Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

FineLine

Posted Today, 06:07 PM

Marlin, on 27 May 2011 - 08:47 AM, said:

Tire rack doesn't list A050's?! Only A048's

Edit - Or O3G's......

Anyone shed any light on that?

Edit - I've emailed them a request for info on those.

I rang them and couldnt get any sense out of them regards the o3g's Ben. I hope you have more luck.

No Re55s listed either. I've been on toyo's for the last 2 seasons on the GTR and really keen to try something better. I tryed a worn out set of medium Ao50s and they definatly impressed me. really want to try some new ones. Can you please ley me know how you go Ben?

pretty sure the fastest Aussie car at last year's WTAC was on Kumho V70A - Luff in the Lotus.

yep Harry is correct, the lotus ran on Kumho last year

damn that car only weighs in at only 750kg according to the spec list this year with 500+awhp

thats almost half the weight my car will be! R35 drivers really do need to pray to the Horsepower and AWD electronic trickery gods for an advantage

_MG_2446.286.JPG

yep Harry is correct, the lotus ran on Kumho last year

damn that car only weighs in at only 750kg according to the spec list this year with 500+awhp

thats almost half the weight my car will be! R35 drivers really do need to pray to the Horsepower and AWD electronic trickery gods for an advantage

_MG_2446.286.JPG

They are actually building a motor for it this year rather than just the race motor that he uses to compete in the GT series with (which is what they did last year).

Was looking at Natsoft results and from the creek yesterday and seen this:

Allan Simonsen Lamborghini Gallardo 5212 A 8 12:52.3149 1:28.0570R

Doing a 1:28.057 in a 8 lap race is dam impressive, may need more GT cars to enter World Time Attack like the little Lotus

Was looking at Natsoft results and from the creek yesterday and seen this:

Allan Simonsen Lamborghini Gallardo 5212 A 8 12:52.3149 1:28.0570R

Doing a 1:28.057 in a 8 lap race is dam impressive, may need more GT cars to enter World Time Attack like the little Lotus

More GT cars , yes please.

yep Harry is correct, the lotus ran on Kumho last year

damn that car only weighs in at only 750kg according to the spec list this year with 500+awhp

thats almost half the weight my car will be! R35 drivers really do need to pray to the Horsepower and AWD electronic trickery gods for an advantage

_MG_2446.286.JPG

Hate to say it Mark but 1500kg+ (at any power level or tech wizardry) will have no chance against the Lotus.

Btw anyone get the email from SL asking people to register what tyres they are running, so the manufacturers are stocked up? You have to wonder how gullable we are i suppose!

Was looking at Natsoft results and from the creek yesterday and seen this:

Allan Simonsen Lamborghini Gallardo 5212 A 8 12:52.3149 1:28.0570R

Doing a 1:28.057 in a 8 lap race is dam impressive, may need more GT cars to enter World Time Attack like the little Lotus

Slicks I assume? I wonder how it would go with semi's?

Hate to say it Mark but 1500kg+ (at any power level or tech wizardry) will have no chance against the Lotus.

Btw anyone get the email from SL asking people to register what tyres they are running, so the manufacturers are stocked up? You have to wonder how gullable we are i suppose!

Yes, my point exactly. We have no delusions of defying physics, especially in the time attack format with available tyre selections.

Slicks I assume? I wonder how it would go with semi's?

Yes would be on slicks, but still be on a harder compound I would think as they are racing. Would love to see some times on very soft slicks or semi’s that would only last 1 lap.

No Re55s listed either. I've been on toyo's for the last 2 seasons on the GTR and really keen to try something better. I tryed a worn out set of medium Ao50s and they definatly impressed me. really want to try some new ones. Can you please ley me know how you go Ben?

No good news Coop;

"Thanks for the email.

I'm sorry but we don't carry those model tires.

Kind regards,

Steve Huffman | Sales Specialist"

  • 4 weeks 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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Thanks for posting, your engine bay looks tops. I'm fairly sure you posted the wrong video though, I think you were supposed to upload the one from your "private test road" where it's banging off the limiter with the gate open?
    • This is something to be careful of. I did a bit of digging on the NM35, as I spend a lot of time on near brand new cars and CANBus related stuff, which uses the same "OBD2" plug for a fair chunk of making my life easy. The NM35, does NOT support OBD2. The data pin is actually on Pin3, which is a manufacturer specific pin, and requires Consult3 to connect to the NM35. Your low voltage, is either because the NM35 doesn't have 12V to the constant power pin on the J1962 (OBD2) connector, OR, it is attempting the standard comms, (CanBus, K Line, etc) and can't see any voltage on those pins. Some people have had success accessing SOME data from the vehicle on OBD2 specification, using a module that supports KPW. My assumption, like Duncan has stated, it will likely actually be JOBD, where there is some cross over with the OBD2 and JOBD standards. Note, lots of "OBD2" dongles, do NOT support KPW, which is what you need for a lot of Japanese vehicles of this era (And even up until recent years!), EG, Subaru, Suzuki, etc.    The end of this thread is probably worth a read, as some people did find a way to get a display up in the NM35 recently, looks like someone implemented all the stuff needed to make it work. (The right protocols).  
    • Depending on the purpose of the car, and how much more fabbing you want to do, and what clearances you have, you could look to raise the motor, which will raise the front diff up. Likely would mean altering the chassis rails etc etc, hence the more fab work you'd need to do. However, this can create issues, not just in clearance with everything fitting under the bonnet, but you've also raised a LOT of weight up in the car, and this will DEFINITELY alter handling characteristics (But, so will how much weight you've already added to the front end). You'll also have to deal with the fact the gearbox to rear diff is now out of alignment too for the tail shaft, and alter the angle of the diff, or deal with a bit of potential vibration. Raising the motor an inch up, is effectively the same as making the whole car sit higher by not lowering it as far. So one inch higher motor, theoretically means you can drop the car an extra inch lower, and maintain the same angles in the CVs. Again, depends on the purpose of the car. If it's a just cruiser on the street car, maybe won't be an issue. If it's meant to be a time attack car, I can see you not wanting to raise the motor. This is just for you to ponder as an idea.
    • Have you not seen geospy.ai? It can now give GPS co ords to within a metre from a photo, even if it's a random photo you take inside. Supposedly at the moment only the government/law enforcement has access to that... Supposedly...
    • I've got the rear ones, they're certainly beefy. I need to take them to my driveshaft guru to check over, he's very fussy about the quality of components so I'll let you know if they are made of cheese by a blind man.   Are you in Australia? A mate just had a set of EN26 shafts made for his K20 Lotus by our fabricator which were quite cheap (compared to Driveshaft Shop) so if you can procure the CV's and draw what you need he'd make them for ~$800 for the pair.
×
×
  • Create New...