Okay, a person would really have to study a bunch of books, learn and understand some formulae and do some examples to prove this. But, I found a good reference (it's on a forum, so it must be true!) from someone who has that knowledge and experience that essentially states that even EXTREME changes to the ratio of upper/lower control arm length only cause 10% change in camber curve over 2" of suspension travel. Since our example was seeing -2.5 (at 12") turn into -5 (at 10"), if we made the lower control arm fully twice as long as the upper one (rather than just moving it the 1/4" or so that we have available for adjustment), the most we could do would be to change that 2.5 degrees of change into 2.75 degrees.
(above VSAL = "Virtual Swing Axle Length", sort of the calculated theoretical length of a swing arm that would move the wheel in the same arc as your suspension; RC = Roll Couple)Originally Posted by nocones
So, I'm going to conclude that the minimal amount of camber adjustment that we have on our lower control arm is not enough to significantly change the overall camber curve. As I stated earlier: "The camber curve is the camber curve."
And as I also stated, the simple purpose for THIS thread was to inform people that lowering the front of their Miata jacks up their front toe, so that they need to readjust the front toe (at a minimum) any time ride height is changed. That's all this thread was about. Y'all can continue to debate other stuff without me.