Alignment specs for ZHP unique or not?

[VA//M3]

I read somewhere recently, that BMWs stock toe/camber/caster settings on E36es are designed to increase understeer and steering 'sensitivity', while decreasing the propensity of the car to break loose at the back end. The downside being that the front wheels aren't as square in turns as they ought to be, which increases the risk of 'plowing' the turn. Vorschlag camber plates (or equivalent) are thus recommended in E36es, along with maximal toe/camber/caster to improve the front contact patch in turns, while also improving tire wear evenness.

First--did I make ANY sense there, or do I sound as dumb as I feel? Second--anyone think this might apply to E46es, like my properly-aligned one that unexpectedly plowed a turn last month, leading to a catastrophic crash? (I'm still pretty positive oil on the wet road must have played a role, 'cause that crash was entirely unanticipated, and breakaway was without warning; I felt like I was on ice).

I've found that running 0 total toe up front, and -1.5 front camber along with 0 or -.04 rear total toe in and -2.2 rear camber give you a very responsive and stable car when pushed to it's limit.

[jjbsilvia]

I have a stock zhp coupe running 255mm tires square. I used front specs at -1.2 camber, toe at minimal 0.04 in total. Rear is -2.1 toe total 0.22 degree in. Result is responsive if not active on the road due to wide front tires and almost no toe. I auto-x once in a blue moon, but drive it.... how do you say... spirited.. this setup seems like a great base setup for my dd that I am willing to have an active front end on. My $.02...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk