Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

wheels of choice for a 32/33/34 gtr in targa with bigger brakes?

I have alcon's (365mm) and heard nightmares of finding wheels that fit over the caliper

obviously would have to be 10" wide or less to be legal. no idea what to do with my weds 10.5" rims.

We ran the 365 Alcon package under 34 wheels, you can see there was some issues with foreign object clearance (always is with big brakes and rallies) but they cheared fine.

Alcon.jpg

Wheel is dependant on whether it is a 32, 33, or 34, as they obviously all had differing sizes from factory.

The supp regs clearly state for Early Modern;

Early Modern & All Classic: Wheel diameters may be varied by a maximum of plus or minus 2” and wheel width varied up to 2” from the standard dimensions. Classic vehicles may only increase sizes up to maximum of 18 x 9 inches.

So, R32= 18x10's

R33 = 19 x 10.5

R34 = 20 x 11 (full hectic)

Edited by Marlin

Wheel is dependant on whether it is a 32, 33, or 34, as they obviously all had differing sizes from factory.

The supp regs clearly state for Early Modern;

Early Modern & All Classic: Wheel diameters may be varied by a maximum of plus or minus 2” and wheel width varied up to 2” from the standard dimensions. Classic vehicles may only increase sizes up to maximum of 18 x 9 inches.

So, R32= 18x10's

R33 = 19 x 10.5

R34 = 20 x 11 (full hectic)

marlin, R33 would be 19X11. as they had 17X9 stock.

it goes:

R32 16X8

R32 Vspec (some run as this I believe?) 17X8.5

R33 17X9

R34 18X9

so just add your 2X2 to those.

Yeah you're right Baron.... I knew that after I posted it, but you got the drift ;)

It used to be 1 + 1, We had to run 17 x 8 on my GTS-t, now we have 18 x 9 which makes me happier trying to catch the Evos (in the dry at least) :)

32 vspec was 17x8 - so 19x10 max not 10.5.

The +2" wheel width is one of the worst things about the current rules....everyone has to spend more on tyres because everyone does, and the crashes are harder.

Blaise reckons one of his biggest advantages was being able to run bigger rubber than the rest of the EMO's (he squeezed on 255 rubber onto his cars where as the others were all on 245's).

The funny thing is for me my tyre choice was the Yoki A050's and the biggest they have been making is 265's. I have a set of 10.5's and a set of 9.5's and I personally found that the A050's in 265's sat better on the 9.5's than they did on the 10.5's (where as the RE55's and DZ03's were both better on the 10.5's in a 265 tyre).

But as soon as the 295's were out I'd have been switching to them on the 10.5's as my preference.

^^^^ My gut feel on the rubber issue, was the bigger tyres gave me more rubber to wear down so hopefully longer tyre life. Made me more confidfent of getting to the end on the one set of mediums. Turned out tyre wear was definatly not an issue for me, but it is a light car with moderate linear power as opposed to the heavier GTR's and bigger HP.

But for outright pace, I did do back to back testing between 235's (what most emos run) and 255's on the same day and there was two tenths of stuff all in it. I went about 0.4sec a lap quicker at best, but also had gone from worn 235's to new 255's so not sure if most of the gain was just that I had fresher rubber. Wasnt a massive improvement, but at the same time cant be a bad thing. Most forms of motorsport if given the opportunity, tend to run the biggest rubber they can.

Greg Garwood is looking for a good tarmac prepped R32 GTR if anyone knows of one?

Yes, I've told him about Jurgenson's and I'm sure he'll follow that up. - edit - Drew doesn't wish to sell now.

Edited by Marlin

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

    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
×
×
  • Create New...