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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
×
×
  • Create New...