Just watching The Dukes of Hazzard and I see the front suspension move just so wildly it's amazing.

When it makes a jump and wheels land it toes out like you would not believe.

When it makes a turn the wheels lay over that much it's unbelievable how much they camber that it's just so stupid, it's like 40 deg they must understeer like a bastard because you would only have a inch of rubber on the road.

I seen the Bat mobile as well comes in and they hit the brakes and the front wheels just toe out like a bastard all the time, it must of been a bucket of shit to drive.

You watch a Falcon when you jack up the front wheels off the ground they camber in I think it is and it's a fair bit but do the same with a HQ Holden they camber out but not by that much as a Falcon does.

Turn the wheel in a LC-J Torana and you will see one wheel turns spastic I think it is the left side, turning out and all of a sudden it just juts right out like a spastic, it's not linier.

Look at the Falcon they are good as they don't move all over the place and look at Gone in 60 seconds Mustang is good as the wheels never goes spastic.

I seen some TV show where they replace the front suspension in a 1965 USA Falcon and they hacked it all out and I thought F that I would off killed the bastards for doing what they did by putting a HQ like setup under it, they got rid of the spring towers, the only thing wrong with a XR to XG Falcon front suspension is the worm drive steering box, replace that with a rack and pinion and all is great geometry.

I wonder has anyone taken note of this sort of stuff. not to mention what the rear suspension is truly doing as one can get a handle on this types of subject then it may help one understand what one can do to better your cars handling.

I was looking into leaf springs some years ago and the thing is that not all leaf springs are same, their are real crappy leaf setups and some are not really that bad at all, but most people think that a leaf sprung rear is total rubbish but I have come across some IRS that can be much worse to drive handling wise.

I was really impressed at a mates new 306 GTI 6 Peugeot, for a small car the ride quality was really good and the rear set up was magic, so when you hit the brakes the rear goes and hunkers downward and does not jump up wards in the tail like all he other crap does, it's fantastic, what a great little FWD car they were.

The camber changes so dramatically, as it needs to account for body roll, whilst still maintaining as much tyre contact area as possible with the road.
When one side of the car is pressed down close to the bump stops, it needs a tonne of negative camber to keep the tyre contact patch on an angle close to the same plane as the road surface

Front suspension arms are designed to move the wheel in an arc when you look at the car from the front - increasing in negative camber as the suspension travels to it's most compressed limit.
The result of this, is as the suspension unloads or droops, is the opposite - positive camber.

Toe is affected by the steering, and ackerman angles - the system that turns the inner wheel on a tighter angle than the outside wheel, for more accurate cornering (and more grip).
Because the length of the steering arms, and the location of the pivot points, which are almost without exception, bolted to the chassis or body - movement of the suspension causes changes in the toe angle.
One of the cars that had great efforts to minimise this was the Camira, with long steering links, and the firewall mounted rack - it reduced the amount of toe change with suspension travel (and also reduced bump steer).

Caster is yet another consideration, but the cars discussed above didn't have that much thought put into castor - it became important as cars were refined more in the 80s & 90s.