Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was driving my car in a car park today and noticed that when I went around the bends my car was making a click click click noise, then on the straight it went away. My car is an R33 series 1 GTST Sedan Auto with HICAS. Do skylines with HICAS have CV joints? has anyone else had this kind of problem? I have done a search and I couldn't find anything relevent.

Reagrds

Chris.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/104832-clicking-noise-when-cornering/
Share on other sites

I think people are confused by the fact that a lot of drive shaft joints on cars with Nissan independent suspension look very similar. Strictly speaking a CV (Constant Velocity) joint is used where the joint has to cope with both suspension and major steering movements - FWD cars in the main, GTR's have CV's in the outer joint of the front drivesshafts. The inner joint on GTR's and the joints on the rear shafts are known as 'Double Offset Joints' (DOJ) and are really only designed to take suspension movement.

Someone will jump in at this point and say 'but what about HICAS, which steers the rear wheels'. Well the steering movement on the rear wheels is only a few degrees max in either direction, and a DOJ is able to cope with that.

Thanks for the indepth deicription Steve, I shall forward this on to him.

Cheers again.

Chris

BTW I think I have pinpointed it do to powersteering pump that is making the noise.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...