Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi predator, maybe I didn't explain this well enough in the previous post, so let me try again.....

The rear suspension arms on a Skyline are not directly connected to the body. They are connected to the rear subframe which is connected to body via soft rubber bushes. So adding strengthening to the body (strut brace or roll cage) is a waste of time, unless you link the subframe to the body at the same time.

This is not the case at the front, where the front suspension arms are directly connected to the body. So adding strengthening (strut brace) to the body is very worthwhile.

If you jack up the rear of a Skyline this difference is very obvious when you compare it to the front.

Hope that clarifies.

What I can say is if it happens again, I would increase the rear anti roll and try that. That will decrease the diagonal weight shift, which is more than likely the reason why it understeers. If you have too much dynamic weight going onto the outside front tyre, it causes it to scrub and pass its slip angle.

Conversely you can decrease the front anti roll, which will increase the diagonal weight shift and therefore push the tyre down onto the track harder. This works if the understeer is caused by insufficient weight on the outside front tyre.

So you can have two reasons for the understeer, too much dynamic weight or too little dynamic weight.

Thanks, i read, read, read, but my practical experience on susp setup is severly lacking ;)

Another concern of mine is the front/rear ride height of my car. From wheel centres to guard, my front is 315mm and rear is 340mm.

I suspect my front is too low, so perhaps need to raise the front before trying other things. I suspect the weight transfer may be also the reason that i seem to have a tendnecy to lock rears, others dont seem to have a bias problem when running 328mm front rotors with std proportioning.

PS - do you eve tire of ding bats like me who mess with their cars settings asking your advice on how to get back on track...:bonk:

... appreciate you help.

Roy,

I had a similar problem with my GTS4 understeering, despite having stock front bar and HD GT-R rear bar. It, like yours, has been lowered.

It turns out that a probable contributing cause was the front suspension riding the bump stops. In that case the front spring rate goes from maybe 200 lb springs to near infinite rating once it hits the bump stops. Fitting smaller / thinner bump stops seems to have contributed to it getting back the "power-on oversteer" handling my car is reportedly renowned for.

Also not helped by the Whiteline camber kit had worn, and cranked in 3.5 -ve camber. New kit - new handling.

Despite my front being so low it doesnt appear to be hitting its bump stops...and im already onto my 2nd set of front camber bushes, the first set i had appeared to react with something they had come in contact with causing them to swell, so now have Nolathane camber bushes on the front.

Anyway sorry for going off topic :Oops: ... my point being the front strut brace does significantly change the way my front susp performs.

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 don't know if you can disassemble the thing and put it backwards for different ramp rates. They're both "2 ways" or both "1.5 ways" because well, 2 ways and 1.5 ways are the same 'thing' I do not know for sure, but I believe the 38420-RSS15-B5 is the 1 way, and 38420-RSS20-B5 is the two way. In other words, I predict Nissan considers this: to be a 1.5 way. No idea what actually happens when it arrives/you disassemble it. It would be an excellent question to ask Nismo directly! I somehow doubt you will get an answer though, I feel you would be the first person to document what you encounter when you open the box and the internet would be grateful.
    • I'm going to slap an old nismo logo sticker on my spare one and sell it to the land of the free for a thousand bucks
    • lol, probably should have read further!
    • Well - they have arrived.  And they are easy on the eye to put it mildly... These only have three bolts - but for a start there is a key that fits with vacuum like precision..  And as you can see by my ruler, the interface is large..   I listened to a podcast on HP Academy about Dan (KiwiCNC) and I'm more than comfortable he knows what he is doing. R35 Bearing assembly should arrive later today so can mock that up for a look. Can't wait to get these on and get some brake pressure logging too. IMG_3860.MP4
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
×
×
  • Create New...