Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Can a Cusco 2 way LSD (R32 GTST) diff center be readjusted/retention to be a little less tight.

Its a little clunky witch doesn't worry me but its a little tight for street driving.

If it cant be no biggy Just thought I would ask the Question.

Cheers.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/153870-cusco-2-way-diff-readjustment/
Share on other sites

Can a Cusco 2 way LSD (R32 GTST) diff center be readjusted/retention to be a little less tight.

Its a little clunky witch doesn't worry me but its a little tight for street driving.

If it cant be no biggy Just thought I would ask the Question.

Cheers.

You could grind the plates a bit thinner, maybe machine the case to have less preload, or just maybe remove one pair of plates, you'd need to get it stripped on the bench and have look / measure up.

  • 7 months later...
You could grind the plates a bit thinner, maybe machine the case to have less preload, or just maybe remove one pair of plates, you'd need to get it stripped on the bench and have look / measure up.

Well I just had a win with the diff. I decided to go with an oil change and my god the difference is insane. I was using the incorrect oil weighting (90w140 I think) and I just changed it to penrite "sin 75" (75w90 synthetic oil).

The diff is silent with no chattering or clunking. Its nice and tight yet really smooth. I feel like a real mooron :P

that oil is way to thin for the diff, stick an lsd oil in it like ls90 or ls140 plus an additive like ford motorsport diff additive or something similar

The oil I used is meant for LSD's.

It is designed to work for any gearbox / differential (includeing lsd's) that require 75w90 or 80w90.

It has worked the treat so I don't see it being a problem.

im using redline shockproof NS with friction modifier.. on my 180 it is harsh as hell.. and clunks everywher.. the oil is 75-140 from memory...

was thinking of switching it out with castrol syntrans or the penrite.

what do u think.?

Well I would try the "SIN 75 or sin 80" these oils are synthetic and are GLI 4 and 5 complient so I would not use it to be braking in the diff but after that I dont see it being a problem.

Make sense to me as a thinner oil would penitrate the plates of a tight lsd better than a thicker oil.

im using redline shockproof NS with friction modifier.. on my 180 it is harsh as hell.. and clunks everywher.. the oil is 75-140 from memory...

was thinking of switching it out with castrol syntrans or the penrite.

what do u think.?

yeah get that shock proof outta there, awesome for boxes.... baad for diffs. Redline do a excellent oil for mech diffs so use it instead 85w140.

Well I would try the "SIN 75 or sin 80" these oils are synthetic and are GLI 4 and 5 complient so I would not use it to be braking in the diff but after that I dont see it being a problem.

Make sense to me as a thinner oil would penitrate the plates of a tight lsd better than a thicker oil.

i have no faith in penrite oils after seeing some of the results in oil sample tests but your theory on thinners oils is no-where close to reality unfortunately.

i have no faith in penrite oils after seeing some of the results in oil sample tests but your theory on thinners oils is no-where close to reality unfortunately.

Different diffs will need different oils. I am just telling people about my troubles and my soltions to the issues. No lies just what I did and what outcome I had.

I agree that penright may not be the best brand around for oils but in this instance it worked out great.

I have had a search and KAAZ and Nismo diffs recommend the 80w90 weighting so I think the cusco RS diff in my r32 will be ok.

Edited by RedDrifter
im using redline shockproof NS with friction modifier.. on my 180 it is harsh as hell.. and clunks everywher.. the oil is 75-140 from memory...

was thinking of switching it out with castrol syntrans or the penrite.

what do u think.?

Its the Syntrax you want.. Not the Syntrans.

The Syntrans is for transmissions and the syntrax for diff's.

The Castrol Syntrax has the ford lsd additive already in it.

Its the Syntrax you want.. Not the Syntrans.

The Syntrans is for transmissions and the syntrax for diff's.

The Castrol Syntrax has the ford lsd additive already in it.

thanks cubes...

should i save the redline and put it in my box :P i think its a bit too thick for the box 75w-140 as its only been in ther for 2 practices and 800kms

  • 2 weeks later...

hey guys just quickly my mate got me some penrite limslip 85w-140 extra heavy duty SAE API GL - 5/6 extreme pressure limited slip differentials oil

will this be suitable for my cusco 2way LSD.. im sick of the chatter and clunks with the Redline.

thanks

mark.

markimak,

Try some friction modifier first. Unsure if ford still stock it or not.

But failing that simply drop the castrol saf-xa oil in to it that already has the friction modifier in it. OR buy redline again + friction modifier and it will be just as good.

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...