People really need to stop hating on his car, my car is low the same way as his. Mine handles fine and have no camber wear at all.

ITS HIS CAR LET HIM DO WHAT HE WANTS.


my cars on the ground. Please leave him alone. Its his car who cares.

Looks great man i love it

4g63dsmer said:

People really need to stop hating on his car, my car is low the same way as his. Mine handles fine and have no camber wear at all.

ITS HIS CAR LET HIM DO WHAT HE WANTS.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

my cars on the ground. Please leave him alone. Its his car who cares.

Looks great man i love it

Click to expand...

Lets go for a run on some twisties or a SHARP autocross style turn and we'll see how shitty your car really handles

We all know it's his car and not ours but if he didn't want to hear anybodys opinion then he would't have posted on the forums.

Wow cant believe i just read all 5 pages. I like the look of the rims but i would definately get that car farther in the air and put meatier tires on there. Your front bumper will love you later..

Skipped all the BS. Love the way the cars looks and sits, Good job.

Can we SERIOUSLY stop with the performance "gains" and losses of a setup like this. This is in appearance, and someone from 2002, who should really know better, is locked into a circular argument about something he really doesn't fully understand. We can talk stance; this is the perfect forum for it.

m_0ney_pit said:

I always wondered what the reasoning was for that. I have 9.5s with 245s and haven't really experienced any tail happiness when its wet, but I can get it tail happy and keep it sliding very easily using the ebrake when its dry . I'm running -0.75* in the front and -1.75* (ingals kit) camber in the back.

Click to expand...

You drive a FWD and I have a RWD...maybe that's where my tail happy comes from?

Everyone, please, let's stop arguing about the performance aspect. I've tried to make a point that keeps getting ignored. Lowering a 2g DSM this much shouldn't be done with the idea that the car will handle well. It might feel sportier than it did before, but there are more negatives than positives in regards to it being that low in relation to ideal performance. This thread isn't about performance. The OP has stated that he was after looks and a better "feeling" ride than he had previously. Looks like he accomplished that. He seems to know that the car isn't going to handle best being this low (at least I think he knows this) but it doesn't matter because the goal was looks first, performance second. No sense in trying to get him to change his goals or argue what is best for performance, tire wear, etc.

So let's just stop trying to make points about camber, roll center, bump steer, understeer, scrub radius, slip angle, etc. None of that is relevant in a stance/hellaflush thread anyway - people who are into the stance trend don't care about all that stuff. If he wanted the car to handle its best, he wouldn't have lowered it that much, simple as that. No sense in trying to get that point across, we all know that, he knows that, he doesn't care. Let's move on. Give him your opinion of the wheels, do you like them or not?

Ludachris said:

. Give him your opinion of the wheels, do you like them or not?

Click to expand...

Ooh, ooh, I can answer this one!

No! They're "hella" ugly.

dsmspick said:

Fix the camber and rubbing issues and then that will look hella dope!

Click to expand...

^^^ THIS!!! Looks great! Fix that freakin alignment though. Hate that white trash sideways wheel shit

Again, fix what camber issues? I have non... I may have 99 Problems but camber isn't 1. Only thing that will be adjusted is Toe once I get new tie rods and bushings on front and back. The rear will hopefully be adjusted by adjustable lower control arms if these wisemen think its ok.


Someone said on my 1.5" drop I had tons of camber.... Please explain where in this 2mm gap where the tons of excessive camber is?

snowborder714 said:

Just curious what your basis is behind setting front camber much lower than rear. These cars need to be setup the opposite way - front camber about double of the rear camber. I believe jtoby's statement about "too little front, too much rear" would still stand based on the above comment. And you're wondering why you're pushing...

Click to expand...

I didn't set shit for camber. I mentioned this numerous times. Stock Arms. The stock arms on a 2g and an inch of drop, the front has 0 Camber and the rear has a couple degrees. That is with Stock arms! Want me to take a picture of the 0 camber adjustments to prove I have not touched camber at all?

jtmcinder said:

That's what I said: too little in the front and too much in the rear, so not even close to "correct camber" or whatever you said.

edit: Yeah, what Brian said.



OK, so we can now add optics to the list of topics that you should not try to discuss.

Click to expand...

My bad. Fish eye. Whatever. I wasn't the photographer. It was some def chick.

I didn't chose the lense or the photographer or the location or the camera. Or tell her what to shoot. A few guys sat around parked our cars and let the girl do what she wanted.

InfiniteGSX said:

I didn't set shit for camber. I mentioned this numerous times. Stock Arms. The stock arms on a 2g and an inch of drop, the front has 0 Camber and the rear has a couple degrees. That is with Stock arms! Want me to take a picture of the 0 camber adjustments to prove I have not touched camber at all?

Click to expand...

Chris keep telling you to restrict the discussion to appearance and yet you keep arguing about technical things. And getting them wrong almost every time.

Please prove that a lowered 2G with no front camber kit has zero front camber. Or go back and delete the above post.

jtmcinder said:

Chris keep telling you to restrict the discussion to appearance and yet you keep arguing about technical things. And getting them wrong almost every time.

Please prove that a lowered 2G with no front camber kit has zero front camber. Or go back and delete the above post.

Click to expand...

I just proved it. So STFU! You all are the one that is arguing with me. Talking fix this camber and this and the tires and this and that. I have said, and I'll say it AGAIN. I HAVE NO CAMBER ISSUES! 0, Nada. Niente

In fact:

Ludachris said:

The OP has stated that he was after looks and a better "feeling" ride than he had previously. Looks like he accomplished that. He seems to know that the car isn't going to handle best being this low (at least I think he knows this) but it doesn't matter because the goal was looks first, performance second. No sense in trying to get him to change his goals or argue what is best for performance, tire wear, etc.

Click to expand...

Chris got what I was doing and saying. It is you who are offended by what I did to my car that are on this burning at the steak.

Eeeeky said:

Hate that white trash sideways wheel shit

Click to expand...

Is that so? White trash Stances their cars. Nice to know. I think I have some mudslingers in the garage from my Jeep I can throw on it....

Does anyone know what these saleen wheels go for? With decent tires? I cant seem to find anyone selling them on craigslist.

Authentic are hard to find. If you want to play it safe and go with a +24 offset you can get replica's for 145 a wheel. Then you could run like a 245 and be safe from fender or tire damage. They are also 32lbs each. Search for s style wheels on Google.

Ok car is now lifted about.... well new spring perch lifted front an inch. I adjusted the coils an inch up from max drop. It almost has that look I want. The rear is still a quarter inch lower from matching the front. But new spring perch should fix that

jtmcinder said:

Second, I do not see how stretching a tire makes it more likely to fit. Yes, a narrower tire on wheel X is more likely to tuck than a wider tire on the same wheel, but I don't see why tire X on a wider wheel is more likely to tuck than the same tire on the correct-width wheel. No, I'm sorry, but the only effects of running a wheel too wide for the tire are (a) less acceleration (due to more rotating mass) and (b) less lateral grip (due to poor sidewall support).

Click to expand...

Under some circumstances, a wider rim will indeed make it easier to make a given sized tire able to "tuck" under the fender without having to resort to too much static camber, but it's dependent upon the car's fender shape and the roll camber rate. This has to do with the wider rim reducing the sidewall height and flattening out the arc of the sidewall.

Honestly, I'm just getting back into the DSM game after being out for years and I'm just starting to re-learn these cars so I don't recall if the 2G suspension would be an example of this, but I have experienced this on other cars (such as the rear end of an MKIV Supra, which is relatively light compared to the front - so the rear can handle more stretch compared to the front - and needs as much rubber on the ground as possible just to hook up).

Does this actually increase performance over just running a skinnier tire? I think it's a case-by-case basis as there are a lot of variables - specific tires sidewall design, how effectively the car uses (or needs) the larger tire patch, etc.

However, I will say that in nearly all situations this is mostly done when your "constant" is your rim height; i.e., "I want 18's/19's/20's and the widest tire I can fit on that rim"; the "best case" scenario will always be beaten by dropping down an inch on the rims and going with a wheel/tire combo that has a lower overall diameter and "proper" width rims.

(As far as the OP's deal...it does look good in the last two pics...)

Ty. I'm workin on it. Going to wait for my new rear spring tops to show up. Since the stock ones wont let me drop far enough for my liking. After that I should be able to get some measurements and then adjust the coils to get the right stance. I want the ass up a little higher than the front.

Josh, once you adjust the rear camber to match the front it will look pretty cool. Way back when I was driving my 1g on the street I think my camber settings were -1 degree in the front and stock specs in the rear. Gave it a nice feel in the curves.

I need to wait for the new rear Perch's first before I set my actual height. I doubt I will be able to make any camber adjustments without some sort of rear fender pulling. But, With the front and rear's level with the fenders (very tippy bottom of the top of the fenders matching the top of the tires), being that the rear fenders are lower on the body than the fronts, I think it should match up. Since the camber matched up with the car fully slammed and it was stanced that way.

I know I had to roll and pull the front fenders a little bit... which imho looks awesome, gives it more sexy curves. IDK how I'd do it with the rear fenders.

Bit to Ballin for me but it does look pretty good in the last two pics.

Car looks mean man. GL with it

InfiniteGSX said:

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Click to expand...

Oh yea 'Merica!

I'd like it a lot more if it was functional. In looking at the first pictures I can't see how you'd actually be able to turn the front wheels without buckling a fender.

bmoha7321 said:

I'd like it a lot more if it was functional. In looking at the first pictures I can't see how you'd actually be able to turn the front wheels without buckling a fender.

Click to expand...

Well like I said from the beginning and numerous times during the whole debate. The car wouldn't move. We had to use a land rover in 4wL to move it. Because the the car dropped itself onto the tires. Meaning the fender sub frame which is about.... I'd say an inch above the fender lip, and right above the fender plastics, was resting on the front tires. I had Plenty of suspension travel, but my "large" tires according to some people who believe I should stretch smaller tires onto these wheels, say that's my reasoning. But I will not. 225/40 is the smallest I'll go. So I will and currently just did, adjust the suspension to allow for enough daily driven travel.

Now, the car moves fine, suspension flexes quite nice for being soo low (in the last pics I posted) I have even more suspension travel so no worries about damaging my shocks. All I need now is some tweaking to my height to get that raked stance I'm looking for since its still not there and be done with it.

The only issues I'm expecting, is speed bumps and my drive way. I don't race over speed bumps, nor my driveway. So ITs good. The city streets are becoming nicer around here. They are fixing bumpy spots and pot holes and all of that. Its very smooth to drive around everywhere. And if I need to go on vacation or whatever, the springs are adjustable! So its quite functional.

m_0ney_pit said:

Oh yea 'Merica!

Click to expand...

The guy that said he hates that White Trash look (the stance look that apparently hicks started)... I realized my room mate has that flag on his side of the garage. So we grabbed it and General Lee'd the hell out of the car hehe... Them darn duke boys at it again with a large turbo'd, E85 AWD Sports car this time instead of the Lee. haha

I thought it was funny. The car looks like a 'Cars' Version of Axl Rose from Guns N Roses....

Chris -

Please make him stop saying stuff like his slammed car has sufficient front travel. Please.

- Jt

I like it! and I thought mine was low. Silver on Chrome looks so badass.

dsmdeliveryboy said:

Lets go for a run on some twisties or a SHARP autocross style turn and we'll see how shitty your car really handles

Click to expand...

^^ignorance. not every car is built for "twisties and sharp autocross style turns. Just like not every car is built for speed.