Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

18x9 +20 and 18x10+18. I seen the car your getting yesterday with some CE28s but in a smaller size.. Looked okay but no where near as much dish as XD9's. There is nearly 100mm of dish on the rear!

how much for said rims?

dang, that's right .... there is no way they would fit .... the rears are 65mm wider than stock - they would hang about 3cm out of the guards :) .... 33mm wider than stock is the perfect number I am after, so 10" rims would need to be offset of +50

Yeah the CE28Ns I have priced and chosen don't have anywhere near as much dish as I would like, but they will have about 35mm dish which is the best I can hope for with this type of car.

EDIT!! Damo beat me too it

wheels on the Stag are already porn, 19" Racing harts FTW!! I was thinking for the 32, over the 34 rims now.

ATTESSA will chuck a hissy fit if you run staggered widths because no matter how hard you try you won't be able to achieve the same rolling diameter.

Don't believe me have a play;

http://www.1010tires.com/tiresizecalculator.asp

Edited by D_Stirls

because of the different stretch you will actually be running different rolling diameters so you will be slowly killing your clutches, the good thing is because the 32's don't run any preload you won't be wearing them as quickly as you would be with a 33 or 34 that run a proload.

Edited by D_Stirls
anyone know of a plastic welder in sa?

yeh i do mate

BUMPER TO BUMPER CRASH REPAIRS off tapleys hill road at Royal park

he did a great job on my series 1 m-spec bumper cutting out the middle section out and instead of leaving the cut out bit on the sides open he plastic welded a section in and it now looks flush

he is located in the western suburbs

how much for said rims?

Not cheap. So if your looking for <$2,500 no chance.

dang, that's right .... there is no way they would fit .... the rears are 65mm wider than stock - they would hang about 3cm out of the guards :) .... 33mm wider than stock is the perfect number I am after, so 10" rims would need to be offset of +50

Yeah the CE28Ns I have priced and chosen don't have anywhere near as much dish as I would like, but they will have about 35mm dish which is the best I can hope for with this type of car.

That's half the fun, making them fit. Camber might help tuck them in aswell.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • 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...