Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

as title states, i have a set of SSR Strusse wheels for sale, have freshly powder coated black centres, huge dish and would look insane on a stagea. follow link for pics and contact info

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Sa...ml#entry5153488

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/314533-ssr-strusse-19x10-19-19x11-11/
Share on other sites

huge dish and would look insane on a stagea

would look insane on a stagea.. if they would fit.

you won't get an 11+11 on the rear without a spacer to clear the struts, then you'd need wider guards to cover them

Not to

mention as soon as u drove atessa wd flip out!

why? just make sure you get the right tyre sizes to maintain the same rolling diameter front and back.

why? just make sure you get the right tyre sizes to maintain the same rolling diameter front and back.

yeah people put different size tyres on the front and rear of stageas and awd skylines all the time, sure its not reccomended but its not like they have a locked centre diff. and im pretty sure they will fit, my quick offset maths says they will. but of course if someones interested id reccomend a test fitment first

yeah people put different size tyres on the front and rear of stageas and awd skylines all the time, sure its not reccomended but its not like they have a locked centre diff. and im pretty sure they will fit, my quick offset maths says they will. but of course if someones interested id reccomend a test fitment first

what? no.

you have to maintain the same rolling diameter front and back or your ATESSA. This means the diameter of your wheels plus the tyres in the front have to be the same as the diameter of your wheels plus the tyres in the back. Tyre profiles are measured in percentages of their width, so when you run staggered widths, you have to make sure the profiles are still the same size.

use this to help you choose:

http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

It is doable on a Stag with those wheels.

235/35/19 front and 275/30/19 rear and the rolling heights will be the closest you can get for staggered 19s. from memory, they're only 3mm apart

D.

currently has 245 35 19 and 275 30 19

  • 1 month later...

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


  • 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...