Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hiya

do 32 vspec gtrs run the same brembo calipers and brake pads as the other gtrs ? rotors seem to be identical but not callipers ?

i need some new pads for my 32 vspec II and they seem to be different to 33 gtr pads

could anyone give me the nissan part numbers I need for front and rear pads ?

also on nengun its the same part number for endless pads all the skylines and s14/15 including vspec 32 so i am a bit confused

EP230 R32

AU $ 142.48

Nissan - skyline R32 (GTS-t.Type-M, GTS-4) BNR32(GT-R V-Spec) R33 (Turbo) ECR33(Turbo) ER34(Turbo) - Front

EP230/EP064 S14

AU $ 284.95

Nissan - Silvia S14 - Front & Rear

EP230/EP064 S15

AU $ 284.95

Nissan - Silvia S15 - Front & Rear

EP230/EP231 ECR33

AU $ 284.95

Nissan - Skyline ECR33 - Front & Rear

EP230/EP231 ER34

AU $ 284.95

Nissan - Skyline ER34 - Front & Rear

EP230SSS Z32

AU $ 142.48

Nissan - Z32( 89/7-02/8) Silvia S14, S15 - Front

EP231SSS R32 REAR

AU $ 142.48

Nissan Skyline R32 (2 Pot) R33 Turbo ECR33, Z32 (from 89 -) REAR ONLY

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/166341-32-gtr-vspec-calipers-and-pads/
Share on other sites

nengun also has different part numbers for 33 and 34 pads , are they realy the same ? now im really confused

41060-12U87 BCNR33 Front

AU $ 419.82

Nissan Skyline BCNR33 RB26DETT (Front Only)

41060-12U87 Front/ 44060-12U87 Rear BCNR33

AU $ 777.84

Nissan Skyline BCNR33 RB26DETT (Front & Rear)

41060-AA393 BNR34 Front

AU $ 419.82

Nissan Skyline BNR34 RB26DETT (Front Only)

41060-AA393 Front/44060-AB085 Rear BNR34

AU $ 777.84

Nissan Skyline BNR34 RB26DETT (Front & Rear)

44060-12U87 BCNR33 Rear

AU $ 411.42

Nissan Skyline BCNR33 RB26DETT (Rear only)

44060-AB085 Rear

AU $ 411.42

Nissan Skyline BNR34 RB26DETT (Rear Only)

ah, well depending on how strict your SEVS workshop is you will need to buy the original nissan/brembo pads.

the front pads are 41060-12U87 and the rear pads are 44060-12U87 cost around $450 for front and same for the rear. they are quite good pads though, so it's not a complete waste of money. last a long time, and good for street/hillls driving. and ok for a little bit of track.

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...