Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Having driven all of the cars in that picture(yes I am gloating)....The Winfield R32 without a doubt.

But I still love the R31 for the excitement!!

Having driven the GMS R31 in front of a crowds ( although usually jumping the start ), I'm surprised your head fits in any of the other cars :P

I'd have to take NEWGTR. Clearly it's driven by someone who can't park, and the car deserves better than that :)

lol @ fatz

For a lap round the track I'd take the R32 in less than a heartbeat, and it would come back with bald tyres and no fuel.

:):)

Yes, R32...

despite the fact that one of my patients who'd just become a non-smoker said,

"You must be the cigarette company's worst enemy!" :D

Having driven the GMS R31 in front of a crowds ( although usually jumping the start ), I'm surprised your head fits in any of the other cars :)

hmmm....i have nothing! next time me see's you i'll have something for you though.

Note to myself - Get Hooker to give me some weapons training :) .....I already know how to do the running thing.

Having driven all of the cars in that picture(yes I am gloating)....The Winfield R32 without a doubt.

But I still love the R31 for the excitement!!

Its a bit hard to tell from videos etc, but would you mind describing what its like to drive/steer? :D

Its a bit hard to tell from videos etc, but would you mind describing what its like to drive/steer? :D

GMS R31: I can push this car car to the limit and feel comfortable with the response given through the chassis in either understeer or oversteer....not meaning that it's faster just more forgiving at the limit than the R32.

GMS R32: Considering I have only done about 40 laps with it at pace the only feedback that I can give is that to take up to the 85% margin it was very easy to drive....no loss of grip and heaps of low down grunt. Beyond that you would have to have a bit more time in the car...it would be very easy to put on the roof. I also didn't find it that much quicker in a straight line than the R31, but the grip coming out of the corners was awesome. Power steering and sync box made it easy to drive as well.....but you do feel the weight.

Maybe I'm old school but I still love the R31.....I just think I could get much more out of it at the limit....not saying I would be quicker....just the fun factor would be greater.

r31 number on!

jetwreck? i recon even terry is sorry he got out of the r31

31 sounds 4-5 million times better as well

r31 number one!

only thing i dont like about it is the rb20...... gay

off its tits 26 would make that a sweet car

Edited by fatz

Having seen them all his weekend, the 31 is very exciting to watch. (Thats me sitting behind the R35 with the cap on in the first photo). The 32 just grabs the attention though, everywhere it goes. After hearing Jim Richards and Mark Skaife echo jetwrecks comments almost word for word, it seems the 31 has the nod for fun to drive. I would find it very hard to make a choice, I would want them all, for different reasons.

GMS R31: I can push this car car to the limit and feel comfortable with the response given through the chassis in either understeer or oversteer....not meaning that it's faster just more forgiving at the limit than the R32.

GMS R32: Considering I have only done about 40 laps with it at pace the only feedback that I can give is that to take up to the 85% margin it was very easy to drive....no loss of grip and heaps of low down grunt. Beyond that you would have to have a bit more time in the car...it would be very easy to put on the roof. I also didn't find it that much quicker in a straight line than the R31, but the grip coming out of the corners was awesome. Power steering and sync box made it easy to drive as well.....but you do feel the weight.

Maybe I'm old school but I still love the R31.....I just think I could get much more out of it at the limit....not saying I would be quicker....just the fun factor would be greater.

Cool thanks!

Btw im the same Steve from the old pac run last night, grey shirt and jeans :P

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...