djr81

He couldn't stay behind Kimi because of the line the Ferrari took into the chicane. What Hamilton had when he was behind Kimi was a slower speed. To get this he backed off & allowed Kimi past. He none the less made it back up along the length of the straight which sort of indicates there is more to the story as ordinarily he shouldn't have been able to. Six km/h is 1.6 metres per second. So every couple seconds along the straight should have represented a car length. By contrast a 2/10's gap at 100 km/h is 5.5 metres & at 200km/h 11 metres. So by allowing a couple or three seconds to travel the length of the straight you end up at a point where there is fk all in it either way. For me the overtake was about what Hamilton did under brakes not what happened on the straight, ie about the grip available to the car not its terminal speed. In any case the terminal speed of the McLaren would have been down on that of the Ferrari. So I don't reckon there was much in it either way. My opinion (for what little it is worth) is Hamilton did enough to satisfy the regulations. Yes he missed the chicane (or was forced to) but by backing off & letting the Ferrari past he satisfied the requirements. That he was able to outbrake Kimi is good for him. Kimi took a couple of different lines on the approach to the corner which may well have raised a few eyebrows in diferent circumstances. The more important point was it was good racing. The kind of thing that should be encouraged. I don't really need to see more boring, processional F1 races, nor the FIA interfering with the championship again. Nor I suspect does anyone else. Here is hoping Kimi can get it together & put up a good fight to repeat his championship.

If you watched the race & the McLaren you would have seen how tail happy it was. It would appear that Hamilton is happy to set the car up that way & drive it that way. Which is great because it looks a treat on the tellie. Also any car on the last lap on slicks was hopeless. Try 30 seconds slower than those with wets. The point needs to be made that if the McLaren was 6 km/h slower than the Ferrari & behind it (although no one has said these two things necessarilly coincided) then surely the gain in position is addressed? The shame of it all is the 40th anniversary of Bruce McLarens breakthrough win in a championship F1 race (yes kiddies there used to be non championship F1 races) was 40 years ago at Spa and it has been all but forgotten. Send them all out in M7's on the full length circuit in the rain & see how hard they really are I say.

Well twenty twenty hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in this instance it ignores a few salient points. 1. Kimi basically shoved Lewis off the road. 2. Hamilton pulled back onto the track behind the Ferrari. 3. The only reason he was able to overtake was because of Kimi's stupid lines going into the following corner. The fundamental problems with this are two fold. 1. Yet again a race has been decided by stewards instead of out on the circuit. May be an opportune time to think about it when Monza turns into a pathetic procession. 2. Yet again the standings in the championship have been changed to close them up. Hasn't the FIA learnt that this sort of carryon turns people off the sport in droves? McLaren said it would appeal the decision. "We have studied the details and put them before the FIA stewards," said a team statement. "They show that after cutting the chicane Lewis lifted off, he was 6 kmh slower than Kimi. After conceding the lead to Kimi, Lewis repositioned his car on the right and beat Kimi on the brakes going into the hairpin."

I dunno. I guess it is easy to blame Renault for everything but the reality is it is hard to increase terminal speed without a huge increase in horsepower. Put it this way if you carry more wing you will increase your apex speed at the expense of the terminal velocity. So I am by no means sure that all of Red Bulls issues are down to the engine alone. I vaguely remember Arrows blaming all things Yamaha for their lack of speed. Ron Tauranac briefly came on board & fixed their engine installation problems for them. Result - a happy motor & a far more competitive car.

They went away? You can pretty much always rely on F1 teams to adhere to the letter of the law & compeltely violate its intent. Truth is Renault aren't spending as much as they used to & it is showing.

Hmm, odd. I have always found the RE55 to be cheaper than an equivalent Toyo in the larger sizes. Better too than the 888's. The price guide I have infront of me lists 245/40R18 at $478 & the 265/35R18 at $555. It may be out of date or you may be able to getter a better price than the list. Anyway check the build date on the tyres....

Why R888's? There are better/cheaper options for GT-R's. Anyway first things first the price difference is about $80 per tyre. Secondly 245's are a bit smallish on a 9.5" rim.

This is to the best of my understanding. The R32 Gt-R's with Sumitomo callipers had 1" BMCs according to the shop manual. Brembo equipped R32's had 17/16's BMCs. N1's with Sumitomos (Or Nismo versions if you like) has 15/16's with no ABS & Brembo equipped N1's had 1" BMC's. Cars without ABS have 3 outlet BMC's. Brake master cylinders for R32 Gt-R's. Part numbers are stamped on the end of the master cylinder. There appears to have been two different part numbers available for most build dates. This may be as simple as Nissan sourcing master cylinders from two different manufacturers - Tokico & Nabco. Stock model: Build dates from 8908 to 8911 Part number 46010-05U20 Size 1" Build dates from 8911 to 9108 Part number 46010-05U00 Size 1" Build dates from 9108 on Part number 46010-05U20 Part number 46010-05U00 Size 1" V-Spec model, ie with Brembo brakes. Build dates from 9302 on Part number 46010-05U02 Size 17/16's. N1 versions. This gets confusing & may well be incomplete. Early version appear to have 15/16" master cylinder sizes. I would guess (Note: NOT SURE) that they may well have three outlets rather than the normal two for stock GT-R's & have Sumitomo callipers. The number of ports relates to the presence of ABS. 2 ports for ABS, 3 for Non ABS. n Interestingly they appear to be smaller in size than their equivalent ABS equipped stock or V-spec GT-R's. Any way: Build dates 9002 to 9108 Part number 46010-02U00 Build date 9108 on Part number 46010-02U00 The specification is listed differently for these units but is in Japanese on the spec sheet & I can't read it. The alternate parts listed are here Build dates 9002 to 9108 Part number 46010-02U20 Build date 9108 on Part number 46010-02U20 Later versions had a 1" size. Build date 9203 on Part number 46010-05U01 for a Tokico unit. Part number 46010-05U21 for a Nabco unit. There may well be more options but that is the limit of my knowledge at present.

You need to first sort out what callipers you want to run & whether you still want ABS before you select a brake master cylinder. Keep in mind the Sumitomo calliper has (relative to most other brands other than Brembo) a large piston area.

This has been dealt with at length a number of times. Maybe try a search. But in the meantime some things you may like to think about. 1. You need to remove the motor to fit sump baffles. 2. If you upgrade the oil pump you may as well fit an oil restrictor to the head. 3. To fit an oil restrictor you need to remove the head. 4. If you are doing that you may aswell rebuild the thing...... But he last. most important point: If you overfill the sump with oil you will not suffer from oil surge & the motor will be fine.

That is usefull info. For some reason when you look at the brake stoppers as offered by Cusco etc they appear to differentiate between the Brembo & non Brembo Gt-R's. No idea why. Anyway this is what little I have been able to find out. Brake master cylinders for R32 Gt-R's. Part numbers are stamped on the end of the master cylinder. There appears to have been two different part numbers available for most build dates. This may be as simple as Nissan sourcing master cylinders from two different manufacturers - Tokico & Nabco. Stock model: Build dates from 8908 to 8911 Part number 46010-05U20 Size 1" Build dates from 8911 to 9108 Part number 46010-05U00 Size 1" Build dates from 9108 on Part number 46010-05U20 Part number 46010-05U00 Size 1" V-Spec model, ie with Brembo brakes. Build dates from 9302 on Part number 46010-05U02 Size 17/16's. N1 versions. This gets confusing & may well be incomplete. Early version appear to have 15/16" master cylinder sizes. I would guess (Note: NOT SURE) that they may well have three outlets rather than the normal two for stock GT-R's & have Sumitomo callipers. The number of ports relates to the presence of ABS. 2 ports for ABS, 3 for Non ABS. n Interestingly they appear to be smaller in size than their equivalent ABS equipped stock or V-spec GT-R's. Any way: Build dates 9002 to 9108 Part number 46010-02U00 Build date 9108 on Part number 46010-02U00 The specification is listed differently for these units but is in Japanese on the spec sheet & I can't read it. The alternate parts listed are here Build dates 9002 to 9108 Part number 46010-02U20 Build date 9108 on Part number 46010-02U20 Later versions had a 1" size. Build date 9203 on Part number 46010-05U01 for a Tokico unit. Part number 46010-05U21 for a Nabco unit. There may well be more options but that is the limit of my knowledge at present.

Roy I think you are probably the only person out there who got more upset about whatever went on between Mika & Coulthard in the 1997 European GP than with all the other stuff that went on, ie Ferrari allegedly colluding with Sauber. Mclaren allegedly colluding with Williams. Schumacher trying to run Villeneuve off the road. As for team orders I should say that I don't actually have much of a problem with them. Clearly F1 team bosses with massive organisations to run should be able to do so however they want. The only time I have an issue with it is when they are enforced in circumstances where they are not at all necessary. Eg The famous Indy race a few years back (the one with six starters) or the 2002 Austrian Gp. The more fundamental problem is that the stupid rule changes prohibiting team orders have three main failings: 1. They clearly are being ignored or worked around. 2. They make liars of the drivers/team owners etc who implement them. 3. They treat followers of the sport like a bunch of clueless simpletons.

Alot of people went ballistic about the result in Austria in 2002. I don't remember it as being confined to Mclaren fans or any one particular group. Most of those people who criticised the outcome were either ill informed & quite frankly missed the point. Quite why the FIA caved into all the bullsh!t is beyond me. So now everyone just pretends not to have team orders. The only question of any validity from that race was quite why Ferrari felt the need to employ team orders whent hey were so far ahead of everyone else. As for come backs some bloke called Prost did ok. Also Niki Lauda. As an aside there was an interesting interview with AJ in a recent edition of motorsport magazine. He mentioned that the worst people to work for were team owners who used to be F1 drivers. He nominated Graham Hill as his worst boss as he was always trying to engineer the car without sufficient regard to Jones' input. Anyway if you want a blow up over team order check the Jones/Williams era....

Yes but it never used to be like that at Ferrari. It used to be MS to finish ahead unless something fundamental went wrong. It was in place irrespective of championship standings other than maybe the year he injured himself. Which was my point. Oh look never mind.

Well thanks for the character assessment but I didn't say team orders were gone from F1. I was saying that they were in place at Ferrari when Schumacher was there to an extent that has not been present in the time since his departure.

Bollocks to that. Don't miss him one bit. Do you really want to go back to team orders at Ferrari & all the attendant bullshit that went along with his stay there? F1 is always about the future, not the past. In any case there are plenty of drivers for whom you can lament without worrying about the Schumacher family. Bring on the new boys - Pantano & Senna.....

So the non M spec R32 GTS-T has what size master cylinder?

I understand* that the R32 GTR master cylinder is 1" whereas the GTST is 15/16's. And yes the GTR brakes are ordinary. You have to ensure they are bled properly & you have good pads & rotors. Even then..... *ie not 100% sure.

What makes you say that? The ATTESSA unit has a number of inputs/outputs that also affect the ABS operation. So if you deactivate the ATTESSA system you render the ABS useless as well as the 4WD system. But this is not the same as saying you can/can't remove the ABS without upsetting the ATTESSA system. Secondly, why would you want to revert to a GTS-T master cylinder? It is too small in bore size.

Some random comments: I bet RBR are really happy about all the trouble they went to to secure Renault engines in place of Ferrari units. All those "reliability" upgrades Ferrari have put into their motors appear to be paying off. & last: Does anyone think BMW will recover their early season form?

http://www.rhdjapan.com/jdm-low/Nissan-RB2...ent-Cover-22501 Nothing has its merits....

Looks like an expansion joint that they have ground to try & keep it flush. What is the problem with it? Also fingers crossed that this thread can move on from all the vitriol.

Try here: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Ge...as-t172861.html

The engine number is on the drivers side of the block under the inlet manifold on a line with number 1 cylinder (approx).

Um I have had the parcel shelf out on various R32's & never once removed the rear seat. You just grap the cushion & pull it forward whilst you lift the various sections of parcel shelf. It is only timber anyway so will flex quite a bit.