Jump to content
SAU Community

Which Has More Potential In The Long Run?


Recommended Posts

r32_bathurst24.jpg

Next...

that isn't a JGTC or GT class race car now is it? that is a group A race car. as was said earlier, all the JGTC and GT class GTR's are RWD, but that is because the rules specify that they must be RWD, and also a NA v8 from memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

r32_bathurst24.jpg

Next...

I hate quoting pictures but do you have a high resolution version of this pic (eg background res).

Thanks

Also I know you guys wanted this thread to die but I picked up on a comment about the closer to 50:50 split they ran the faster their lap times. Is this a predominantly RWD that progresses to 50:50 upon loss of traction, or was it permanently 50:50? Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also I know you guys wanted this thread to die but I picked up on a comment about the closer to 50:50 split they ran the faster their lap times. Is this a predominantly RWD that progresses to 50:50 upon loss of traction, or was it permanently 50:50? Cheers.

I think that was me. I didnt quite say 50:50 I said more front bias.

The way it works is roughly as follows.

The stock Attessa cuts front bias when it senses a reasonable road speed & reasonable lateral gee input. This is to "make it feel like a rear wheel drive car". Which is fine if that is what you want. By reducing the influence of the lateral gee input you end up with more front torque. Which if you have a reasonable chassis balance & some horsepowers gives you a quicker lap time.

It isnt a loss of traction thing to be pedantic. Also I have no idea how the fixed torque bias controllers work. Never used one.

For whomever wanted to PM me whatever I emptied the rubbish out of my inbox.

Anyway put the damn thread in a box & bury it. Please. Before RBNT has an aneurysm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that isn't a JGTC or GT class race car now is it? that is a group A race car. as was said earlier, all the JGTC and GT class GTR's are RWD, but that is because the rules specify that they must be RWD, and also a NA v8 from memory.

No it is not. Thankyou for stating the obvious.

I believed this thread was comparing an r32 gts-t to an r32 gt-r.... When someone makes a gts-t as capable as that car then I will be both surprised and accept the original premis of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that was me. I didnt quite say 50:50 I said more front bias.

The way it works is roughly as follows.

The stock Attessa cuts front bias when it senses a reasonable road speed & reasonable lateral gee input. This is to "make it feel like a rear wheel drive car". Which is fine if that is what you want. By reducing the influence of the lateral gee input you end up with more front torque. Which if you have a reasonable chassis balance & some horsepowers gives you a quicker lap time.

It isnt a loss of traction thing to be pedantic. Also I have no idea how the fixed torque bias controllers work. Never used one.

For whomever wanted to PM me whatever I emptied the rubbish out of my inbox.

Anyway put the damn thread in a box & bury it. Please. Before RBNT has an aneurysm

It still won't let me, says you can't receive any new PM's. >_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it is not. Thankyou for stating the obvious.

I believed this thread was comparing an r32 gts-t to an r32 gt-r.... When someone makes a gts-t as capable as that car then I will be both surprised and accept the original premis of this thread.

This is a fairly good way to summarize this thread. I am currently starting a very simple build up of a gts-t because I find them a more entertaining drive than the gt-r, I don't hold any delusions of it being faster at this stage. I welcome someone to make the fastest possible rwd R32. That said, Russel from Sau Vic has a nasty habit of beating all the GT-Rs in his gts-t at quite a number of events ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a go at you? When? Sorry but I do not remember. sad.gif

Sorry, I thought whey you said "I hate quoting pictures" that you were having a go at my thread reply with a picture only but you must have meant you don't like including a pic in your reply.

Anyway, here are some pics I have that are reasonable resolution...

post-26935-0-88637800-1308460154_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-67862800-1308460266_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-02316500-1308460416_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-22871800-1308460577_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-53347200-1308460843_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I thought whey you said "I hate quoting pictures" that you were having a go at my thread reply with a picture only but you must have meant you don't like including a pic in your reply.

Yeah thats what I meant lol, sorry for the confusion, thanks heaps for the pics! :)

Link to comment
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
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • You could try some less aggressive pads on the rear. I found (a long time ago when all my brakes were stock 32) that using the same (Bendix Ultimate) pads at both ends made the rear bias excessive. I strongly suspect that the stock Nissan pads probably use a different material, but aftermarket pads will usually be the same material regardless of what pad they are put onto. That bias situation did get better when I put R33 calipers on the front AND used the same pads - just transferred them from old to new calipers. So you should feel the difference with the change you're making. But certainly do not forget the option to change the rear pads down a grade or two.
    • Ha ha, sorry dose, I wasn't meaning to argue the point on "it'll do f**k all". I was only shining a bit of a light in the flawed logic you used with it mate.   I 100% agree that there is zero point changing stock manifold with a stock turbo, unless the manifold is f**ked. And only reason I'd ponder aftermarket manifold on a stock turbo would be that I'm too scared too look at the potential ludicrous prices people are asking for a stock manifold! Ha ha ha
    • Shhh... Muricans don't understand the idea of metric so can't find half the stuff we have for modifying JDM cars 😛
    • That may or may not be me that replied 😅
    • Your response is extremely similar to what someone on the Haltech tuning tips Facebook page answered me. I take it you're also on there haha. Dyno is booked for June 27th and that's exactly what I'll be doing. I also realized I never setup a pulse width adder table so I went and did that last night. Made a fair bit of fueling difference in low load areas.  I sorted out my power steering belt woes. It was an alignment issue and it has now survived multiple instances of abuse that would have killed it prior. I also changed my fuel pump hose. The hose I replaced looks nothing like the legit gates hose I received. Real hose is actually 5/16" and is labelled properly. Amazon refunded me but has been giving me grief about my nasty review I'm trying to leave... I keep having to modify it for acceptance. I want to make sure the point gets across to others.  Last issue I want to deal with soon is the slight vibration I get in my steering wheel with my GKTech Spacers in front. My annoyance has grown and I'm at a point where I want it resolved. I've tried everything I can come up with like clean spacers thoroughly, tighten in star pattern, retorque, have wheels rebalanced 4-5x with a variety of machines (2x with a Hunter elite). I've also taken the spacers off and remounted multiple times just in case.  I'm starting to think my GKtech spacers are at fault. I'll pop a wheel off and toss a dial indicator on tomorrow to verify runout and parallelism. 
×
×
  • Create New...