Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Confirming what salad said. The hole at the very end of the bar is softer, the one closer in will make the swaybar act 'stiffer'. Try them both to see what you like. Also depends on the way you're driving and the rest of your suspension setup.

You actually have three settings even though there are only 2 holes either end.

Soft - both holes cloest to the ends of the bar(outer holes)

Medium - one outer hole and one inner hole

Hard - both inner holes

The bar does not have to be balanced - it is simply a torsion bar determined by length.

From Whiteline themselves

Asymmetric is the opposite to symmetric and implies the use of differing holes on each side of the swaybar. For example, this might involve setting the left hand side to the hardest setting of 3 while the right hand side might be set to the middle setting. Contrary to what some people think it does not equally split the rate difference between symmetrically using setting 3 and setting 2. That is, the resultant rate is also asymmetric with more roll stiffness on one side compared to the other.

You can do it, but it's probly not the best

Edited by salad

Jim and I are still debating this one, he tested it on the Whiteline test rig and found a difference. I use split settings all the time and haven't found one driver who can pick any side to side difference.

A stabiliser bar simply links one wheel to the other wheel on the same axis, so anything you do to stiffen up one arm must stiffen up the other. This is how most race cars adjust their anti roll, by rotating the blade (arm) on one side of the bar. The fact is that this adjustment results in equal and linear increases/decreases in anti roll.

The question (and the debate) therefore can only be about the geometry of the links when different holes are used side to side. Based on real world testing, on a Skyline that effect is very small on the rear and basically non existent on the front.

Moving on to settings, there is no right or wrong in stabiliser bar settings. It is a personal choice, you set them the way that feels best for you. Personally I would start with the front on the middle setting and the rear on the softest setting. But have a play around, see what you like, that's why you spent the extra money so that you could adjust them.

:D cheers :D

PS; the Group Buy stabiliser bars come with additional adjustment holes over the Whiteline retail product.

Jim and I are still debating this one, he tested it on the Whiteline test rig and found a difference. I use split settings all the time and haven't found one driver who can pick any side to side difference.

A stabiliser bar simply links one wheel to the other wheel on the same axis, so anything you do to stiffen up one arm must stiffen up the other. This is how most race cars adjust their anti roll, by rotating the blade (arm) on one side of the bar. The fact is that this adjustment results in equal and linear increases/decreases in anti roll.

The question (and the debate) therefore can only be about the geometry of the links when different holes are used side to side. Based on real world testing, on a Skyline that effect is very small on the rear and basically non existent on the front.

Moving on to settings, there is no right or wrong in stabiliser bar settings. It is a personal choice, you set them the way that feels best for you. Personally I would start with the front on the middle setting and the rear on the softest setting. But have a play around, see what you like, that's why you spent the extra money so that you could adjust them.

:no: cheers :(

PS; the Group Buy stabiliser bars come with additional adjustment holes over the Whiteline retail product.

are the stock sway bars on the R33 GTST much softer than the group buy?

maybe I'm just getting used to decent handling, as my R33 sits flatter around corners than any other car I've been in - although it hasn't been on the track yet :)

No idea whether the bars are stock or not, I'll get underneath and measure the diameters of the bars

Mike

  • 2 weeks later...

From stock, the front bar is 21mm hollow and rear is 16mm solid. So, the front bar is roughly 200% stiffer and rear bar is 60% stiffer.

It's a bit hard to tell the exact stiffnes of the front bar as the stock one is hollow and the ends aren't just squashed pipe like others. I have made a guess at the wall thickness going by an S13 and R32 GTR swaybar.

EDIT, just noticed you have R33 GTS-t, I was going by stock sizes on R32 GTS-t. Post up the stock R33 swaybar sizes and I'll work them out for that too. Also tell me if the bars are hollow or solid. You should be able to notice by the weight of them and what they sound like when you tap them.

Edited by salad

Staggering the adjustment is a two edged sword. The Best advantage to the stagering of the sway bar settings we have found is this.

Because a sway bar applies mechanical pressure to the spring (which loads it up more) in a corner, it is often used to help flatten a car during the cornering process. We have found that staggering the sway bar (soft setting on on side/ hard on the other) that it is possable to 'tune' the suspension a little better to suit a particular track. This helps tyre wear, car balance and other such things. This helped when on a left turn track. (more turns left than right, or vise versa)

By swapping the staggers around, we found the vehicle tended to understeer more in some corners. On the street, i would recomend not staggering the bar for this reason. The car tends to be a little vague when turning one way as opposed to the other. Its because the leavering effect.

But at the end of the day, try it.. and be aware of these things.

Any other thoughts. :)

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

    • As discussed in the previous post, the bushes in the 110 needed replacing. I took this opportunity to replace the castor bushes, the front lower control arm, lower the car and get the alignment dialled in with new tyres. I took it down to Alignment Motorsports on the GC to get this work done and also get more out of the Shockworks as I felt like I wasn't getting the full use out of them.  To cut a very long story short, it ended up being the case the passenger side castor arm wouldn't accept the brand new bush as the sleeve had worn badly enough to the point you could push the new bush in by hand and completely through. Trying a pair of TRD bushes didn't fix the issue either (I had originally gone with Hardrace bushes). We needed to urgently source another castor arm, and thankfully this was sourced and the guys at the shop worked on my car until 7pm on a Saturday to get everything done. The car rides a lot nicer now with the suspension dialled in properly. Lowered the car a little as well to suit the lower profile front tyres, and just bring the car down generally. Eternally thankful for the guys down at the shop to get the car sorted, we both pulled big favours from our contacts to get it done on the Saturday.  Also plugged in the new Stedi foglights into the S15, and even from a quick test in the garage I'm keen to see how they look out on the road. I had some concerns about the length of the LED body and whether it'd fit in the foglight housing but it's fine.  I've got a small window coming up next month where I'll likely get a little paint work done on the 110 to remove the rear wing, add a boot wing and roof wing, get the side skirt fixed up and colour match the little panel on the tail lights so that I can install some badges that I've kept in storage. I'm also tempted to put in a new pair of headlights on the 110.  Until then, here's some more pictures from Easter this year. 
    • I would put a fuel pressure gauge between the filter and the fuel rail, see if it's maintaining good fuel pressure at idle going up to the point when it stalls. Do you see any strange behavior in commanded fuel leading up to the point when it stalls? You might have to start going through the service manual and doing a long list of sensor tests if it's not the fuel system for whatever reason.
    • Hi,  Just joined the forum so I could share my "fix" of this problem. Might be of use to someone. Had the same hunting at idle issue on my V36 with VQ35HR engine after swapping the engine because the original one got overheated.  While changing the engine I made the mistake of cleaning the throttle bodies and tried all the tricks i could find to do a throttle relearn with no luck. Gave in and took it to a shop and they couldn't sort it. Then took it to my local Nissan dealership and they couldn't get it to idle properly. They said I'd need to replace the throttle bodies and the ecu probably costing more than the car is worth. So I had the idea of replacing the carbon I cleaned out with a thin layer of super glue and it's back to normal idle now. Bit rough but saved the car from the wreckers 🤣
    • After my last update, I went ahead with cleaning and restoring the entire fuel system. This included removing the tank and cleaning it with the Beyond Balistics solution, power washing it multiple times, drying it thoroughly, rinsing with IPA, drying again with heat gun and compressed air. Also, cleaning out the lines, fuel rail, and replacing the fuel pump with an OEM-style one. During the cleaning process, I replaced several hoses - including the breather hose on the fuel tank, which turned out to be the cause of the earlier fuel leak. This is what the old fuel filter looked like: Fuel tank before cleaning: Dirty Fuel Tank.mp4   Fuel tank after cleaning (some staining remains): Clean Fuel Tank.mp4 Both the OEM 270cc and new DeatschWerks 550cc injectors were cleaned professionally by a shop. Before reassembling everything, I tested the fuel flow by running the pump output into a container at the fuel filter location - flow looked good. I then fitted the new fuel filter and reassembled the rest of the system. Fuel Flow Test.mp4 Test 1 - 550cc injectors Ran the new fuel pump with its supplied diagonal strainer (different from OEM’s flat strainer) and my 550cc injectors using the same resized-injector map I had successfully used before. At first, it idled roughly and stalled when I applied throttle. Checked the spark plugs and found that they were fouled with carbon (likely from the earlier overly rich running when the injectors were clogged). After cleaning the plugs, the car started fine. However, it would only idle for 30–60 seconds before stalling, and while driving it would feel like a “fuel cut” after a few seconds - though it wouldn’t fully stall. Test 2 – Strainer swap Suspecting the diagonal strainer might not be reaching the tank bottom, I swapped it for the original flat strainer and filled the tank with ~45L of fuel. The issue persisted exactly the same. Test 3 – OEM injectors To eliminate tuning variables, I reinstalled the OEM 270cc injectors and reverted to the original map. Cleaned the spark plugs again just in-case. The stalling and “fuel cut” still remained.   At this stage, I suspect an intermittent power or connection fault at the fuel pump hanger, caused during the cleaning process. This has led me to look into getting Frenchy’s fuel hanger and replacing the unit entirely. TL;DR: Cleaned and restored the fuel system (tank, lines, rail, pump). Tested 550cc injectors with the same resized-injector map as before, but the car stalls at idle and experiences what feels like “fuel cut” after a few seconds of driving. Swapped back to OEM injectors with original map to rule out tuning, but the issue persists. Now suspecting an intermittent power or connection fault at the fuel pump hanger, possibly cause by the cleaning process.  
×
×
  • Create New...