Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey all

i own a hr31 skyline and recently purchased a r32 gts4 4door skyline with a rb26.

i would like to do a bit of track work every now and again to really open her up!

the car has stock brakes at the moment and i really want to ugrade them but without spending anymore than $1500.

the car aslo has ABS

are r33 brakes much of an upgrade?

would the lines match up properly for the GTS-4?

could u guys tell me a good setup without goin over my budget of $1500?

thanks

luke

you could go with R33 GTS-t front rotors and calipers if you wanted... they are the same diameter (296mm) as R32 GTR (non-brembo) but are 2mm narrower in width (30mm as opposed to 32mm i believe).

not sure if you'll need to modify your lines or not... it's quite possible though.

to be honest, i can't really fault the standard R32 brakes (although with slotted DBA4000 rotors) on the track, with some good fluid and good pads, but i don't have as much power as you would, so it could be a different kettle of fish.

I have a RB25DET in my GTS4, pushing 180kW at all 4. What I've done with mine:

Slotted rotors all round.

Braided brake lines (probably the best mod) all round.

I used to have problems with pedal fade, but the braided lines seem to have almost eliminated that. Had a day at Simmons plains a while ago, and the brakes worked well all day.

And, if you keep the fluid fresh (ie change annually), it should pull up well all day, every day.

i don't see how changing to braided lines would help with fade resistance....

fade is to do with either boiling the brake fluid, or your pads not being of the right heat range and overheating basically.

braided lines addresses neither of these.

what it WILL give you, is a slightly solider pedal feel, as they will stop the line expanding/ballooning ever-so-slightly under hard braking. (though unless your standard rubber lines are very crap, you won't really notice the difference)

the Just Jap brakes are the best value for money by far. brand new 8 piston calipers on 356mm rotors with pads and braided lines for $2,200

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...howtopic=112347

I know you don't want to spend that much but nothing comes close to that price, I paid 1500 for used 4 spot brembos with used pads and used rotors a couple of years ago.

r33/34 gtr brembo brakes are the best bang for buck. dont waste your mony on slotted rotors n shit cos they do nothing for better braking.

you gotta get bigger discs.

but if thats out of your budget just use some really hi temp brake pads, such as sbs duel carbon or ds3000's. and good brake fluid

the Just Jap brakes are the best value for money by far. brand new 8 piston calipers on 356mm rotors with pads and braided lines for $2,200

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...howtopic=112347

I know you don't want to spend that much but nothing comes close to that price, I paid 1500 for used 4 spot brembos with used pads and used rotors a couple of years ago.

i'm REALLY dubious about these things, purely because they are an unknown entity...

they have not had rigorous testing, they are not proven, they are cheap, and (possibly) nasty...

i don't want to trust my car/my life to something that is unproven.....

duncan where was these 355mm rotors at?

I can't see it in that thread either, but they definately have them in stock I was going to get them instead.....but clearance to 17" rims I needed to run was a problem

i'm REALLY dubious about these things, purely because they are an unknown entity...they have not had rigorous testing, they are not proven, they are cheap, and (possibly) nasty...i don't want to trust my car/my life to something that is unproven.....

I agree with the concern, there is nothing more important than brakes. But its not right to say they are untested and unproven, they have been used on a heap of cars including track use.

I bought a set a few weeks back and will be running them on my race car on the track, and at Targa Tas next year.....I'll let you know if I have any problems. At least 3 other gtrs will be running them at Targa as well

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • 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...