Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Knew the R888 were too 'soft' for our heavy cars :P.

I said something like that earlier in this thread and IIRC an mx5 guy said they were shit on his car too... So i guess they're just shit. Cheap tho.

  • 3 weeks later...

I am looking for a tyre that is good value for money and offers the best performance for the $$$ to have a go at a few track days.

The car it an R34 GTT. 320RWKW. coilovers, 350mm brakes etc.

I would be putting the tyres on a seperate set of rims to be put on to drive to the track, on the track and back home. Would be from Canberra to wakefield which is roughly 100km each way. I have a separate set of rims and tyres for daily driving.

Rims are:

Desmond Regamaster

17x9 + 38
17x8 +35

I was thinking of getting Nitto NT01

255 40 17

225 45 17

Should be able to get a full set of tyres for around $900. What do people think? Are there any better value options out there?

You talking about the soft compound Z221 - the C7?

How are they relative to the A050's?

There are part numbers on the Hankook website for the tyres which may line up.

So in 255/40/17 hard is 1010343, medium is 1012650 and soft is 1011508 apparently.

http://www.hankooktyre.com.au/Product/MotorsportTyreSemiSlick.aspx?pageNum=1&subNum=5&ChildNum=3#Z221

Just curious because I would like something a little harder than an A050 and better than an RE55. Almost everything else appears to be sht.

I am looking for a tyre that is good value for money and offers the best performance for the $$$ to have a go at a few track days.

The car it an R34 GTT. 320RWKW. coilovers, 350mm brakes etc.

I would be putting the tyres on a seperate set of rims to be put on to drive to the track, on the track and back home. Would be from Canberra to wakefield which is roughly 100km each way. I have a separate set of rims and tyres for daily driving.

Rims are:

Desmond Regamaster

17x9 + 38

17x8 +35

I was thinking of getting Nitto NT01

255 40 17

225 45 17

Should be able to get a full set of tyres for around $900. What do people think? Are there any better value options out there?

NT01's will be fine to drive to and from the track on but I'd probably run a wider front tyre if I were you. See if you can get the 255 to fit on the front, if not a 245.

  • 2 weeks later...

I learnt the hard way. Bought a pair of bargain secondhand 275 Z214 C51 "Mediums" for the back of the Soarer, only to find they were harder and less grippy than the 245 NT01s I had on there. I had NFI about the Hankook compounds at the time, but "medium" sounded like what I wanted for sprints. Wrong! They'r enot that old and had almost new tread, so at first I thought they might just have been cooked or heat cycled too many times. But a mate who runs C70s told me about the compounds... At least it was only $100 bucks wasted.

I bumped into the Hankook rep up here at a hillclimb and he explained the C70 "softs" as really being medium compound and the C50 "medium" is really a hard compound. C90 for Hillclimbs. C70 for Sprints. C50 if you want to do a 3hr race!

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months 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

    • 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...