Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Why do it with an r33.

R34 rollers are scarce but fairly cheap.

Building something like it won't really fit many categories so why waste time and effort with an RB when there is a much larger cap inline 6 floating around now days with much more to offer.

Hang on sounds like the car I've got in the build.......

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why do it with an r33.

R34 rollers are scarce but fairly cheap.

Building something like it won't really fit many categories so why waste time and effort with an RB when there is a much larger cap inline 6 floating around now days with much more to offer.

Hang on sounds like the car I've got in the build.......

I am not too sure Skyline owners are very good at math :) Some of the do this and do that for all less then 25k etc seems waaay optimistic.

I think the GTR will win in most conditions, however I think a rwd platform that is 200kgs lighter can be as quick, if not quicker in some circumstances. There is always the issue of what you can do yourself and what you do with the car. AWD is a pretty big bandaid

It seems that a GTR in rwd form, purpose built that way would more then likely be better then a straight gtst. Purely due to the car having a better all round setup from factory. Slightly wider track, provision to run bigger wheels/tires which is quite important. This is severely limiting in a gtst. The most obvious one being the stance of the gtr makes it looks a hell of alot tougher then a gtst!

Have you seen the stance on my car? I'm running wider track than most GTR's. Not exactly pretty but it's a race car.

Wasn't at all expensive but you probably guessed that :whistling:

I am not too sure Skyline owners are very good at math :) Some of the do this and do that for all less then 25k etc seems waaay optimistic.

I think the GTR will win in most conditions, however I think a rwd platform that is 200kgs lighter can be as quick, if not quicker in some circumstances. There is always the issue

of what you can do yourself and what you do with the car. AWD is a pretty big bandaid

I couldn't agree more with your first paragraph.

It can be done on a tight budget if you rummage around for parts or have heaps of gear lying around.

Those cars end up as shit boxes that never lap near their potential though.

To physically go out and buy parts/knowledge costs.

I've outlined budgets for people then told them to double it to finish the car.

Just to add, I guess if you take the line that you already have a R33 GTR (i.e. like I do) and then you make a decision one way or another. Sorry, just to keep the thread on a lead.

First thread start in this section so please be gentle.

Thinking about track/race only R32/R33/R34 GTR's with no 4WD... is the trade off between the weight lost at the front without the front diff., drive shafts and also transfer case behind the gearbox be a greater advantage over the 4WD grip?

When you consider when you remove the front sump/diff. you could fit a custom shallow dry sump oil pan, without the transfer case you could fit a ex-Supertaxi seq. box without worrying about the transfer case.

The GT cars in Japan were all rear wheel drive only be it for rules or reliability.

What are peoples thoughts?

The trade off for the weight loss of the 4WD system is a slower lap time, ie remove the system and go slower. Dont waste your time just to struggle with the other GTST's.

Oh and by the way the "supertaxi" gearbox is a Holinger. Originally designed to fit in a - wait for it - R32 GTR. True story.

I am not too sure Skyline owners are very good at math :) Some of the do this and do that for all less then 25k etc seems waaay optimistic.

I think the GTR will win in most conditions, however I think a rwd platform that is 200kgs lighter can be as quick, if not quicker in some circumstances. There is always the issue of what you can do yourself and what you do with the car. AWD is a pretty big bandaid

Roy, that post is spot on!

Name a race series where awd has not been outlawed, or is not the only way to win. Sierra was more than 200kgs lighter and had similar hp (towards the end) and got smashed.

ATCC-We all know what happened there

BTCC- awd had about 100kg penalty, then got banned

JGTC- awd outlawed

WRC- 2wd last won a round in late 90s

Superlap- awd dominating..

The list goes on..

Name a race series where awd has not been outlawed, or is not the only way to win. Sierra was more than 200kgs lighter and had similar hp (towards the end) and got smashed.

ATCC-We all know what happened there

BTCC- awd had about 100kg penalty, then got banned

JGTC- awd outlawed

WRC- 2wd last won a round in late 90s

Superlap- awd dominating..

The list goes on..

it also only ran 9" wide tyres while the GTR ran 11" wide tyres, so you can't accurately compare the 2. they were in different classes.

in the rwd vs awd argument it is worth considering the performance/lap times of the rwd porsches vs the awd 911 turbo. you will find that in most cases the 911 turbo (awd) is slower than the lighter, less powerful GT3. have a look through the nurburgring lap times and you will see that the 911 turbo comes in after the GT2 (rwd, but has more power), the carrera GT (obviously) and the GT3 RS (lighter, less pwoerful, RWD)

  • 1 month later...

There are way to many factors here.

Your never going to be able to drive a 800Hp GTS on Hard semi slicks... Obviously the class you want to run in will always be the biggest factor.

Say you do want a high HP GTS to run in Time attack with Semi-Slicks,

The GTS will obviously be struggling with corner exit and to help with this and the over-all drivability of the car you will have to make it squat, move around and soft. In turn reducing the good entry and mid corner speed you have just gained through the RWD platform and even still its going to be a handful, with half the amount of off the corner grip available in a GTR. When setting up a car you can only ever have two of the 3 aspects of a corner (Entry - Mid - Exit), corner exit should always be once of the chosen traits of the car. This will even be a more important trait of a car on semi-slicks because its the hardest trait to set a car up for with minimal grip, hence the domination of 4WD cars in the time attack series. Its interesting many people say 4WD induces understeer, i believe this is a common misconception, possibly caused by bad driving, bad setup, a combination of both or just the wrong style of driving suited best for a 4WD car. Mark Skaife described the Winfield R32 GTR to have the best turn in out of any car he has ever driven, it must also be noted that this car had minimal aero; go figure.

I'm also very doubtful if the GTS will weigh much less than a GTR, with high horsepower applications you will need a GTR rear end, Holinger Box, a solid tail shaft and diff. Brad Sherriffs R32 GTS in race spec, even fully lightened, Carbon Doors Etc, weighs the best part of 1350Kg

There has also been mention of the GT500 cars being RWD, firstly its a requirement, secondly; you must remember in GT500 the cars must be only 500hp and run slicks, making mechanical off the corner grip not the biggest of issues. These cars are also driven by some of the most experienced, accurate, precise and talented drivers in the world. I'm very doubtful that many drivers would have the talent to make a high horsepower GTS fast.

Yes a GTS has a lot of Pros, Reliability, Easier setups, cheaper Etc but for outright speed GTR will always dominate.

who ever "risking" is he sounds wise, experienced and knowledgable, he qoutes you just carnt keep front diffs in them, which is correct in moderate to big hp racecars (650 plus on race tyres) so is if reliablity is an issue (which it is front diff, front shaft) wise then is the subject reffering to 1 lap wonders or time attack style racing?

Out of intrest who has run there gtr at either philip island, calder or sandown?

was just wondering what times you fast guys are rattling out over there now as its been a good couple of years since ive run anything at those track and at the time 1.43 on a radial at the island and 1.16 and sandown and 63 or 4 s was the goods at calder, whats the goods these day

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

    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
    • Motor and body mockup. Wheel fitment and ride height not set. Last pic shows front ride height after modifying the front uprights to make a 1.25" drop spindle.
×
×
  • Create New...