It seems to annoy some people when they see a stanced FWD car with more camber in the rear than the front, but doesn't that make more sense? Since the back wheels aren't driven, woudn't it be ok to put as much camber as you need back there because you don't have to deal with those tires needing longitundinal grip, just lateral. Then the fronts would have less camber because the need to do the turning but they must also have a solid contact patch for when the car is accelerating. On a rwd car, however, it is just plain dumb. I'm not saying that this crossed the mind of anyone hammering their camber plates to -10 degrees, but it is an interesting thought.