Has any body tried this trick . I mean not to this extreme of filing the slots but to the extent where atleast what ever space in slot is available is used.
WHat shall be procs and cons of altering the more or less factory setting.
Regards
Gopesh




Performance driving requires some front wheel negative camber to reduce excessive wear on the outside edge of the tire/tyre caused by road/track abrasion tearing off over-heated rubber molecules. The 240's existing adjustment slots are minimal in width, and can easily be extended inboard by hand-filing a longer arc as there's plenty of metal to spare. With standard ride height only about -0.5 degrees can be obtained. Lowering the suspension will achieve additional negative of at least 1 degree. With effort I achieved -2 degrees each side on a lowered 1980 chassis using standard upper strut bearing mounts. The limit to negative camber is when the large spring touches the inner strut tower when the steering is turned.
Moving the uppeer strut mount 17 mm equals a one degree increase in negative camber.

It's worth mentioning that when the McPherson strut is turned, a small increase in negative camber occurs. With a wheel alignment, less toe is required, some people report a little toe-out assists cornering, others settle for a little toe-in.

Source:
http://wwwrsphysse.anu.edu.au/%7Eamh110/Technical_pages/volvo_sports_handling.htm