Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

the point of fitting the R30 rear is to get disc brakes. 180B's dont have discs, and the C110 already has an R180 so there would be no point that i can see for going to the trouble of fitting a 180B rear cradle.....Hmmm 200B SSS *might* have discs......that would be worth checking out.

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

perhaps a trailing a-arm off a dutsun 1600 is close, or if not at least the diff a r160 or r200 diff will be the same as alot of the datto boys have rear disc conversions using r32 skyline rear stuff if you wanna find out i can sell you the rear brakes, driveshafts and trailing arm for $350 with disc brakes!!! It works on a 1600 like a dream!!!

i meant r31 skylines...

also checked with the old man the disc and caliper isnt intregal to the trailing arm there is just a bracket that can be mounted to your trailing arm, so it should work, is the 240k 4 stud pattern?????

Also if you need good front brakes i have brand new 270mm discs with comodore calipers all modified mounted to a 180b strut bottom which can be made to suit a 240k!!!!

The amount of 1600 and 180b stuff i have im happy to part with as much stuff as possible!!!! but ill hang on to my 1000 and 1200 parts with dear life (to rare)!!

if this stuff fits a 1600 it *should* fit a C110, but im pretty certain tha a arms will be a different width....

R200 are not the same as an r160...the rear mounting braket has to be modded to fit an r200.......and r200 are cv joints, r160 is uni joint

Thanks Daniel and Jason,

i figured that the 1600 and C110 rears may be similar (seeing as many of the brake components are the same) and some pics would be a great help

Unfortunately my knowledge in older nissans is really lacking :) makes it very hard to figure out what components can be transposed onto the car, all your advice and ideas are unbelieveably helpful!

I had read a conversion faq on converting the 1600 drums into disks.. it didn't seem to hard (apart from the fabricating etc :P) i will try and find it again and see what you guys think..

Daniel, i will check out over the weekend what we already have on the front, i know we have kyb height adjustable suspension, and the brakes have already been swapped out, though i havn't looked at them in too much detail (i am 80% sure they will need to be bigger for what we are doing though)

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

How did I miss this one??

Yup, I'm the fool who bought the P76 V8 powered (and I use the term loosely) :D 240K.

The rear suspension in the 240K is differend from a 1600 (apart from size) in that the shocks mount at an angle, rather than almose vertical, like the 1600 does.

As V8Skylineman has said, the R30 rear control arms use a coilover setup, as opposed to the 240k, which uses a separate spring seat and shock mount. I'm very dubious about the effectiveness of a coilover setup on the back of a 240K, because of the angled shock absorbers, and the lack of height available to fit a decent coilover system in there.

The MR30 rear discs should fit in without any major mods. That's what Dave Gaines uses in his giant killing 240k rally car. I have a set of R30 control arms, complete with discs, and plan to trial fit the discs sometime in the next few weeks (will try to get to the workshop this weekend for a better look).. Once I've had a chance to do this, I will report back here.

Oh, I'm pretty sure that R200's were aalso available with Universals (in some 260Z 2+2's). All of the modern Nissans use the CV's though.

Hey, V8SkylineMan - are you still at Coomera Shores? I thought you moved down to Sydney??

good to see more 240k's showing up on the forums!

i have learnt a lot about the suspension since my original posts.. we are currently working on upgrading the rear brakes to R31 disks, then we will be eventually looking at getting an R200 in, preferably converting the rear half shafts to CV joints in the process..

finally got my hands on an RB25DE wiring loom, so we will start concentrating on getting that all hooked up, our RB30DE put together (T will come a little later on down the track), and finding a gearbox to start work on fitting the engine in the car.. then the rest of the fun begins!

  • 6 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

    • 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...