Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If you read the .pdf file posted above it says that over 1201kg year models after 1973 i think then you can increas it by 2" there for on a Skyline you should be abel to run 18's legally.

Can you read the PDF file again and tell me where?

And please, read it carefully and the text around it just so you get the context right.

Edited by scathing

My conclusions on the diameter permitted can be found here.

As for the table you're referring to (the "1201kg year models after 1973" thing), that's the maximum width allowed with an engineer's certificate for a car.

You can go to a 26mm (1") wider rim than the biggest wheel on your tyre placard without an engineer's cert for cars weighing over 1200kg past 1973, when the relevant ADR was introduced.

Note that the width increase permitted (with and without the cert) is not based on what came with your car. Its based on the biggest wheel the tyre placard (which would be the biggest wheel the OEM offers as an option for your vehicle).

So, if you had a frontal lobotomy and bought a new Commodore Executive, you can go 1" wider than the SS Commodore's rim (which is the widest OEM rim that is listed on a Commodore's placard).

As for diameter / circumference, this is what the VSI06 you linked to (which I assume you read before linking to it) has to say:

Correct me if my interpretation is wrong, but when the RTA says that the diameter measured is the "wheel and tyre combination", they're not just looking at the increase in rim height to determine its legality.

read the rta guidelines again guys

legal is 10mm larger for the whole wheel and tyre package

2gu up an scathing are on the money

My conclusions on the diameter permitted can be found here.

As for the table you're referring to (the "1201kg year models after 1973" thing), that's the maximum width allowed with an engineer's certificate for a car.

You can go to a 26mm (1") wider rim than the biggest wheel on your tyre placard without an engineer's cert for cars weighing over 1200kg past 1973, when the relevant ADR was introduced.

Note that the width increase permitted (with and without the cert) is not based on what came with your car. Its based on the biggest wheel the tyre placard (which would be the biggest wheel the OEM offers as an option for your vehicle).

So, if you had a frontal lobotomy and bought a new Commodore Executive, you can go 1" wider than the SS Commodore's rim (which is the widest OEM rim that is listed on a Commodore's placard).

Thanks that makes sense. So teh biggest OEM wheel offered by nissan for the R33 woudl be??????? 16'??

Thanks that makes sense. So teh biggest OEM wheel offered by nissan for the R33 woudl be??????? 16'??

No idea, mate.

If you've got one, locate your tyre placard or owner's manual. It should be printed in there.

The standard R33 GTSt / Maxima / S14 200SX rim is 16x6.5, and I don't know if they had an optionally larger rim, so on the safe side I'd stick to a 7.5" wide rim unless you can find "official" documentation saying the car came with something bigger.

N.B. This interpretation of the ADR is not national, so this is strictly a NSW-only thing. VicRoads says that you can go 1" wider than the widest rim for any model using that chassis without an engineer's cert, regardless of if its on the tyre placard or not. So from my Commodore example, you could go 1" wider than the rim on a HSV Clubsport R8 while still remaining legal in Victoria.

I point that out just in case you ask in the "Suspension, braking and tyres" forum and some Victorian tells you that you can go 1" wider than the 17x9 that comes on a GT-R (assuming the two share the same chassis, which is another thing I don't know but I'd hazard a guess at). If my assumption about the GTSt and GT-R chassis is accurate it would be legal for them, but its not for you unless the tyre placard for the GTS-t has the rims for the GT-R.

Before anyone asks, I'm not 100% sure if VicRoads has a rule on the diameter of the wheel (in case someone replies back telling us there's a only 1" diameter increase permitted on the rim). I'm only aware of the differing width rules between states because of an article in a Hot Tuner edition of Motor Magazine which pointed it out.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...