Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys

Someone was kind enough to back into my car the other day :D so now i need to get some things fixed.

i have already pick out a front bar (do luck) but i was also thinking about getting some wide gaurds done.

just wanted to know what everyone thought and here from some people who have gone through the trouble of doing it.

is it worh it? how hard was it? adn what did it look like (PICSOBARN!)

This goes for both front and rear ones, do the wider GTR rear guards/quaters fit on the GTS-T

Thank for your help in advance.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/144151-wide-gaurds-on-r32-gts-t/
Share on other sites

Hi

Yes the GTR fronts will fit a GTST, bonnet and grill will aswel, you will have to play around with the front bar though to make it look perfect. Or just get an R32 GTR front bar aswel while you're at it which would be the best option IMO

For the rears - that will cost some big money for the result, i dont think its worth it, but run around and get some quotes, they may be in your budget

My Silvia is in getting it's widebody fitted.. and he had a GTS-T in there that had been crashed in the rear.

The guy found a slightly damaged R32 GTR Rear cut which he basically got for nothing.. (this is NZ :P ) and has now had the whole thing stiched on.. old skin removed and the GTR one put on. It was done in a couple of days.

All up though by the time you include the painting etc, your looking a few thousand just for the rear guards..

front guards will fit but you need GTR indicators as well

just dont get fibreglass guards

they always look shit compared to genuine metal ones

i did the rear quaters on my car

its not a massive job compared to some other shit people do.

only issue you will have is the inner guards will be too short

and the fuel filler wont line up properly

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 feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...