I used to change the camber plates at the site when I got there on a McStrut car (E36). For street the camber was at -2.5, with 0 toe. When I moved the camber plates to the more aggressive setting (which I had marked on the plate when at the alignment shop) the camber would change to -3.5 with a bit of toe out (can't remember the exact amount now, it's been a few years). I verified this with the alignment rack several times. The slight bit of toe out was good for turn in. YMMV, given different cars, different setups, but I hope that helps generally how this can work.
E36 uses a front steer rack so for sure what you saw is correct and perfect for exactly the purpose intended.
That Kia on the other hand must be rear steer and would/should pick up toe in when adding camber by moving the strut top,no way it can't unless the steering arm is located on the same plane as the lower ball joint...which it ain't
I was in the garage today fooling around on the tercel ice racer,I run camber plates on it for quick side to side changes.We run the same track one direction on Saturdays and the opposite on sundays so running offset camber each day is a bonus.
When I set toe I have to set it up for one day or the other then when I flip the camber for the next day the toe stays ok....steering wheel changes each day but that's ok.
I can tell you for sure if I leave one side alone and move the other side away from its intended location there's a very obvious change in toe.
Not trying to beat a dead horse but I can't see how the alignment guy said it stayed the same until -5.
kevlarcorolla wrote:
E36 uses a front steer rack so for sure what you saw is correct and perfect for exactly the purpose intended.
That Kia on the other hand must be rear steer and would/should pick up toe in when adding camber by moving the strut top,no way it can't unless the steering arm is located on the same plane as the lower ball joint...which it ain't
I was in the garage today fooling around on the tercel ice racer,I run camber plates on it for quick side to side changes.We run the same track one direction on Saturdays and the opposite on sundays so running offset camber each day is a bonus.
When I set toe I have to set it up for one day or the other then when I flip the camber for the next day the toe stays ok....steering wheel changes each day but that's ok.
I can tell you for sure if I leave one side alone and move the other side away from its intended location there's a very obvious change in toe.
Not trying to beat a dead horse but I can't see how the alignment guy said it stayed the same until -5.
A.) not "an alignment guy", but a friend of mine and I was there while we were doing it. IT was in our shop.
2,) Not only has their machine shown the same, my plates do as well.
The differences in Toe were in the hundredths of an inch until we got up to ~-5 (technically we were 4.8 or 4.9) where it finally gained enough to be a tic over a tenth on each side. Together they were right at .25" total toe in.
This is no different than the number of times I've been told a Crew Cab GMC can't get 24mpg, or any number of other stupid E36 M3 people spout all the time. I do lose caster with the camber. I lose more caster than I gain toe.... lots more.
With all this said, Nats is in 4 weeks so I'm going to dial in a little toe out when I get it back together with the new uprated springs.
Ok so your car defies the laws of geometry,I only brought it up in an attempt to help in case you were missing something.
Don't group me in with the "other stupid E36 M3 people spout all the time"....that isn't me or what this is about.
Not even going to ask why you lose castor,I install my plates square to the chassis so that E36 M3 doesn't happen....
Springs are in. Tires getting flipped today, pick 'em up at lunch. Reinstall the header tonight and HOPE I can get it tight and sealed this time.
In reply to kevlarcorolla:
You can't install these "square". The slots always slide toward the front of the car. When you have an oddball that all of 2 companies make parts for, you take what you can get and roll with it.
So, yes, there "is" toe gain, but it is offset by the caster loss and is very minimal to final toe the what the upper mount is designed. Yu have to go absolutely crazy with the amount of negative camber to get appreciable toe in.
Even 1/8in toe IN is a lot for autocross.
FWIW I run zero toe daily, and turn one of my tie rods 1 full turn to add toe out(1/4in in my case). Steering wheel will be off center for the event(no big deal), but when done, if you turn it back the same amount, if the wheel is centered you're good.
I added a zip tie to my inner TRE so the "tail" of it acts as a pointer to help gauge how many turns, etc so I just lay beside the car to change it, not crawl under and look directly at it, etc.
You may want to try the same. My car with zero toe turns in really lazily. My codriver didn't think so at one event, but I added toe out for the next one and he was like 
This thing turns in any faster and I'll hit all the damn cones. I can barely keep up with it as is!
Bobzilla wrote:
In reply to kevlarcorolla:
You can't install these "square". The slots always slide toward the front of the car. When you have an oddball that all of 2 companies make parts for, you take what you can get and roll with it.
So, yes, there "is" toe gain, but it is offset by the caster loss and is very minimal to final toe the what the upper mount is designed. Yu have to go absolutely crazy with the amount of negative camber to get appreciable toe in.
Hmm,redrill the plate to match tower holes to square the plate?.
Losing toe or castor is generally not a good thing for autox but losing both would have me looking to correct that even just for peace of mind.
I can regain the minimal caster loss with offset control arm bushings. The top plates work very well and hte car has been and is competitive in the condition it's in. I'm not really going to mess with what appears to be working well for "peace of mind". This setup is only on the car April to October.
Back together. Front is sitting higher even though I did not change the ride height. It definitely does move much.
I'm wondering if this thing is going to scream "RACECAR " over every crack in the road?
Well, that was mildly surprising. Not bad. Definitely solidified my desire to tow the car to Lincoln though that's for sure. But livable. While I was at it I put in just under 1/4" total toe out up front. That, combined with the RE71's being wide and aggressive makes for an "interesting" and "engaging" drive on rutted, pot holed streets.
A few things to update on. First, Kecvlarcorolla... I think I have an answer as to WHY there is such minimal toe change while swapping over wheels again. The tierod is almost on hte same plane as the lower ball joint. It's about 1/4" higher. To top that off, it comes in from the bottom so it moves the same way the LBJ does.That would explain why when the top tips in, there is almost no toe change.
Secondly... the car turns. HARD. To the point that normal tire pressures (36f/39-41r) made the car so damn loose I spent all my time catching it. Lowered down on Sunday to a square pressure setup and bingo... car is good.
Lastly... 3.5* of camber now is too much. With less "lean" getting the power down is painful. As in, you don't. Period. So we're going to dial back to 2.5 and see how that goes for Lincoln. Overall, good choice to bump the rates up front. very good choice.
Glad to hear it feels good... I finally got my camber issue sorted this weekend too and I'm about the same at 2.5-2.6 deg. 
yeah, I'm not driving this beyotch to Lincoln, that's for damn sure! No way I'd tolerate those springs all the way there and back. Time to get the truck ready.
Bobzilla wrote:
A few things to update on. First, Kecvlarcorolla... I think I have an answer as to WHY there is such minimal toe change while swapping over wheels again. The tierod is almost on hte same plane as the lower ball joint. It's about 1/4" higher. To top that off, it comes in from the bottom so it moves the same way the LBJ does.That would explain why when the top tips in, there is almost no toe change.
Secondly... the car turns. HARD. To the point that normal tire pressures (36f/39-41r) made the car so damn loose I spent all my time catching it. Lowered down on Sunday to a square pressure setup and bingo... car is good.
Lastly... 3.5* of camber now is too much. With less "lean" getting the power down is painful. As in, you don't. Period. So we're going to dial back to 2.5 and see how that goes for Lincoln. Overall, good choice to bump the rates up front. very good choice.
Yes that makes more sense,knew there had to be something going on there.
Go get'em.
I honestly never considered why... until you questioned it. MAkes it more interesting as a thought exercise. moving the tie rod to the lower area of the knuckle means you have more adjustment availalbe without toe-change, but what is the drawback? This would be an engineering question that I don't have knowledge on.
Its probably just a packaging thing regarding the steering rack location to get the bumpsteer(lack off hopefully)where it should be.
Usually the tie rod is above the LBJ,helps clear the wheels when turning and stuff
this car has 12" rotors... so there;s plenty of room for packaging behind it. IT's why I can't run 15's.
I'd bet your car is a lot more tolerant of just replacing a strut or strut mount(in a stock application) and not having the alignment far enough off to cause problems even if it's not put on a rack.
I'll have to poke my head under one some time when one passes through work.
In stock configuration the only alignment adjustment is toe. no camber or caster, rear beam needs those weird shims to adjust anything so it's tyically left alone. So an alignment stock is super easy.
Bobzilla wrote:
In stock configuration the only alignment adjustment is toe. no camber or caster, rear beam needs those weird shims to adjust anything so it's tyically left alone. So an alignment stock is super easy.
On most cars, if you replace a strut, it will not be 100% the same as before(manufacturing tolerances, bolt hole slop, how you orient the strut mount on the chassis, how much wiggle room there is to potentially change readings, etc) so as a result generally toe will be thrown off to some degree(ah ha!). Example: replaced an HHR strut(also camber-caster nonadjustable) yesterday due to leaking, toe went out of spec by like 0.10 degrees with wheel off center. It was straight before.
Your car it sounds like would be more tolerant of a strut change. Maybe less tolerant of a control arm replacement though.
I can count on one hand the number of cars I've replaced a part on, and been in the green with wheel centered afterwards after about 11 years. 9 months was nothing but 12-14 alignments per day for reference. I've done a TON of alignments in regards to stock road-going vehicles. 
I just wish we were allowed to align our own stuff at work after hours, so I'm stuck doing driveway alignments except for when I feel like paying for one 
Yeah, I had access to a shop and people to do it for many many years. (13.5 to be exact) It was nice. the biggest change on this critter is the full on suspension swap each spring and fall. Even then it's a couple turns and done.
The wife's Rio was the one that kicked my butt... but then again, it had struts, springs, knuckle, hub, control arm and all the mounts replaced. SO yeah.... you can't replace that much junk and keep the alignment spot on thats for damn sure.
Header back on and actually sealing. Sounds completely different, yet again, and man... I missed the power. IT's not ever going to be confused with a V8 muscle car, but that midrange punch and power up top.. yeah I missed it.
