By "inside" I mean the inside of the turn. So, if you're turning right, the inside (right) wheel will tilt away from the car, achieving more positive camber.
This car is technically turning left but the wheels are turning right and that's what I'm referring to.
I read your first post and this one and I'd like to clarify something about camber usage in drift cars. I think you're touching on it here but not stating it explicitly.
Obviously we see a lot of drift cars, amateur or professional, running a high degree of negative camber on the front wheels. What you can't see is that they're also running higher than usage negative caster - the steering axis of the wheels is tilted further backward, creating more straight-line stability and causing the steering to return to center more quickly. Obviously this helps during quick transitions where we witness the driver let go of the steering wheel as it spin furiously in the opposite direction.
The high negative camber angle of some drift cars actually compliments in the high caster angle and improves cornering grip
in that application. You've stated correctly that the front wheels of a drift car mid-corner are technically steering the opposite direction. Because of this, the wheel on the outside of the corner (inside of the steering direction) will camber in a positive direction by default, and that's not good. Here's an example of a stock car's suspension doing this:
To counteract this, they run a high negative camber angle so that as it becomes more positive it actually flattens the contact patch and never becomes truly positive, unlike the photo you've posted. Combined with this effect, the outside wheel is loaded so its camber angle will change as a result of that as well, but this change depends on the type of suspension geometry.
The car in the picture you posted is running too little negative camber to flatten the contact patch at high drift angles. It doesn't necessarily need to as it's a driver preference thing. But for the sake of the geometry argument, here's an example of a car running high camber (even on the rear for dem style points) which flattens the front contact patch during a drift:
The car you posted in Matt Powers's who runs in FD. Here's a picture of his newest car with its wheels straight:
Based on my own car which has -2 degrees of camber front and rear, I'd guess his car has more than that, around -4 degrees, possibly more. In fact, here's a picture of a car which the owner stated has -4 degrees front and -1.5 degrees rear:
Now, with that said, this alignment of the front wheels is useful for drifting but not for circuit driving because of the way the suspension geometry moves in this style of driving. I think you realize this based on what you've already said, but I wanted to clarify because some GT fans seem to think that higher camber settings should always be better. In reality, and with my own experimentation on my own car (1991 RX7, coilovers, 235/40-17 NT05, -2 camber all around, very slight toe-out front, very slight toe-in rear) -2 degrees seems to work well for most street-legal performance tires. My experience is based on small circuit, autocross, and street driving among myself and friends with various other performance tires on differing suspension types. Testing the contact patch during cornering is fairly simple in real life but obviously the game doesn't give us that luxury.
I'm new to this argument that GT6's camber system is broken. From what I've read, it seems effective, but at lower angles than what it should be. What I haven't seen is whether or not the game factors in differing suspension geometries. Camber needs will cary from car to car - McPherson struts tend to go negative under slight compression, but then go positive past a certain point; double-wishbone tend to increase negative throughout the suspension stroke; multi-link suspension tend to act similarly to double-wishbone; live-axles don't have camber adjustment at all (thus the interesting NASCAR alignment terms which don't exist in GT); torsion-beam axles move in different ways as well. All the other various alignment angles change through suspension stroke also - most angles are not adjustable in real life and aren't mentioned in the game at all.
I'm just wondering if GT players take into account the various changes which take place. I'm also wondering if the
game takes into account the various changes. Frankly, I don't think it accurately models individual suspension geometries because when you slam a Miata the front and rear double-wishbone suspension causes extreme negative camber. I've done it. This doesn't happen in the game as far as I can tell. In fact, on a Miata with stock suspension and performance tires you shouldn't need to adjust camber at all because the geometry creates its own negative camber as it compresses in a corner.
