Geometry Settings.

dave1 · July 23, 2008

I was chatting to a mate who is thinking about getting an IS200 but had heard about poor tyre wear. I mentioned that WIM could almost certainly reset the various settings if he went ahead and purchased one and that would cure the problem. He was quite interested but did bring up a point which I had not really thought about. If you make alterations to the manufacturers chassis/geometry settings how would you stand insurancewise if unfortunate enough to have an accident and these alterations came to light?

I am sure that this must have been looked into but I could find no threads relating to it.

aaronabbott · July 23, 2008

thats a very valid question,but id imagine depending on the accident the geo would be out anyway(with a bent chassis) so how would they be able to tell

dave1 · July 23, 2008

thats a very valid question,but id imagine depending on the accident the geo would be out anyway(with a bent chassis) so how would they be able to tell

As a true example, just under 30years ago I had a bad crunch where a pedestrian was killed. I was travelling (at night) on a poorly lit road and hit a drunk guy who came from behind a tree right in front of me and ended up bending my windscreen pillar. I was in an XJ6 and the police kept my car for a week examining it even though the only damage was the pillar,windscreen and a small dent by n/s headlights. They found my maximum speed could only have been 19mph but contacted Jaguar because they found play somewhere in the steering. Jaguar confirmed that the amount of slack was in fact correct and was needed because of the torque/power or whatever. Accidents do not neccesarily cause serious damage to vehicles.

DJ Wozza · July 23, 2008

I would suggest that if your car was in such an accident that the geometry was actually a suspect in the cause,

the car would be bent so badly the suspension would attain damage....

It would be impossible to prove IMO that the IS200 chasis with WIM Geometry was at fault purely because in a back to back drive

in an unbiased handling test of a Lexus set-up IS200 vs a WIM'd IS200, I bet 99 drivers out of 100 would suggest the Lexus car

didn't hadle well compared to the one set up by WIM.

Take the recent WIM meet, ask any of the club members who had their cars set up on the day (for free or paid) and see the

results you get. If you get one of the drivers to seriously suggest they preferred the car in the way it handled prior to the WIM

set-up, I'll go on a diet (for a week).

Noel · July 23, 2008

slightly off topic but Insurance can be a grey area, what about guys who fit non OEM brake discs and pads etc?

TigerFish · July 23, 2008

It would be impossible to prove IMO that the IS200 chasis with WIM Geometry was at fault purely because in a back to back drive
in an unbiased handling test of a Lexus set-up IS200 vs a WIM'd IS200, I bet 99 drivers out of 100 would suggest the Lexus car

didn't hadle well compared to the one set up by WIM.

Take the recent WIM meet, ask any of the club members who had their cars set up on the day (for free or paid) and see the

results you get. If you get one of the drivers to seriously suggest they preferred the car in the way it handled prior to the WIM

set-up, I'll go on a diet (for a week).

That's not really the point Wozza. Having a big brake kit on your car would in theory make it safer and it should stop better, doesn't mean the insurance companies give you money off, instead they will hike the premium and refuse to pay if it wasn't declared.

However, I do think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to measure a geo setup and hang any weight onto it as a determining factor in an accident, after all, you can drive over a pothole on your way out of WIM and not have the same geo setup that you just left with.

aaronabbott · July 23, 2008

you can drive over a pothole on your way out of WIM and not have the same geo setup that you just left with.

exactly as thats why mine was out after wim had set my geo the first time round so it'd be extremely difficult to prove,anyway would the insurance company be this picky having never been in a situation with them i wouldnt know

TigerFish · July 23, 2008

anyway would the insurance company be this picky having never been in a situation with them i wouldnt know

I suppose if you use Dave1's example of a resulting death, the payout could be in the millions so I'm guessing extreme pickyness will come to the fore in those cases to avoid paying out.

aaronabbott · July 23, 2008

anyway would the insurance company be this picky having never been in a situation with them i wouldnt know

I suppose if you use Dave1's example of a resulting death, the payout could be in the millions so I'm guessing extreme pickyness will come to the fore in those cases to avoid paying out.

i suppose in that case then anything they can do to avoid paying out is their aim

dave1 · July 23, 2008

I only brought out my accident to show that although my car suffered virtually no damage, the police accident investigation team found such a small detail on my car even though it was actually correct.

In no way am I suggesting that the excellent work done on handling and tyre wear issues by WIM are wrong, I just asked if the legal implications in the very unlikely event of an accident had been looked into. I did not intend to stir up such a hornets nest but was looking for realistic input into a point raised by a prospective 200 buyer. I had thought that possibly the superior experience of other LOC members might help, including the A Plan insurance manager who used to use this forum to solicit business (he got my business for 1 year) If members think I am wrong to ask such questions then let me know and I will not use the forum. I had thought that the purpose of these clubs was to benefit all members with the experience of other members, not just to answer things relating to "modding" of owners cars which is actually done by relatively few owners.

TigerFish · July 23, 2008

Strange reply Dave1. Post a question, ignore the answers/discussions if you don't like 'em. That is what forums are all about, in the old days they were called discussion forums. Maybe next time just put in your original post "do not answer unless you are an insurance manager" :winky:

dave1 · July 23, 2008

Strange reply Dave1. Post a question, ignore the answers/discussions if you don't like 'em. That is what forums are all about, in the old days they were called discussion forums. Maybe next time just put in your original post "do not answer unless you are an insurance manager" :winky:

No Rick, not a question of "ignore". More the point that the original question posed seems to be being misinterpreted by some. The point about handling before and after resetting the Geo is not in doubt (DJ Wozza), the salient point being not the fact that handling,tyre wear is greatly improved following being reset, but rather the fact that could it result in possible problems insurancewise should anyone be unfortunate enough to be involved in a fatal RTA which then results in a very thorough check of the car by a trained police accident investigator.

Whether or not the handling is better after being WIM'd is irrelevant to the point I was attempting to ascertain.

TigerFish · July 23, 2008

Strange reply Dave1. Post a question, ignore the answers/discussions if you don't like 'em. That is what forums are all about, in the old days they were called discussion forums. Maybe next time just put in your original post "do not answer unless you are an insurance manager" :winky:

No Rick, not a question of "ignore". More the point that the original question posed seems to be being misinterpreted by some. The point about handling before and after resetting the Geo is not in doubt (DJ Wozza), the salient point being not the fact that handling,tyre wear is greatly improved following being reset, but rather the fact that could it result in possible problems insurancewise should anyone be unfortunate enough to be involved in a fatal RTA which then results in a very thorough check of the car by a trained police accident investigator.

Whether or not the handling is better after being WIM'd is irrelevant to the point I was attempting to ascertain.

OK, fair enough.

dave1 · July 23, 2008

I would suggest that if your car was in such an accident that the geometry was actually a suspect in the cause,
the car would be bent so badly the suspension would attain damage....

It would be impossible to prove IMO that the IS200 chasis with WIM Geometry was at fault purely because in a back to back drive

in an unbiased handling test of a Lexus set-up IS200 vs a WIM'd IS200, I bet 99 drivers out of 100 would suggest the Lexus car

didn't hadle well compared to the one set up by WIM.

Take the recent WIM meet, ask any of the club members who had their cars set up on the day (for free or paid) and see the

results you get. If you get one of the drivers to seriously suggest they preferred the car in the way it handled prior to the WIM

set-up, I'll go on a diet (for a week).

Undoubtedly members would agree that their cars handled better but that is not really what was being asked. Also your point about the car being so badly bent is very misinformed. My XJ6 sustained virtually no damage and most low speed encounters would probably not result in the car being "badly bent"

Maybe Dr Bones or Alistair at "A Plan" could give some more informed input.

Paradroid · July 23, 2008

My take on this is that it would be waste of time trying to explain this to the customer services department of the insurance company, and I don't think they'd be interested anyway.

On mods I've always been careful but each person has different thoughts on what's ok and what's not. I would always declare an induction kit or a sports exhaust, because they're obvious to see and it's just not worth the risk of not declaring it. On something like geometry/tracking, you're only making adjustments to the car, not modifying it with different parts. I know you're changing it from the factory setup, but to be honest unless there's a raft of crashes caused by Lexus cars with modified geometry (not likely given it's a more stable setup from what I hear), the insurance companies aren't going to know about it or check for it.

Scorps01 · July 23, 2008

I would say the fact that ths IS is adjustable it would be fine as i dont think the revised positions fall that far outside the range if at all or all IS's would have extended camber adjusters fitted.

Intresting q though.

Tony-Bones · July 23, 2008

Very good topic..... Well done Dave1.

Incorrectly set Alignment or Geometry in it's true term can be a killer without question.... Problem we all have is that Alignment centres do "not" need to be certified so there is a huge gray area out there.

In the event the car is set incorrectly, generating an accident then the insurance could deem this as a undisclosed modification and void the policy, the owner could then use third party liability and sue the Alignment centre.

The only proof would be the final printout from the Geometry and this would need to display distressed figures consistent with the accident.

In truth the Geometry would need to be very violated to induce an accident, i would expect the owner to feel something is wrong in a matter of yards, liability is more probable from advanced tyre wear.

Additionally each angle has a "range", this range takes in to account mechanical wear, build variations and suspension coils sagging over time changing the dynamics.

Our "revised" positions for the IS200/300/Sc are within the OEM range but we do not respect the centre points on any of our settings so our change is a dynamic one rather than total violation of the suggested static range.

Saying all that though.... I am requested to set road cars that drive to Drift events/meets.... As you may or may not know a Drift calibration is very unstable.... My policy on this is that we will not set full-blown Drift settings if the car is used on the road and the owner needs to agree a bulletproof disclaimer in writing.

I hope this helps.... And Dave1 nice topic, no one has ever thought of this before so i am as intrigued as you.

dave1 · July 23, 2008

Additionally each angle has a "range", this range takes in to account mechanical wear, build variations and suspension coils sagging over time changing the dynamics.
Our "revised" positions for the IS200/300/Sc are within the OEM range but we do not respect the centre points on any of our settings so our change is a dynamic one rather than total violation of the suggested static range.

Saying all that though.... I am requested to set road cars that drive to Drift events/meets.... As you may or may not know a Drift calibration is very unstable.... My policy on this is that we will not set full-blown Drift settings if the car is used on the road and the owner needs to agree a bulletproof disclaimer in writing.

I hope this helps.... And Dave1 nice topic, no one has ever thought of this before so i am as intrigued as you.

Extremely helpfull thanks. I am not that well up on matters such as geometry settings( does it show ) but I do understand what you are saying regarding your revised settings. "within OEM range" would certainly appear to mean that there should be no issues insurancewise. Keep up the good work and thanks for your more informed input.

Tony-Bones · July 23, 2008

@Dave1

Your question is absolutely valid and i am sure there is some insurance "cop out" if realised the car had a non-specific Geometry positions but i also feel the insurance industry doesn't have the ability to police such a situation.

Domestically the suggested range is so vast we rarely need to violate this unless the domestic car is highly modified, and then the modifications "should" be declared to the insurer by the owner?

Point to note is that within the range permitted i can make the car violently over-steer or violently under-steer, and that's before we even talk about tyre wear?

It's a very gray area that few want to explore...... But you have, so welcome to the world of chassis dynamics :)

TigerFish · July 24, 2008

Sorry, going a bit

Tony, I'm a bit confused by what you have said above. You seem to be saying that the OEM settings are NOT wrong, which is not what I always thought from the hundreds of posts on this forum. And you are saying that rather than setting the geo at the centre points of the factory specs, you do them off centre?? So in reality, it is the establishment doing the geo setups that are not reading the problem correctly and not using the tolerances to help clear up any issues. Which kind of shifts the blame, if you want to apportion any, to not being 100% with Lexus anymore?

I'm also a bit confused by the statement "so our change is a dynamic one rather than total violation of the suggested static range". Can you explain this statement better so I can get clear in my head what you mean? What has being dynamic got to do with violating a tolerance? If something is static range, then it is not static? is rather than total violation implying that there is some violation. No offence intended here, but that statement sounds like a whole load of fancy words to say nothing, but in fairness it does look/sound good

Back on topic

More for Tony I'm afraid, "the insurance could deem this as a undisclosed modification", are you saying this is true or just a guess? I want to make sure that indeed a geo setting is classed as a modification as opposed to a "Could be", "might be", "may be" etc. Let me explain, although you say that your settings are in tolerance (depending on above answers potentially), I have also read on here that adding wider alloys can effect what geo settings you should have, so if you have to declare the wheels, would you have to declare the resulting geo changes as suspension mods as well? Are you saying that should a drift car go out on the public highway, that the geo settings will invalidate its insurance unless declared. I guess in a round about way, I am trying to ascertain if you have any grounds in your thoughts about the insurance issue or are guestimating based on your opinions just like the rest of us (until an insurer actually posts of course - which would only be valid for that insurer as they all have differing rules). Ultimately, someone has no choice but to speak to your insurer if you really want to know the answer, however painful that explanation/process may end up being.

Bazza · July 24, 2008

i think a lot of people are jumping to the wrong conclusions

an insurance company would be interested in any performance or cosmetic modifications

setting the geometry doesnt fit either

its a bit like changing the tyres to a different brand

as long as the tyre falls into the recommended type and size it is fine

its like using optimax and worrying about the performance gains

the geometry is only a recommendation from Lexus, and has a variable degree of adjustment, nothing that Tony does that doesnt fit within the adjustment values or could be deemed unsafe,

the natural wear and tear on a car would alter settings after a time, thats why there are tolerable values, no insurance company could argue if the settings are within the range

Scorps01 · July 24, 2008

The Lexus setting fall in between + v - as they are adjustable and they are set at a certain degree within that range as they wont know what roads a driver uses or speeds and style of driving whereas Tony (WIM) do through questions asked so i dont see the need to let your insurance know that its been shifted to suit your driving whilst staying within the tolerance range.

If you have after market coilovers on your car you should let your ins co know, but should you tell them everytime you adjust your suspension to suit your needs?

TigerFish · July 25, 2008

Sorry, going a bit
Tony, I'm a bit confused by what you have said above. You seem to be saying that the OEM settings are NOT wrong, which is not what I always thought from the hundreds of posts on this forum. And you are saying that rather than setting the geo at the centre points of the factory specs, you do them off centre?? So in reality, it is the establishment doing the geo setups that are not reading the problem correctly and not using the tolerances to help clear up any issues. Which kind of shifts the blame, if you want to apportion any, to not being 100% with Lexus anymore?

I'm also a bit confused by the statement "so our change is a dynamic one rather than total violation of the suggested static range". Can you explain this statement better so I can get clear in my head what you mean? What has being dynamic got to do with violating a tolerance? If something is static range, then it is not static? is rather than total violation implying that there is some violation. No offence intended here, but that statement sounds like a whole load of fancy words to say nothing, but in fairness it does look/sound good

This maybe off topic, but I am still interested in the answers to above. :)

Tony-Bones · July 25, 2008

Sorry, going a bit
Tony, I'm a bit confused by what you have said above. You seem to be saying that the OEM settings are NOT wrong, which is not what I always thought from the hundreds of posts on this forum. And you are saying that rather than setting the geo at the centre points of the factory specs, you do them off centre?? So in reality, it is the establishment doing the geo setups that are not reading the problem correctly and not using the tolerances to help clear up any issues. Which kind of shifts the blame, if you want to apportion any, to not being 100% with Lexus anymore?

I'm also a bit confused by the statement "so our change is a dynamic one rather than total violation of the suggested static range". Can you explain this statement better so I can get clear in my head what you mean? What has being dynamic got to do with violating a tolerance? If something is static range, then it is not static? is rather than total violation implying that there is some violation. No offence intended here, but that statement sounds like a whole load of fancy words to say nothing, but in fairness it does look/sound good

This maybe off topic, but I am still interested in the answers to above. :)

If you have a collection of figures from a car sitting on the ramp (static) what will happen to them when aerodynamics or cornering forces or simply a bump is added to the equation (dynamic?) Lexus suggest a static position the covers dynamic gains..... they were wrong.

The establishments setting the calibration would only deviate if they were aware of my corrective positions, other than that they will use the data supplied, not every company reads information online!

For your information the problem with the IS is the "scrub radius" on the front.... The SR is where at the tyres footprint the cars weight is held, "dynamically" the SR migrates across the footprint as the wheels are steered. This migration is controlled by the castor position and it's relationship in order to lift the inner wheels camber during a turn.

On the IS the castor is to low.... so it's unable to lift the camber sufficiently hence the wear..... Further reading can be found here> www.wheels-inmotion.co.uk .... If your having trouble sleeping it will help.

As for "fancy words".... If we were talking particle physics would you suggest i describe them as "those small grainy dots?"... For a dumbed down explanation of chassis dynamics i hear Crap-Fit is a good place to go.

TigerFish · July 25, 2008

Thanks for the explanation Tony. From your tone, I'm getting the feeling you didn't like the questions, which were not intended to rile you in any way. You said something, which when I read it can mean a multitude of things, so I asked if you could explain further. I do not doubt your expertise or abilities in car geometry (or WIMS and all the people who work in it) and the results are well documented to back that up that expertise :) I have read the wim website, and find the whole subject fascinating. That is why when I see something that looks like "fancy words", I am interested in getting a proper understanding. I do have a bucket load more questions but I can see that you obviously do not wish to continue my education in chassis dynamics so I will go to crap-fit tomorrow and get the full story