Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

These are a set of 18" by 8.5"wheels off my GTS4 Shyline. They all have some gutter rash, but nothing too serious. I had them looked at today and all are easily repairable, but I saw some new rims at the shop that I much prefer.

I'm after $900 for the four no WITH tyres that are about 70-80% Open to offers, but don't be offended if I say no.

Tyres are 235 40 18 Firenzas.

gallery_34272_1557_246002.jpg

gallery_34272_1557_86402.jpg

Edited by 1JRocket
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/157467-18-wheels-off-r32-canberra/
Share on other sites

Well by then I would have forgot about these... Please get the widths and offsets of the plakard on the rim and PM them to me .. Also hit me up with pic links please

Cheers mate

I've had a long day and have way better things to do than take pics of rims on my night off. But out of the goodness of my heart I already had and now I come on here and get attitude.

If your going to forget about the wheels in 2 days your not that interested.

Now... for the people who are interested, here are the images. Feel free to save them to your desktop and soom in.

Wheel 1

Wheel 2

Wheel 3

Wheel 4

The rims are 24 cm wide from lip to lip so taking into account the thickness of the lip they are 8.5" front and back. As for the offset, I don't know. They fit under my 32 guards. If someone lets me know how to measure the offset I'll get out my ruller and let you know.

Hope that is all helpful.

NOTE - The tyres are NOT included.

Edited by 1JRocket
If only they were 17's , i'd be interested, a bit too big for me, gl with the sale.

If you bought these then you wouldn't have to keep explaining to people that yours isn't a WRX.

Anyway. I'm outa here and off to my girls.

I was just saying Id lose the page mate, Take a chill pill.. I dont have all the time in the world to search through pages to find ur post...

Im only actually here right now because I remembered looked for ur post .. couldnt find it but then found ur sig and clicked the link... So .. there u go :wave:

  • 1 month later...

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...