Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Everyone knows the R32 fuse trick to convert to 2WD, but i was reading the R33 service manual and it says;

2WD Setting, Remove air evacuation connector, depress the brake 5 times within 10 seconds after placing ignition to on

then follows by saying remove the front shaft,

just wondering if the 32 uses this air evacuation system and is that why u can just pull a fuse on a 33.

Thanks.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/204549-2wding-an-awd-r33/
Share on other sites

the reason u cant just pull the fuse out in an r33 is because the ATESSA is run eletronically and also with 33s and 34s there is always i think 5% of torque goin to the front wheels. In R32s 100% of torque is goin to the rear wheels until loss of traction or too many gs and also the 32s ATESSA system is run by a motor and oil.

theres lots of threads about this use the search button

hope this helps

vinnie

I'm new here so treat me gently. How does the attessa system handle different rolling diametres within front rear tyres? does the % torque system take care of the different speeds or do you have to have your tyres whithin a fraction of each other.?

im pretty sure u have to have the same size tyres all round other wise it starts to play up

Best way is to do as described... removing the front drive shafts etc

I've been told you can buy a controller but it'll f**k the plates in the transfer case over time if running 100% RWD mode

As described above, you can't just remove a fuse as it's always sending torque to the front wheels. Kinda sucks doesn't it..... but still, the handling advantages are worth it :thanks:

Edited by TommO

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...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
    • That's my life. Past-Duncan has a lot to answer for
×
×
  • Create New...