Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi, I've got a 1994 R33 NA and am wondering what 4 stud wheels fit, I have found a set but am unsure if they will fit properly. The wheels I found are 17 X 7.5 Wheels 4x114.3 +47. Would they fit straight on? Before anyone says try them on, I'm looking to buy these interstate. Cheers.

Edited by Ten Four
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/241665-r33-na-4-stud-wheel-question/
Share on other sites

Alright cheers, does that mean they will look weird? How would they look in comparison to stock 4 stud wheels? I don't have a kit or anything. Spacers, would they work and what would I need?

Edited by Ten Four

Well if the offset on an n/a is the same as the turbo it is +48 (??), other words the rims you want to buy will sit 1mm further out from the guards than the wheels u have now. Preffered offset for an r33 is +30 cuz it sits nice and flush with the guards.

tbh id look elsewhere. itsa good buy but would be shit on your car. i run 18x8 with +38 offset and its sits real nice. so anything around that ballpark figure is what you want. anythingx8 with +30 to +38 would look nice, 7.5 is just too skinny for an R33 imo tho. moar grip = win :P

gallery_45120_2898_58119.jpg

Edited by G0DZLR

Silly NA's, just when you thought you found something.... The hardest part is finding wheels that actually fit, then theres the part where they have to look decent without costing a fortune, its impossible, impossible!

Edited by Ten Four

anyone know how will 18x7.5 rims with a 45 offset look??

finding it very hard to find rims, and found a cheap pair with those specs ^

Can anyone give me some advice where i can find rims plus tyres(dont mind if new) for under 800

anyone know how will 18x7.5 rims with a 45 offset look??

finding it very hard to find rims, and found a cheap pair with those specs ^

Can anyone give me some advice where i can find rims plus tyres(dont mind if new) for under 800

theyd sit too far in the guards i think. i have 18x8 with +38 offset and theyre just in the guards by about a mil.. look awesome tho

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...