Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think what Steve-SST is trying to say is that the times he did are done on regular street tyres that about 90% of skyline owners would use. NOT semi-slick soft compound nitto's.

To me his times are more impressive because if by going by SydneyKids posts he said his nittos would attribute to 0.5second better pass over the 1/4. I think he is also trying to say that tyres you use for regular street driving wont have the same grip as the nittos.

Now we all know that the nittos are classes and accepted as street legal tyres. Thats all well and good, but just think about the fast times that Steve and his cars are running without the assistance of semi-slick soft compound tyres. It impresses me.

I think another GTR doing impressive times on 'normal' street tyres is the Brisbane Street Machines 32 GTR that ran with Federal road tyres. *cant remember its time off the top of my head, but it was damn quick

I think another GTR doing impressive times on  'normal' street tyres is the Brisbane Street Machines 32 GTR that ran with Federal road tyres. *cant remember its time off the top of my head, but it was damn quick

Yep its another very fast GTR but sort of makes me wonder how it can be called a street anything even using Federal tyres when all it runs is C16 fuel, the inside of the exhaust is as white as my arse hahaha :)

Hmmm... it's interesting to note what each of us considers a "street tyre".

I personally think that NT555R Nittos ARE a true street tyre. I use them on the rear as my daily driven rubber. I also use RE540S's as my everyday rubber on the front. Both of these are true road legal radial tyres that anyone of us can use all day everyday. Sure, they may well give a grip advantage over non semi-comp rubber, but the same can be said of top-of-the-range Bridgestone S03 and the like vs. POS retreads!

IMHO if it's a treaded radial that is road legal in Australia it IS a "street tyre" A cross-ply slick or semi-slick (e.g Mickey Thompson ET Street) is NOT a street tyre.

whatsisname

mate I agree with you 100% I also use Nittos 555R as my everyday tyres, to me its really no different then changing suspension or upgrading your turbo you do it or use them to go faster but are the cars using different suspension or other modifications not true street cars aswell?

Its like because we're smart enough to take advantage of a good grippy tyre we're cheating hahaha I think its silly

My definition of street tyre, have a look at the cheap and nasty $140 a corner tyre i use. :Oops:

Anything that costs more then the cheapest Nankang is a race tyre :)

I have only ever used the cheapest Falken (451s or something) or D01J/RE55... nothing in betwwen. Ill have an accident one day then i will see the point of having a nice $300 road tyre. :Oops:

LOOKSHUREEE!!!! You need to get up at 2 in the morning, half an hour before you go te bed and lick road clean wit toong!

Ahem!

unlike the screamer pipe and most likely the other 20 modifications on most of our cars that are running the times :)

Screamer pipes? Oh you mean the people running the times with bigger turbos.... okay :D

Adrian

i'm sure there a heap of things we all do or use that technically make us not a true street car

I don't have a TRUE street car because I use or have used:

1/ Nittos

2/ Nitrous

3/ VHT On the track

4/ A level drag strip

5/ Buster as my pit bitch

As you can see, I am a dirty friggin cheaterer!!!

Adrian

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...