

I'm not nearly enough driver for that to make a real difference, so I just eyeball it...

--DD