Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys, have a 32 gts and was looking at putting 32 gtst rear brakes on it. i got hold of some brakes, lines and rotors that came off a r31.

which i thought i killed 2 birds with 1 stone with getting 4 stud rotors.

BUT turns out the center of the rotor that goes over handbrake shoes is to deep and when wheel is tightend up fully it fowls the hub and

wont let wheels spin >_<

so just wondering what rotors i need to get? 32 gtst 1s and redrill to 4 stud? has anyone else ran into this issue?

should also add that front is already upgraded to 32 gtr calipers and rotors before people think im a total nut lol.

thanks in advance

beau

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/387408-upgrading-brakes-need-help/
Share on other sites

im thinking the best/easiest/cheapest upgrade for you would be to throw on R33 brake calipers/rotors/5stud hubs etc, that would open up a whole lot of wheel options for you as well, the 31 stuff taint the best especially the handbrake setup

sorry i musnt have made sence.

the only thing 31 is the actual rotor, standard 32 handbrake set up and 32 gtst calipers...

only reason i tried those rotors was cause they are 4 stud already.

not too keen on goin 5 stud as i have a set of LMGT4's on it now which i think look good!

thanks for your reply though dude.

cheers beau

The majority of the breaking effort is taken by the FRONT brakes. I can't see any great benefit in changing / upgrading the rear brakes.

Not quite...

With regards to the rear brakes, probably the biggest mistake people make is neglecting the rear because they beleive it does less work. Yes it's true that the rear 'axle' as a component does less of the overal vehicle braking, but it's also got substantially smaller hardware in which to do it with, so the actual 'brakes' themselves can often work nearly as hard as the front ones do. What can happen if you neglect the rear is that end starts to fade out slowly without you noticing, and it puts more pressure on the fronts, which causes them to fade, and people blame the front for a problem caused by the rear.

Yuh, the overall lesson is not to upgrade the rears on their own, but if you do a reasonable upgrade on the front then you should upgrade the rears as well if you can.

Even a smallish upgrade on the front will change the balance. I was convinced I had too much rear bias with standard R32 brakes. Same pads all around, which was probably the cause - I think OEm pads use a better coefficient pad material on the front. Anyway, put R33 calipers and discs on the front, so a small overall upgrade, but significantly changed the behaviour of the car. Wasn't so likely to lock a rear brake any more (especially the inner rear when late braking heavily into a corner). Much improved the balance in my estimation. If I were to use adaptors to push my front calipers out to use 324mm rotors, I'd start to worry about overdoing the bias change.

interesting replys guys, making me think i should get these rear brakes on, as i have 32gtr fronts and 32 gts rears.

that cant be good for the balance... :O

so back to 1st question has anyone upgraded 32 gts brakes and what to and how did they go about it???

cheers beau

Well, the answer to that question would have to be another question.....Wouldn't it be trivial to upgrade to GTSt brakes?

And yes, I know you said you've got some 4 stud wheels you want to keep, but that's a different problem. What are you running for front wheels?

Edited by GTSBoy

ummm any given brake set up? Ok... Im asking the question if these are good to use as I want to better my rear brakes, no need to be narky mate, im greatful for the help though... And my 1st question was what rotors can I use with the 4 stud gts rear hand brake set up, if 32 turbo rotors will fit, thats exactly what ill do as I have done that with the fronts... But I didnt want to go ahead and order them if they were going to turn out to deep like the ones iv just tried

Cheers

I wasn't being narky.

Have you looked at the DBA site's disc catalogue to see how compatible the R32 NA and turbo discs are (in terms of how they connect to the hub, hat depth, the size of the handbrake surface inside, as much as anything else, and ignoring the 5 stud/4stud thing)?

looked at r33 gts brakes? The non turbo r33 front brakes are basically the same size as the turbo r32 brakes so i'd imagine the 33 non turbo rears would be a good option, plus they're already 4 stud

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...