Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Does anyone remember the super tourers of the mid 90s- early 00s? The weight penalties were something like FWD 0kg, RWD 50kg, 4WD 150kg... The group A GTRs had a massive weight penalty over the Sierras to start with but by the end of racing were carrying a heap more weight and boost restrictions that were not applied to the Sierras, anyone remember how that went? I am not going to get into science and big noting myself, because it is very simple, 4WD gives better grip, allowing you to use more HP, sooner. The rallying is very relevant simply because it highlights the difference by reducing the grip. I cannot think of a race series that allows 4WD where it is not unbeatable (no, I do not care about drag racing)

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

the long and the short of it is that no matter which side you are on, group A is an extremely poor example to use. the rules and regulations were pretty ordinary, and manufacturers could build a car that was right on th elimit, make enough road going models to get it allowed to race and that was it, meanwhile other car companies were simply beefing up existing models to make them a little bit better.

i would've like to had seem how the AWD turbo falcon that ford was working on (but ended up scrapping) would've gone against the GTR.

oh and i remember the super tourers that were all 4 cylinders (basically what the BTCC is). because of parity regulations neither fwd, rwd or awd dominated, however in the wet the audi's did very well, being awd.

That was why I mentioned the Supertourers/BTCC, very tightly regulated and controlled, they wrote rules to hobble the 4WDs, then outlawed them. So in summary, OP, was it Tyres?, asked for opinions, my OPINION, Build a 4WD, which means if you want to restrict it to a Skyline GTR, but an Evo will make a better cheaper track car... Puts on Wizard hat and robe... Realises flame suit will do shit all on this one...

I had a run against my mate in his GTS-T and my GTR. His car had more rwkw than mine yet at the track the GTR would walk away from in the corners. If you add more power to the GTST the situation will only get worse, not better. Ive owned and driven everything turbo in the R32 guise and the GTR is at the top of tree im afraid.

Did I just get owned in my own thread? I think I did :thumbsup:. Thanks guys, gonna sell my Skyline and get a cheap 'run around' til i'm in the opens. Not much I can argue, I can already see oversteer is possible from the videos NISMO has posted, with limited grip levels even as an AWD from high power.

Marc: Last time I checked the rules of Group A racing (just then), there was no rule on the compound of tyre you can run so I'm assuming that it was a modern day spec Group A GTR. Why did Ford scrap the AWD turbo Falcon? They released the XR6T anyways so I don't see why they wouldn't just release it as an AWD, surely it wouldn't cost that much more to develop unless a certain drivetrain works better for some cars?

djr81: Not saying I don't believe you or anything but you're saying that the more static load a tyre has, the less grip it will have? It would at least make sense if the tyre's coefficient of grip decreased with decreased load because of the area of tyre patch. Is there an explanation? If given a weight heavy enough, would the coeffecient of friction become 0? (LOL logic) Or would it just asymptote? For your information I have read Carroll Smith's Drive To Win and am a big fan of his books. In regards to the GTSR comment, the G35/V35 is actually pretty much just as fast as a R32 GTR (Reference

skip to 3:45 onwards), it's FR and it weighs more. Hows that work if AWD was so superior and modern?

Iplen: Yeah it's true, Evos dominate the top places in TA because their AWD system is actually sophisticated with all the yaw controls etc, probably as developed as the R34 GTR system. Spoke to a few Evo owners and they said it was cheaper, and more reliable to track the Evo instead of a GTR.

RBNT: But the GTS-T had you in terms of acceleration right? More wheels to spin = more drivetrain loss. What aero and tyres was he running compared to you? Who had a better lap time? (No I don't wanna hear excuses if you lost lol)

Edited by TyresBro

Did I just get owned in my own thread? I think I did :thumbsup:. Thanks guys, gonna sell my Skyline and get a cheap 'run around' til i'm in the opens. Not much I can argue, I can already see oversteer is possible from the videos NISMO has posted, with limited grip levels even as an AWD from high power.

Marc: Last time I checked the rules of Group A racing (just then), there was no rule on the compound of tyre you can run so I'm assuming that it was a modern day spec Group A GTR. Why did Ford scrap the AWD turbo Falcon? They released the XR6T anyways so I don't see why they wouldn't just release it as an AWD, surely it wouldn't cost that much more to develop unless a certain drivetrain works better for some cars?

djr81: Not saying I don't believe you or anything but you're saying that the more static load a tyre has, the less grip it will have? It would at least make sense if the tyre's coefficient of grip decreased with decreased load because of the area of tyre patch. Is there an explanation? If given a weight heavy enough, would the coeffecient of friction become 0? (LOL logic) Or would it just asymptote? For your information I have read Carroll Smith's Drive To Win and am a big fan of his books. In regards to the GTSR comment, the G35/V35 is actually pretty much just as fast as a R32 GTR (Reference

skip to 3:45 onwards), it's FR and it weighs more. Hows that work if AWD was so superior and modern?

Iplen: Yeah it's true, Evos dominate the top places in TA because their AWD system is actually sophisticated with all the yaw controls etc, probably as developed as the R34 GTR system. Spoke to a few Evo owners and they said it was cheaper, and more reliable to track the Evo instead of a GTR.

RBNT: But the GTS-T had you in terms of acceleration right? More wheels to spin = more drivetrain loss. What aero and tyres was he running compared to you? Who had a better lap time? (No I don't wanna hear excuses if you lost lol)

the awd falcon was in developement back in the 80's (was going to be a 268kw AWD twin turbo XF).

No, I'm saying they probably scrapped the AWD XF and invested the rest of the money into the creation of the RS200... (yes it did have a turbo as well as AWD)

you do realise that the rs200 finished production around the same time that they started the AWD XF designing. it was more likely scrapped because of new emissions laws, and the fact that the XF model was scrapped for the EA.

rs200 was actually AWD

Marc and I don't agree to often, but yeah, RS2000 was RWD, RS 200 was not, mid engined 1.8 turbo, with 4WD, twin shocks and there was some sort of tricky gearbox too, dual range or something from memory. The Evolution was going to be 2l. Was released for the RAC Lombard at the end of 85, part way through 86 it was announced that group B was to be finished as well as Group S which was due to replace it, following the death of Henri Toivenen and Sergio Cresto as well as an RS200 crew after they ploughed into spectators. When Ford/cosworth were developing this thing they could not have cared less what a little tuning company in Aus was doing..

....and yes, you got owned in your own thread

gud werk

No I didn't get owned actually. In the end, you guys ran outta arguments or couldn't answer your own statements :cheers:

This brng out the other question in the events of owning a GTR, would you install an AWD torque split controller? And if yes, what would you set it to on the track? Be honest. If no, why?

Edited by TyresBro

No I didn't get owned actually. In the end, you guys ran outta arguments or couldn't answer your own statements :cheers:

This brng out the other question in the events of owning a GTR, would you install an AWD torque split controller? And if yes, what would you set it to on the track? Be honest. If no, why?

Yes you would install a torque split controller (On a 32 in my experience). You then set it up to transfer as much torque forward as possible (based on the assumption it is of the type that interferes with the lateral accelerometer input to the ATTESSA system).

The GTR's were set up to drive nicely on the road. How you set the up for the track is a whole different story.

Yes you would install a torque split controller (On a 32 in my experience). You then set it up to transfer as much torque forward as possible (based on the assumption it is of the type that interferes with the lateral accelerometer input to the ATTESSA system).

The GTR's were set up to drive nicely on the road. How you set the up for the track is a whole different story.

djr81 Are you messing with us? Not saying it's incorrect (or correct), first you say that the less load on a tyre the higher coefficient of grip but now you say with a torque split controller to put as much power to the front wheels as possible. So in a way, on top of the already understeering and front heavy R32 GTR, you give it more understeer?

I was only agreeing with you.

My knowledge is from experience, not google.

Well I take it back :P

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

    • just an update to this, poor man pays twice  Tried sanding down the pulleys but it didnt do the trick. Chucked another second hand alternator in the na car which I got for free off my mate and its fixed the squelling. Must have been unlucky with the bearings.    As for my turbo car, I managed to pick up a cwc rb alternator conversion bracket + LS alternator for 250 off marketplace, looked to be in really good nick. Installed it , started the car and its not charging the battery.... ( Im not good with auto elec stuff so im not sure if this was all I needed to do but I verified such by using a multimeter on the battery when the engine was running and I was only getting 12.2v )   I had to modify the earth strap for the new LS alternator , factory earth strap was a 10mm bolt which did not fit the bolt on the LS alternator which was double the size so I cut it off , went to repco bought some ring terminals that fit, crimped it onto the old earth strap and bolted it up to the alternator , started the car and same issue. Ran like shit and was reading 12.2 at the battery.  For a "plug and play" advertised kit thats not very plug and play but alas.  My question is , am I missing something ? Ive been reading that some people recommend upgrading the stock 80 amp alternator fuse to a 140 amp but I dont see how that would stop the alternator charging especially at idle not under load.  Regardless ive pulled it out and am going to get it bench tested by an auto elec tomorrow but it would be handy to know if ive missed something silly or have done something wrong.   
    • My wild guess is that you have popped off an intake pipe....check all of the hoses between the turbo and the throttle for splits or loose clamps.
    • Awesome, thanks for sharing!
    • To provide more specific help, more information is needed. What Android screen? What is its wiring diagram? Does the car's wiring have power at any required BAT and ACC wires, and is the loom's earth good?
    • So, now all you need to do is connect the 2 or 3x 12v feeds into the unit to permanent 12v, ACC 12V and IGN 12V that you can find in the spot behind the stereo, and the earth, and then it will switch on with the car.
×
×
  • Create New...