Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

wanting to know whats the best suspension and wheel size for a gtst rwd to get the best traction it could from a launch.

i want the rears to look fat aswell :P possibly with some deep dish at the rear... but main concern the traction

ide love to buy a gtr but not going to bother,

i want a 5 spoke black wheels to suit a maroon car and i need to know what tyres i should get. i want the widest i could fit but best for traction

what suspension setup should i go for?

and do i need to change things like the camper arms, control arms and all the rest of the little fiddly bits and if so could u name the parts i should be changing

it will mainly be for a straight line so i want a fast launch as ill be competing with my mates wrx

but i would also like to take it to a track day every now and then

Edited by Stealthynsa

Good tyres, 255/35 is a good start or some semi slicks.

Subframe bushes set for maximum squat.

Get the rear camber as close to 0 degrees as you can.

Rear suspension to be nice and soft.

See how you go with that and go from there. I have a similar setup but 1st gear is still a joke. Going to try and get the rear camber as close to 0 as i can. It's about -1 at the moment.

See how you go with that and go from there. I have a similar setup but 1st gear is still a joke. :)

lol thats exactly what i dont want first gear to be a joke ;)

thanks for the tip thought... whats the widest size wheel/tyre i can go on the rears?

i recently found out about tyre stretching and i think it looks awesome so i would like to do that a little bit aswell

What kind of power are you pushing? Mine comes on very hard in the midrange so unless i run semi's or put stock shocks and raise the car a bit in the back, i don't think i'll ever get 1st gear to hold under full throttle on the street.

What kind of power are you pushing? Mine comes on very hard in the midrange so unless i run semi's or put stock shocks and raise the car a bit in the back, i don't think i'll ever get 1st gear to hold under full throttle on the street.

You have 2 obvious problems;

18" Volk Racing GTC's

Tein Super Street Coilovers

Too low a profile tyre to absord the torque hit plus very unsophisticated shock absorber valving and too high a spring rate.

Cheers

Gary

Yeah i know, it's not the best setup for getting power down, but hell, gotta compromise some where :P

Aslong as i can keep power down throughout second gear (which some times gets hard), ill be happy. Gonna probably get a second set of whiteline camber adjusters for the rear, or just put a set up adjustable arms in to try to get it to zero degrees in the back. Cheers though Gary, havn't seen you on the forums for a while :P

Edited by PM-R33
You have 2 obvious problems;

18" Volk Racing GTC's

Tein Super Street Coilovers

Too low a profile tyre to absord the torque hit plus very unsophisticated shock absorber valving and too high a spring rate.

Cheers

Gary

so would you say 255-40-17's would be to much low profile?

so would you say 255-40-17's would be to much low profile?

Depends on the spring rates. It's pretty simple maths actually;

tyre + effective spring rate = total rate (where the tread meets the road)

low profile tyre = high rate

high rate + high rate = no traction

Cheers

Gary

buy some R32 GTR wheels, chuck some 255/45's on, roll guards, R32 B6 bilsteins (nice and soft), stock springs (soft), pineapples in, aligned for maximum squat.

that would be my guess for a fairly cheap setup for straight line stuff.

I'm with Gary.

Mines up over 300rwkw with an RB30DET, comes on relatively smooth but has bulk torque form 3500rpm onwards.

Stock suspension was a joke the rear end would sit down unevenly, strangely the left would dip and create a taily rear. Possibly a stuffed shock.

I fitted a set of harder teins, instantly I noticed the rear would squat evenly. It hooked up better and twin wheel in a near straight line.

I then dropped the front of the cradle ~12mm and fitted a mechanical diff with wheel alignment - 0.5neg rear camber.

The cradle rake really made the biggest difference as you could feel it absorb a little of the drive line shock + when it was spinning it went from spinning on the spot to what felt like spinning but strangely accelerating damn hard. 18's were too slippery even with wide tyres. Best grip I've found is with a good set of 16's. I've found with 17's you need to jump up ~2 sizes to obtain the same grip for if your running the same overall dia. compared to the 16's.

No doubt a set of purpose built springs and shocks will improve grip 10 fold. For a good handling + straight line grip I believe I've found a nice balance.

The issue with launching a manual RWD skyline quick and clean is it requires you to slip the clutch some what.

With making over 500hp you typically need a clutch that doesn't like being slipped so its either have a nice clean launch or kill your clutch.

If your experiencing traction problems with near 400hp (200-230rwkw) you need to ditch the low profiles, look at the condition of your diff and finally look at your driving/launching style. :)

Edited by SLAPS

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...