Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Work Emotion Xd9 18x9+20 (215/40/18) 18x10+18 (235/40/18)

Putting my Work's up for sale. I can guarantee you that you will get pussy if you put these wheels on your car and if you don't, you should be giving up on pussy all together. So if you want to be super cool on Nissansilvia.com and think your JDM as F*ck then BUY BUY BUY

Would fit perfect on an R33/R34 will need a flare on a R32. Fronts have a few marks on the rim from the old owner who apparently dropped them when fitting tires. Tires on the front are Dunlop Direnza with 85% tread (mark on one from guard rubbing on tire from old owner) and the rears are brand new still in the box and I've just got some Kuhmo KU31 tires in for them yesterday, I haven't fitted them yet but I can if need be.

In all honesty I just want back what I've paid for the wheels, so basically your getting free tires with them. Don't want any low ball bullshit offers nor do I want to hear that I'm selling them for too much, you'll be hard pressed to get these wheels in with the same tires for the price I'm asking. Fronts were on my car for two days then I got defected so they came off. If you want some quality dished jap rims for your car these are what you need.

$3,000 - Wheels will be shipped at buyers expense.

P1000706.jpg

P1000710.jpg

P1000712.jpg

P1000707.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/277835-work-emotion-xd9-white/
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

No idea how your paying 350each when even the work site labels them at 62000yen each, as seen here http://www.work-wheels.co.jp/catalog/pdf/45.pdf

:devil: dreamers

You're probably looking at about $2,700-$2,900 del for 18" XD9's in white with the exchange rate and that is buying straight from work. Factor in the the tires which the fronts came with the Dunlops on them and the brand new rear tires PLUS work nuts.

If you can get XD9's delivered here for $1,500 like you said.. why are you posting in my thread?

$3,000 O.N.O simple. You don't want them or you think you can get them cheaper. By all means give it a shot.

Edited by J-Dawg
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

nice wheels man! i'm looking at a set of gunmetal ruffly same spec as those if not then the 17's, how'd the go under your gaurds? (ie: what work did you do)

oops just read your 2nd paragraph

Edited by BstewyR33

I had the same sizes just different wheels before hand and they sat pretty good on the rear with it sitting real low. Fronts would need abit of guard work. But for a R33 it would sit flush all the way around

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...