Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

sany0473.jpg

sany0475bs.jpg

Mostly happens when there's a very sharp dip in the road, pot hole, whatever. Also happens when turning sharply on a bumpy road. (It does it on some corners of Old Pacific Highway) ... is that metal bit above my tyre supposed to be sticking out that far?

The tyre size's I have is 235/45R17 on 17" Work rims. Standard suspension (I think) ... it's not low at all.

Edited by RB25PWR
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/
Share on other sites

ummm, correct me on this but i tawt that upper arm moves with the suspension so doesnt matter which way it travels u always have the same gap. jus checked my car, the gap seems similar so id say its normal, u may have wheel rubbing sum where else. best way to confirm this is take wheel off and look under suspect area, u will have a definite rub area thats free from dirt and stuff. if not there look for same symtoms in other areas.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/#findComment-5134445
Share on other sites

I think it might be a problem as i have 235/45 R17's on at the moment (i have not noticed that it rubs on that bushing nor does it feel worn) and also the sticker inside on the drivers side door gives the Kpa measurement if your using this size 235/45 R17. The car should fit the tyres no problem at all.

Also your bush looks very close too your tyre there, mine was about 5cm's apart.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/#findComment-5134621
Share on other sites

i have 235/45 and looks very similar to yours but im pretty shore im not getting any rubbing but probs will be getting 235/40 next time around

u should take the wheel off and have a good look also full lock the steering both ways with the wheel on

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/#findComment-5134955
Share on other sites

It doesn't rub on it per say. It feels like it hits it very shunt-like... I only really notice it when I'm going down a hill, and right at the bottom of a hill there's like a TINY dip in the the road.

dip.jpg

Poor illustration but you get the idea. I gotta admit I don't know whether it's hitting that thing for sure either, but wtf else is it hitting?! =\

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/#findComment-5136359
Share on other sites

the top of the shock is hitting the bump stops. Or if you've cut the bump stops the top of the wheel is hitting the top of the wheel well. Look up my son, look up.

In the first pic, see the spring - then inside that is the bump stop. The top of the shock body is hitting up against that. Have you got stock shock absorbers and springs?

Or more likely you have lowered springs and stock shock absorbers. Probably could do with some new shock absorbers. and if you've got lowered springs I'd take about 10mm off the bump stops (cut them).

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/311910-is-this-normal/#findComment-5137669
Share on other sites

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...