Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a 24mm whiteline front bar and it's ok, i've had a good look at that bit of the sump over the last 6 months or so as i've been climbing under the car making various repairs. My sway bar looks to sit a lot further forward though, closer to the leading edge of the sump rather than back over the shallow section as yours is.

is that pic taken with the wheels carrying the weight of the car?

Maybe elongate the links to effectively rotate the whole bar clockwise (when looking in the direction of the pics) but that may lead to issues with the other part of the sump when unloading both wheels....

Yeh, the pics are with the car on a hoist. It is a 27mm swaybar.

Where the bar is at full droop with the links disconnected should be where the bar stis relative to the sump. as soon as you connect the links and drop the car. Links are fully extended and the bar pretty parallel with the ground so, maybe its an R33 bar or something. Perhaps they are similar enough that you can fit them, but different enough to have this result :geek:

LOL, maybe this is why my shocks bump stops are so healthy, swaybar hits sump before the shocks get near the full travel. Is now making me wonder whether this is the reason my car was locking brakes so wildly as i was effectively limiting front suspension travel under brakes :)

Anyway, off they come...nto sure what to do with the sump. Probably not a problem, just dont like havigng a sump that looks this way :) Then have to thnk about what to do for a new swaybar, might just go a Cusco fixed one and modify it for adjustability...

yeah, I reckon piss it off. grab a cusco or arc bar. they are hollow so nice and light too. and I can bet one of my nuts it wont foul on anything and will be a snack to fit.

when my nuggie is back on the road i'm going to toss my current bars and go cusco too.

That's a good one Roy, never seen that happen before. Is the picture taken with the car at normal ride height? Because if it is, the bar is not in its usual position in relation to the sump, it should be rotated further forward. What links are you using? If they are too short, it will rotate the bar towards the sump. Then, when the suspension compresses, the bar will rotate further than intended and hit the sump. The other possible issue is ride height and how far the suspension compresses before the bump stops limit the travel. What static height is it and how much travel before bump stop contact?

Cheers

Gary

These swaybars have been on the car with the Bilsteins and the Teins.

Ride Height with Bilsteins

462DSC07641.JPG

Ride Height with Teins

gallery_462_50_508080.jpg

I am using std links. When they were delivered there werent any, you said there should have been. I rang Whiteline and they said use the std, the swaybars dont come with the links. So i did as they woudlnt even sell me the links as they said to use the std. :P

So possibly the links :wave: The photo is with the car on a hoist. The Teins actually have more travel then the R33 Bilsteins that were in the front of my car. Bump stops are fine, dont get near them with the ride height and springs i run.

Ah, the joys of modifyign cars. lol, two steps forward about twelve backwards :ermm:

These swaybars have been on the car with the Bilsteins and the Teins.

I am using std links. When they were delivered there werent any, you said there should have been. I rang Whiteline and they said use the std, the swaybars dont come with the links. So i did as they woudlnt even sell me the links as they said to use the std. :P

So possibly the links :wave: The photo is with the car on a hoist. The Teins actually have more travel then the R33 Bilsteins that were in the front of my car. Bump stops are fine, dont get near them with the ride height and springs i run.

Ah, the joys of modifyign cars. lol, two steps forward about twelve backwards :ermm:

Standard links are OK, as long as they are standard R32GTST links, not some other model.

Sorry I am not very good at identifying ride height from pictures, I need a tape measure to get the job done.

More travel (from the Teins) is actually a bad sign, increasing the travel (compression) rotates the swaybar towards the sump more than less travel. Just another reason why I never use short shocks. Add that to regressive positive camber curves and bump steer.

The solution is to rotate the sump dip on the swaybar, which is a simple $50 mod, send the bar up and allow 2 days .

Cheers

Gary

Standard links are OK, as long as they are standard R32GTST links, not some other model.

Sorry I am not very good at identifying ride height from pictures, I need a tape measure to get the job done.

More travel (from the Teins) is actually a bad sign, increasing the travel (compression) rotates the swaybar towards the sump more than less travel. Just another reason why I never use short shocks. Add that to regressive positive camber curves and bump steer.

The solution is to rotate the sump dip on the swaybar, which is a simple $50 mod, send the bar up and allow 2 days .

Cheers

Gary

If thats the case then i will be throwing the swaybar to the shitter, but surely there is an easier fix or cause for the problem. The links were std GTSt (to the best of my knowledge). I cant tell you what the ride height it. I can tell you it is within a few mm of what Whiteline used to have on the pdf file on their website.

What you say about more stroke being a bad thing? I would rather suspension parts not bottom out on bump stops to stop swaybars from bottoming out on sumps. I hear what you are saying, but the car used to bottom out at speed on big bumps making it a real handful at places like DECA and the back track. So i am not talking unlimited suspension travel the point coils bind or come in contact, just enough travel to give the spring enough time to do its thing when punting it in autocrosses.

Not going to get into a debate over suspension with you. I am sure you know more and ways around everything. Fact is i dont. I like your idea of some longer aftermarket links. I will try that before i swap/repair the sump. Hopefully that will fix the problem. I suppose its possible that the std links i am using are off another model car or something. Fark knows, the guy was wrecking an R32 GTSt, but????

If thats the case then i will be throwing the swaybar to the shitter, but surely there is an easier fix or cause for the problem. The links were std GTSt (to the best of my knowledge). I cant tell you what the ride height it. I can tell you it is within a few mm of what Whiteline used to have on the pdf file on their website.

What you say about more stroke being a bad thing? I would rather suspension parts not bottom out on bump stops to stop swaybars from bottoming out on sumps. I hear what you are saying, but the car used to bottom out at speed on big bumps making it a real handful at places like DECA and the back track. So i am not talking unlimited suspension travel the point coils bind or come in contact, just enough travel to give the spring enough time to do its thing when punting it in autocrosses.

Not going to get into a debate over suspension with you. I am sure you know more and ways around everything. Fact is i dont. I like your idea of some longer aftermarket links. I will try that before i swap/repair the sump. Hopefully that will fix the problem. I suppose its possible that the std links i am using are off another model car or something. Fark knows, the guy was wrecking an R32 GTSt, but????

I know that you know enough to figure out what works for you, so I just throw out the information and you absorb what you can. You are spot on that increasing the travel helps with impact absorbtion, but it introduces other problems. As I mentioned above, that being bump steer and regressive camber change. You could engineer out the bump steer and correct the camber curves, as John is doing on the Zed. But that is time consuming, requires some equipment and experience to overcome. There is a simpler solution. What I would suggest is that raising the ride height for those tracks is a superior solution, that's what we do at Sandown for example for the huge bump at the end of the pit straight. It's a lot simpler and less fraught with compromises than the alternatives.

But some people (not you) cling fanatically to the "low is always better" philosophy, even when it is obviously the route of the problem.

Cheers

Gary

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

    • I have been being VERY quiet about what you're alluding to, as it is something that ticks me off... The number of cars from factory that run coil overs is HUGE! Most of them these days do... The other part that annoys me, is people saying "Well all the incabin adjustable suspension is illegal by blah blah blah"... If that's the case, then why can I buy a car brand new that can do it if, FULL STOP in cabin adjustable suspension is illegal...   Also, I could just chuck some aftermarket shocks in my car, throw the stock springs on, after my blue slip, dump my super low springs back in. Same shock and spring style setup... Hell, they could also be the same colour springs etc.     I'm voting, BlueSlipper didn't want to touch the above car for some reason. Whether it be some sort of bias against the car, the owner, them maybe having previously done dodgy shit and now they're being super careful in case they get slapped in the face by the Gumbyment again... Find a new blueslip place.   And can confirm as you had said, yes there are holy bibles of vehicle heights, and all sorts of other suspension stuff. Heck your run of the mill mechanic, and tyre shop has access to all of that stuff. It's how they do wheel alignments...
    • Funny story Heading to Sydney this morning on the HWY there was some slow traffic, so I gave it the beans and midway through my overtaking "power run" I lost all power It seems that I missed a hose clamp,  and the MAF and filter went WiFi To make this more problematic, the little tool kit that lives in the boot, is sitting in the sun room at Goulburn......LOL Luckily for me I found a bit of steel on the side of the road that could be used like a rusty and bent flat head screw driver to tighten it up enough that it got me into Sydney, it is now all tight like a tiger with the aid of a 8mm socket Note to self: Use my brain and double check stuff, and always keep that little tool kit in the car for when I have a brain fart
    • Oh, and as for everyone with their fuel economy changes, I switch between E10 and 98 in the company car. Even do when I had personal cars that could run on E10. You know what changed my fuel economy in any noticeable way? How I drove, and where I drove. Otherwise, say on full tanks of just back and forth from work only (So same trips, same sort of traffic), couldn't notice a difference that I can correlate to the type of fuel in use. In the current vehicle, that's over 42L of USABLE fuel. While 98 is all "more energy dense", it also has higher knock resistance as it takes more energy to get it to ignite too. The longer hydrocarbons, typically more tightly bound. So running the same ignition map, can also produce less power, if there isn't enough time to get it all burnt through properly, as yep, the flame propagation speed is different from lower octane fuel to higher (Higher has a lower flame propagation, due to the more tightly bound and harder to self ignite funs. This is also typically where, a vehicle that is designed purely to run on 91 (Whether it be E10 or normal 91) usually sees absolutely no real world difference in fuel economy for the normal man, woman, or dog.
    • We've got some servos around me that have 91 with E10, 91 (no E10), 95, and 98. At those stations the change from 91 E10 to 91, is typically around 8c/L.   But lets not get started on the price of fuel in Oz. It's ridiculous. All the service stations around me, bar one, the price of fuel has been over the $2 mark per litre for the cheapest, 98 being around $2.45. That one service station is a CostCo, fuel from it comes from the same refineries, and makes no pitstops, it runs great, including the 98. In fact, I've had no issues on CostCo fuel, but plenty of issues at other stations!. The CostCo fuel, was $1.65 roughly this week for 94 with E10. $1.88 for 98. Servos directly across from it, $2.10 for 91 E10, and $2.48 for 98. The part I had to laugh at? If I drive multiple HOURS away from Brisbane, say out near Nanango, or Kingaroy, or even out to Goondiwindi, the price of their fuel, is the same as what it is at the CostCo... Oh, and that BP servo at Goondiwindi is HUGE and goes through epic turnover of fuel, so it's not sitting there for weeks going to shit. And what blows me away, my mate is one of the people who drives the Fuel Tanker all around QLD, delivering to all those places. At the same company his previous role was doing the "local haul" deliveries... Same truck, same driver, same pickup point it all comes from. So you tell me, how the hell it is 60c/L CHEAPER for fuel, when nearly all else is equal, except they require a B-Double to drive half a day out of Brisbane, and half a day back, every second day, compared to the delivery that can be under 30 minutes drive from the fuel pickup point... Not to mention, go five blocks down the road, and Ampol to Ampol will vary 30c/L... And I've had this conversation with my mate... The way it's priced, is just typical, pure and utter rubbish... He also does runs from Brisbane, to all over QLD, down to Newcastle, Sydney, Nowra, Melbourne, Geelong, and even out to parts of the NT depending on the companies needs. His main stuff is all the longer distance away from home for a few days at a time, then when he's back, he loves to just pickup extra shifts wherever he can in whichever truck, hence all the weird different places.   Oh, as for getting E10 into all the fuels in Australia... It was very quickly highlighted, that we don't have enough biomass available to use to make E10 sustainably like they require, and it would dramatically cut into our, and the worlds food chain supply...   I vote we all just start running on liquid methane gas... Plenty of that just getting tapped off at tips from underground decay... (Note, this is pure just stupid commenting. I could very easily highlight the reasons its not a good idea especially on scale...)
    • Am I correct in assuming that the R35's are getting the classic skyline haircut off the odometer?  Quick search on carsales, there are 33 08 and 09 GTR's for sale, only 2 of them have more then 100,000km's on them (116,075 and 110,000 respectively).  And somehow there are about 25 for sale with around 60,000kms? Looks like the classic skyline haircut to me =/
×
×
  • Create New...