Sydneykid

Buy and installation is easy, but have you measured and corrected the bump steer? The steering pivot points are now no longer in alignment with the lower control arm inner joint, hence you have introduced a noticeable amount of bump steer . Which is a good 2 days work to correct if you know what you are doing, have the measurement tools and the hardware items requird to fix it. Cheers Gary

Saliya is spot on, ducting is very important, otherwise airflow just takes the easy course and goes around the cooler instead of through it. Particularly if the car is sideways. So if you already have a decent sized cooler then I suggest ducting it properly will fix the problem. BTW, the Gibson cars ran 2 coolers for the long distance events (Bathurst etc), for sprint races I only saw one cooler in use. Cheers Gary

It's not a bad idea, but personally I shy away from engine swaps, different engine number, rego, compliance, insurance and all that other crap. Plus I would have to pull the engine to swap it over, so I might as well stick some rods and pistons in the VQ35 and stick it back in. Not a lot of extra work really. Cheers Gary

Rear bump steer is simple to measure. Take the spring and shock unit out of one side, disconnect that side swaybar link, stick the car on the wheel aligner, supporting the chassis at normal ride height of course and then measure the toe change (with the wheel aligner) as you jack that wheel up and down. Ideally there shouldn't be any change in the toe. If you have adjustable traction rods then you simply adjust them to minimise the toe change. I guess you already know that even by replacing the upper control arms (and traction rods) you have still left the soft, standard, old, worn out, rubber bushes in the uprights (hubs). So you are going to get some movement in toe as a result of that. Cheers Gary

Stand alone, longer steering tie rods make no difference to the amount of steering lock. Generally they are used to compensate for longer or relocated lower control arms (used to increase camber). Changing the steering rack for one with more travel is the best way to increase steering lock as it doesn't disrupt the other geometry provided the steering pivot points are alignment with the other suspension pivots (most importantly lower control arm inner joint). Cheers Gary

The requirements are no different to any other IRS system; 1. Eliminate the bump steer (not necessarily toe in at all times) 2. Optimise the camber curves to suite the tyres 3. Run the softest possible spring rates that you can within the tyre's working window 4. Adjustable squat 5. Separate adjustment in the shocks for bump and rebound Number 3 above almost always demands that some rear anti roll be utilised. Let's face it, why would you remove the easiest, cheapest and most effective way to tune the handling balance. Cheers Gary

There is no doubt that taking out unnecessary movement is a good thing, if done properly. The problems that I see are not in the theory itself but in the physical application of the theory. For example, solid mounting the rear cradle without allowing for adjustment of its angle. Even worse, adjusting control arms with spherical links and not correcting the bump steer. Or using roll centre adjusters without knowing where the actual role centre or the CoG are. Any the sphincter of the universe can buy a box of bits and bolt them on, but it just makes the handling worse if the knowledge on how to use those bits isn't there. If you don't have the knowledge, experience and the equipment to measure the results its pretty much guaranteed to be a waste of time and money. The underlying problem is the parts themselves are relatively cheap (in time and $'s), but acquiring the knowledge is expensive in that it takes time. Then you require the equipment, scales for calculating the CoG, bump steer guage, wheel alignment equipment etc and the knowledge to use them. Lastly I need the time and $'s to test their effects and optimise the set up accordingly. In a full day of testing, with 1 driver, 4 crew and a suspension engineer/manager I might just optimise the geometry. Provided I have spent a full day before hand doing the homework. In simple terms, what I have found is if I spend $500 on suspension components I often need to spend 20 times that on optimising them. If I don't do that then it's pretty much guaranteed that I will have wasted the $500. It's the reverse of having a big power engine, you spend $10K on buying the engine and $500 turning it. Cheers Gary

Not true. Most Japanese service items (filters, brake pads, tie rod ends, steering links etc) are made in Korea, Taiwan or d China in the SAME factories that make aftermarket filters etc. The exact SAME product in a different box. The last time i had my car serviced at a dealership the work was done by an unsupervised 2nd year apprentice. The truly good technicians don't work for suburban dealerships, they simply don't get paid enough to stay. Hence why UltraTune (and others) successfully took the major manufacturers to court about warranty claims being refused because the car wasn't serviced by the manufacturer's appointed dealership. As long as the servicing is carried out according to the book then its doesn't matter who actually does the work. It was also part of the same court ruling that all servicing and warranty related literature must be made available by the manufacturers. No secret squirrel stuff allowed. Anyone who thinks that they are going to get superior parts and service from a Nissan dealer is delusional. You'll get the same service quality on an $160K R35GTR as the guy who bought a $16K Tiida. You'll stand in line behind him just like everyone else. It's the same problem they had with the R32GTR 15 years ago, nothing has changed. They appointed special dealers, they trained mechanics and STILL they couldn't sell their allocation, they sold cars at a loss, they cancelled orders etc. What's different this time? Cheers Gary

Insurance, safety gear, clothing, development funds etc etc are all valid points for having licensing, no sensible person would question that. What it is valid to question is the accuracy of the demarcation lines and whether or not they are up to date. For example, at some point in time someone decided that an 11.00 ET was a line drawn in the sand that said once you cross that line you have to do certain extra things. The real question here is how was the 11.00 decided? If it was based on the logic that no production cars do 10.99, then it’s time to question that logic. The idea that all cars running faster than 11.00 couldn’t possibly be “road cars”, hence they must be “race cars”. Since they are “race cars”, their owners should have no problem with cages and other items that further separate their “race car” from a “road car”. To achieve that sort of time their owners will have carried out a large number of modifications. Such modifications that have taken the car so far away from being a “road car” that the owner couldn’t/wouldn’t/shouldn’t validly complain about a few more safety related requirements. The problem currently being faced is that there are an ever increasing number of production cars that, with a minimum of mods, can easily exceed the line in the sand. These are “road cars” in my definition and hence why the line in the sand should be reviewed regularly. Otherwise we are risking turning their owners away from doing their racing where it belongs, on the track. After all that’s what we are really talking about here, why the government kicked the can to build the track in the first place. Give the guys with “road cars” somewhere to race other than the streets. If the current ANDRA regulations are turning these guys away, then it’s time to review those lines in the sand. Cheers Gary

In no particular order; I use Noltec rear subframe bushes and the Whiteline Rear Subframe Alignment kit in all of the road + track use cars. If the standard bushes are OK, then I leave them for road cars. The regs we race under don't allow solid replacements for bushes, rubber to polyurethane is OK of course, they are both elastomeric. Bump steer is simple to measure. On the front, take the springs out, put the struts back in, stick the car on the wheel aligner and measure the toe change as you jack one wheel up and down. Ideally there should be any change in the toe. On the rear its even easier, you leave both the springs and shocks out. As for the front, stick the car on the wheel aligner and measure the toe change as you jack one wheel up and down. Ideally there shouldn't be any change in the toe. What you feel with bump steer is easy to recognise once you have felt it. When a front wheel hits a bump the car deviates from the course you chosen with the steering wheel. If the bump steer is bad you have to turn the steering wheel to get back on course. Wha tshould happen when you hit a bump is the the suspension should go up and down, but you shouldn't have to correct for it. The rear is similar, no stering wheel of course, but it deviates from it course when it hits a bump. So you have to compensate for the movement at the rear with a small correction of the steering wheel. At high speed when thee is noticeable slip angle and bumps are encounterd you end up flicking the steering wheel to compensate for the front and rear bump steer. This lessens the tyres' already limited grip. Ackerman is also pretty simple to measure, put the car on the wheel aligner and measure how much toe out occurs as you turn the steering wheel. The more degrees of turn of the wheels the larger the amount of toe out should be. Simplistically 1 mm toe out for every 10 degrees of steering angle. Cheers Gary

Let's attack it one piece of the puzzle at a time; 1. The rear camber (0.7 & 1.0) looks OK to me, my recommended road settings are 0.75 to 1.0. Keep in mind that the standard adjusters are good for around 0.25 degrees, so you can fine tune it so that they are equal if you want. 2. Your experience with the radius rods and caster is typical, people change to adjustable rods thinking that they will get more caster than with the bushes, but the fact is the difference is negligible. 3. So the excessive 0.5 degrees of front LHS camber is the only real problem, the RHS is OK at 1.15. If the front LHS ride height is 345 mm then even that (1.5) is not far off normal. At 355 mm it's still not unusual in R32 and R33's, the LHS cops a lot of impacts over the years and that wears out the bushes, the ones that you haven't changed so far. The first thing I would check is the condition of the inner lower control arm bushes, pretty much all R32's and most R33's I see these days those bushes are stuffed and should be replaced. Jack it up and lever it around with a decent sized screw driver, there should be almost zero movement. They are pretty easy to replace, the same polyurethane bush part number fits R32GTST and R33GTST (GTR's have ball joints not bushes). I have a couple of sets in stock so let me know if you need them. If the bushes are OK, then there are 2 other solutions. If it's an R32GTST then you can space the upper control arms brackets away from the inner guard to remove some of the camber. The pounding that I mentioned above pushes the inner mounts further inwards and hence adds camber, which may also explain the missing caster. There is enough length on the studs for spacers to fitted between the brackets (there are 2 brackers, 1 front and 1 rear of the arm) and the inner guard. Around 2 mm spacers are usually enough remove 0.75 degrees, then you can use the adjusters to fine tune it to where you want. If it's an R33 then it's not so easy, the brackets are welded to the inner guards. Because of theur superior design (compared to R32's) the wide spread upper control arms don't bend the inner guard. But what they do do is wear out the inner bushes. So you will need to check the wear on them using the screwdriver leverage method. The bad news is no one makes replacement bushes for the inner uppers that I know of. So you may have to replace the arm. Let's cross that bridge when/if we come to it. Cheers Gary

Assuming 7 active coils (3 progressive) 580 lbs/inch (10.3kg/mm) Cheers Gary

One man's comfortable ride is another man's trip to the chiropractor. What's the spring rate? What's the damping rate? Why have you limited yourself to those brands? Ask yourself, which shock absorber manufacturer did Nismo turn to when they needed a better handling package for the upgraded Skylines since 1989? Was it D2? Was it TEIN? Was it GReddy? Who did Nissan turn to when they wanted the R35GTR to be the best Skyline ever? Was it D2? Was it TEIN? Was it GReddy? The last question, why shouldn't you enjoy the same technology source for $1250? Cheers Gary

There is this widely held belief that in order for a car to handle well it HAS to ride harshly. Which is of course complete and utter rubbish. The truth is you CAN have a car that rides acceptably and at the same time handles very well. You just have to choose the right components and then set the suspension geometry to maintain the maximum tyre contact. After all, keeping the tyre in contact with the road surface at all times under all conditions is what makes a good handling car. A car that leaps from bump to bump is hardly going to handle very well, because it has no grip when the tyre is off the ground. Cheers Gary

Excuse me if this sounds a bit harsh, but this is the way I see it. What are the current alignment specs? I can't help you decide if you have enough adjustment if I don't know where the car is right now. I know the range it needs to adjust through, for road use you need to be able ot get the front camber to around 1.5 degrees negative, for track use at least 3.5 degrees. For the rear you should be aiming at 1.0 degrees negative to 2.5 degrees negative. If you can achieve that range with what you have now then. You can leave the caster the same all the time, at least 6 degrees positive in the minimum, 8 degrees is better. Ride height is very important, moving the height up or down 5 mm makes a difference, especially at the rear. So you need to know exactly what the ride height is, a 10 mm guess is not good enough. What springs rates did they supply you with the Tein Flex? That's a rather important number to know for the set up. What swaybars, diameter, hollow or solid, adjustable? Adjusting the swaybars is the best method for tuning the handling, it's the simplest way to change from road to drift set up. Changing spring rates is a right royal pain in the ass in comparison to a simple swaybar adjustment. I would have thought that changing the rear subframe angle would be a good idea, it's a pretty simple process to swap the pineapples from road to drift settings. Why have you gone for the less tuneable solid mount? It just makes the car unnecessarily harsh all the time and gives no method of adjustment. Steering lock, Ackerman correction and bump steer elimination are the last on this list. If you don't have enough steering lock to maintain the drift attitude you are achieving, then some changes in steering components is required. Once you have enough lock lock then you need to work on eliminating the resulting bump steer created by changing the steering components. There is uusally an accompanying loss of Ackerman that aslo needs to be addressed. Most drift cars I see how atrocious amounts of bump steer and Ackerman like a horse and cart. If you don't know what I am talking about when I mention bump steer and Ackerman, then I strongly suggest that you leave the standard steering components in the car until you do have an understanding. As I said a bit harsh, but better that you know the facts before you jump in. Cheers Gary

The two stage boost has nothing to do with extending the turbo life, it's to prevent wheelspin in lower gears and save the auto gearbox/manual clutch from excessive low gear torque loading. Running 7 psi all the time has absolutely zero effect on the life of the turbo. Cheers Gary

Later model (R33 S1.5 and Stagea S1 onwards) have the ignitor built into the coil pack, rather than a stand alone ignitor. Not sure if that's the issue, but it is a difference from the earlier models. That said I have been working on R32/33/34's since 1999 and I haven't found one failed coil pack, maybe I'm just lucky. Cheers Gary

When was the last time ANDRA updated the performance index for licences? Standard cars get faster and it seems logical to me that licences should move with them. My memory is not so perfect, but I seem ot recall that when 10.99 was the licence limit most stock standard road cars did 16's or so. So a 10.99 was pretty damn fast in comparison. These days it's not such a big deal. Cheers Gary

From what I have seen the HKS cast manifolds look different LHD versus RHD. Personally I don't think it's worth the risk. The Nengun price is pretty much the same as what I can get them from the US. Cheers Gary

R32GTST Group Buy http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=85591 Cheers Gary

7. Brakes, given equal braking hardware, the lighter weight of the GTSTs will always see them stop quicker for longer. In summary, when the engine's power output exceeds the 2wd traction then the GTR has a distinct advantage. Over a given power level (my guess ~500bhp) this traction advantage is simply too great for the other advantages of the GTST to overcome. That's where a GTR comes into its own. Of course, in a high end drag environment, the availablity of ever bigger and better rear tyres overcomes even that dissadvantage. Cheers Gary

Interesting topic, much more complex than it would appear on the surface. Since almost no one on SAU has a stock standard R32GTST or R32GTR then I have to allow for the possibility of modifications, their cost and effect on any comparison. I think I would need to break it down; 1. Engine, in the SAU world the GTR and GTST engine differences can in fact be ignored, RB's are so easily interchangeable and RB30DET's in GTST's so common, that any off the show room floor advantage held by a GTR is temporary. 2. Gearbox, personally I think the advantage here is with the GTST due to the requirement for the transfer case on GTR's. Internally there is no difference in strength between an R33GTST gearbox and an R32/33 GTR gearbox. Realisically you could use almost any RWD gearbox in a GTST, but that's not the case in a GTR. For example installing a complete Hollinger (sequential or H pattern) as used in V8Supercars would be a simple excercise in a 2wd chassis 2. Diff/diffs, the problem with a GTR is the size of the front diff, its physically much smaller than the rear diff and failures are common. Whereas the rear diff is almost bullet proof in both GTST's and GTR's. When we start to get the power balance right (~60/40) for ther best handling in a 650+ bhp GTR they start to break the front diffs on a regular basis. Upgrading the centre (to a Torson for example) fixes the major weakness, but the size of the crown wheel and pinion is still very much a limiting factor. There is no simple fix for this, accommodating a larger diff in the space available would be a complex engineering exercise. 3. The chassis, there were all sorts of rumours around about GTR shells being "stronger" than GTST's. Having done a number of torsional tests on both R32GTST and R32GTR during race preparation I can confidently say that I haven't seen any consistency there. The measured differences are small and usually traced to any damage that the chassis may have incurred in its lifetime. 4. Handling, not to be confused with traction. The GTST advantage here is in its inherently lower weight and the fact that the excess weight of the 4wd system in a GTR is in the front of the car. This further exacerbates the already front heavy bias inherent in the R32/33/34 chassis. So given equal tyres and suspension set up there is no reason why a GTST can't have a higher cornering speed due to its lighter weight. This also manifests itself as lesser front tyre degredation over the race distance. You can also get more caster in a GTST as there re no front driveshafts angles to complicate the process. 5. Traction, the only big advantage that a GTR has over a GTST. If the power output of the engine greatly exceeds the capacity of a 2wd to transmit that power through the tyres to the road then that's where the 4wd comes into its own. This particularly applies in a standing start event, such as a hillclimb, where a GTR has a distinct advantage in launch and power down. 6. Drag Racing, there is plenty of evidence that shows it is much easier/cheaper to build/buy a 9 sec GTST than it is to build/buy a 9 sec GTR. SubZero in their day output a number of 9 sec R33GTST's with autos and RB30 bottom ends that rattled of 9 sec 1/4's in the hands of relatively inexperienced drivers. To be continued

The diff bushes have no effect on the suspension geometry, so I can't see how they would affect the handling. Much like engine and gearbox mounts, diff mounts can have dynamic effects (moving mass, inertia etc) if the bushes were badly worn/torn. But I can't say that I have ever seen an R32/33/34 with flogged out diff bushes, they seem very durable and arguably over engineered even for drag cars with 1000 bhp. My personal opinion is that there are better, more effective ways to spend my time and money. Cheers Gary

Standard (new car) height is 390/380. Upper control arms are the same on GTR, GTST and GTS4. Cheers Gary