Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I know it's not a FR Skyline, in fact, it's a FF Primera P11 with RNN14 SR20DET, wondering if someone has drove a FF before can give some advice.

The car has GTiR SR20DET, 2835R, 550 inj, 264CAMs, full coilover..

As the pic shown, it's close street circut race, 600M straight line and left turn1, 200M straight, then left turn 2, another 200M, then left turn 3, 200M then right turn 4 then 400M back to where it start.

Question1, what sort of setting will reduce under steer, which is normally happen to FF? say stiff up front sway barand softer rear sway bar? and what spring rate should but into consideration?

Question2, because it's short circut, what will be best line to get the best time?

thanks heaps..

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/40406-suspension-setting-for-ff/
Share on other sites

mmm, is this a computer game? :P

well....generally FF tend to be stiff at the front to maximise what traction is available and softer at the rear....

its a pretty short and simple track by the look of it....my suggestions would be:

brake as late as possible in the first corner, make the most of the speed on the straight...its only a short run after corner to the next so exit speed is not super important

brake earlier on the last corner and maxmise exit speed for the straight ahead....ie get the last corner right.

Other than that all I can suggest is the usual few tricks of trail braking and left foot braking.

Are there other cars on the track at the same time or just a timed sprint. If there are other cars just stay on the inside all track and hang everyone else out ;)

I know it's not a FR Skyline, in fact, it's a FF Primera P11 with RNN14 SR20DET, wondering if someone has drove a FF before can give some advice.

The car has GTiR SR20DET, 2835R, 550 inj, 264CAMs, full coilover..

As the pic shown, it's close street circut race, 600M straight line and left turn1, 200M straight, then left turn 2, another 200M, then left turn 3, 200M then right turn 4 then 400M back to where it start.

Question1, what sort of setting will reduce under steer, which is normally happen to FF? say stiff up front sway barand softer rear sway bar? and what spring rate should but into consideration?

Question2, because it's short circut, what will be best line to get the best time?

thanks heaps..

1. stiffer rear will create oversteer. spring rate depends on a number of things, weight dist included. sorry can't recommend but try whiteline

2. I'd try 'outide on the straights' and 'inside on the corners' on a cct this short

It's a sprint timed sprint, so they don't worry drive into other cars, in fact it's about 4 lans in width..lucky them got local goverment to close the main road for this event..

Stiffer rear would not increasing more under? what I done to my R33, is soft up my front and stiffer rear to make it more easy to steer, would FR opposit?

Also will treat those cornor as dpuble apex a good idea??

Well, I think 4 lane 90% turn is definately single apex thats quiet wide actually....depending on tyres you may not need to brake much at all....perhaps just dap the brakes on turn in to get the nose to come in and the tail to come out, and then back on the gas.

Gary...sorry, it's a Front engine, front wheel drive..

Cool, then I recommend a huge rear stabiliser bar (to assist the power down on exist), lots of caster (to assist the turn in) and a little negative camber (the corners are not long enough to need too much).

Lots of caster = wind it on till the front of the front wheels touch the front of the guards, then back it off a little. At least 8 degrees positive, the more the better.

I can't remember the standard rear stabiliser bar size, but you need at least a 300% increase in anti roll. The Whiteline web site has a table, look up the standard diameter and then look up the diameter you would need to achieve a 300% increase.

As for camber on the front, maybe 1 to 1.5 degrees negative. I'd keep the rears at zero camber.

If it is still reluctant to turn in, then add a bit of toe out to the rear. Around 3 mm each side is usually enough, but I have seen up to 8 mm used.

Hope that helps.

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...