2018 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 1LE switches between street and track camber with no visit to the shop....

Car And Drive zl1 1le review

One hell of a party trick:

"...

The other half of the chassis performance comes from Canadian supplier Multimatic in the form of aluminum-bodied spool-valve dampers. Not only do they provide an elegant and passive way to vary damping force, the inverted struts provide a means to achieve race-car-like negative camber at the front end. Via a trick method to switch back and forth between street and track settings, the ball-jointed and forged-aluminum top mount of the front strut is adjustable to increase negative camber by 1.7 degrees. To set the car to track camber, jack one corner, remove an alignment pin in the wheel well and the three bolts at the top of the strut tower under the matte-black hood, twist the top mount 180 degrees (it has a dual bolt pattern), reattach, and—voilà—instant camber. Combined with fairly common eccentric alignment bolts, the ZL1 1LE can have as much as 3.7 degrees of negative front camber, although Chevy recommends negative 2.7 on the track.

..."

Genius.

I'm having trouble picturing why this would be better than just having a camber plate up top? Consistency? Seems like a lot of work to gain 1.7 degrees of camber?

ProDarwin wrote: I'm having trouble picturing why this would be better than just having a camber plate up top? Consistency? Seems like a lot of work to gain 1.7 degrees of camber?

Because you can flip it back for less camber on the street if desired without needing to worry about getting it back in the same place each time.

I'm also failing to see that this is extra special cool, since other suspension geometry is likely to change based on the static camber... which would send you to the alignment rack anyway.

Unless it doesn't?

rslifkin wrote:

ProDarwin wrote: I'm having trouble picturing why this would be better than just having a camber plate up top? Consistency? Seems like a lot of work to gain 1.7 degrees of camber?

Because you can flip it back for less camber on the street if desired without needing to worry about getting it back in the same place each time.

Camber plates usually have alignment marks you can use...so this is just a slightly more convenient and idiotproof variant of a camber plate.

Yep, no need to measure each time. It's like pre-set quick-change camber plates.

Duke wrote: I'm also failing to see that this is extra special cool, since other suspension geometry is likely to change based on the static camber... which would send you to the alignment rack anyway. Unless it doesn't?

Just toe. And that might not change much, depending on geometry. And toe is easy to set in a few minutes with toe plates.

GameboyRMH wrote:

rslifkin wrote:

ProDarwin wrote: I'm having trouble picturing why this would be better than just having a camber plate up top? Consistency? Seems like a lot of work to gain 1.7 degrees of camber?

Because you can flip it back for less camber on the street if desired without needing to worry about getting it back in the same place each time.

Camber plates usually have alignment marks you can use...so this is just a slightly more convenient and idiotproof variant of a camber plate.

I think you mean less convenient? Don't have to jack up a corner to adjust a camber plate. Yes, more idiotproof. Also less likely to slip if the tires see huge loads.

ProDarwin wrote: I think you mean less convenient? Don't have to jack up a corner to adjust a camber plate. Yes, more idiotproof. Also less likely to slip if the tires see huge loads.

I always jack mine up when making adjustments. I don't want to put my hands near 500lb+ of weight pushing against a slippable plate that's probably not exactly perpendicular to that force.

It most likely toes out slightly when you increase negative camber. Which might actually be beneficial for track use, negating the need to actually change the alignment when switching camber settings. Basically, you get a setting for "some camber with slight toe-in" and other for "more camber with either zero toe or slight toe out" or something like that.

I'd was a lot more enthusiastic when I thought it was a GUI selected option.

RossD wrote: I'd was a lot more enthusiastic when I thought it was a GUI selected option.

Yeah I was expecting electrically actuated variable camber plates, like the ones BMW once tested.

I thought it was pretty nifty.

I prefer the mechanical simplicity and what (I assume) is a lighter mechanism to some electro-mechanical do-dad, but I'm a bit silly like that, and I'd imagine if you can afford a 70k+ car you'd also take it to the dealer for all repairs....

GameboyRMH wrote:

RossD wrote: I'd was a lot more enthusiastic when I thought it was a GUI selected option.

Yeah I was expecting electrically actuated variable camber plates, like the ones BMW once tested.

But then the GRM community would be up in arms because it's another needless piece of technology that could break

I told my wife yesterday that instead of getting her a CX5 and me an RF, we needed to just get a ZR1 1LE. I'm not sure she's convinced.

accordionfolder wrote: I thought it was pretty nifty. I prefer the mechanical simplicity and what (I assume) is a lighter mechanism to some electro-mechanical do-dad, but I'm a bit silly like that, and I'd imagine if you can afford a 70k+ car you'd also take it to the dealer for all repairs....

Yep. That's part of the reason they went to the dampers they did, saves weight over the maghnerheotoiclaweoijhc ones!

Keith Tanner wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote:

RossD wrote: I'd was a lot more enthusiastic when I thought it was a GUI selected option.

Yeah I was expecting electrically actuated variable camber plates, like the ones BMW once tested.

But then the GRM community would be up in arms because it's another needless piece of technology that could break

Keith Tanner wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote:

RossD wrote: I'd was a lot more enthusiastic when I thought it was a GUI selected option.

Yeah I was expecting electrically actuated variable camber plates, like the ones BMW once tested.

But then the GRM community would be up in arms because it's another needless piece of technology that could break I told my wife yesterday that instead of getting her a CX5 and me an RF, we needed to just get a ZR1 1LE. I'm not sure she's convinced.

She'll never be convinced with that attitude! It's better to ask for forgiveness than permission?

She does love tork. I think a supercharged 6.2 is just what's missing from her life.

Are they doing a ZR1 1LE or did you mean the ZL1

Whatever that sexy thing that just posted the 'Ring video is. So many random letters.

Lol I just thought maybe they were doing a vette version now :)

This is a super cool car. It also has height adjustable springs perches with what appear to be 2.5" springs. I'm toying with the idea of getting a V6 Camaro and swapping in the trick shocks from the ZL1 1LE.

Just wait it might be available direct from Chevy like the Z28 suspension was

My ZX2SR had adjustable geometry with the top mount.

Problem was, if you went for the max camber of +29 minutes you had 0 caster. Compromise set gave +14 minutes on both.

Hardly worth the bother.