Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yes

http://www.r33gt-r.com/2013/07/trunk-bar-another-noticeable.html

About fitting the ECR33, just look in your boot to see if there's any predrill holes, according to the blog, there is predrilled holes on r33 gtr series3

I don't think I have those hole predrilled though but will check tomorrow. Mine is a series 1 GTS-t let alone series 3 GTR lol. If they are not pre-drilled I wonder how hard it would be to drill them in and prevent rust?

Certian models of the s15...hmm? I guess I'll post in the WTB section and look around on ebay and maybe some wreckers.

It really does sound like you need new bushes mate, if the car takes a while to settle from a corner or a bump? Creaking? This would be due to worn out bushes and shocks.

If you can't afford all of them at once, just get upper and lower control arm bushes first, swaybar bushes are cheap. And then buy some solid strut tower bars front and rear and some sway bars front and rear and new shocks front and rear.

You are most definitely right about that too. If I brake hard enough in a straight line it will actually change the alignment of my front. The steering wheel will be pointing slightly differently and the feeling of "load" on the steering wheel will be shifted.

My suspension doesn't hold alignment from the 3-4 alligments I've done either. I think 1-2mm off. There is also a vagueness to the steering. I did replace the outer tie end rods but that didn't do much. What it did do is carry the slight wobbles to the steering wheel more while driving, until about 6 months passed and I guess the new tie end rods wore out again.

I also suspect I have a bearing issue which may be wearing out components I put in faster, like the tie end rods. I took it to my mechanic to replace them ( bearings) but he wobbled the wheel around with his hands and said its fine don't waste your money so I sort of gave up (still have the bearings and some control arm bushes but places like pedders want a fortune to fit them).

Point yes probably most of the steering and suspension is a mess. But that doesn't change the fact the body also wobbles excessively after the suspension has transferred its force. Someone else in the family also has a low km R33 and thats so much tighter.

I feel like even if I change all my bushes, the body will still slop. So I though id start with some minor bracing I can get my hands, even though i know the bushes have to be done at some point too.

You guys say bracing wont do much, but I figure solid pieces of steel bolted to crucial parts of the chassis that normally flex and deform, will do something rather than nothing. It has to. I cant imagine a under-body or fender brace, or trunk brace is going to stretch or flex much , but I I can imagine that a long ass 4-5 metre long chassis un-braced will.

Edited by sonicz

You guys say bracing wont do much, but I figure solid pieces of steel bolted to crucial parts of the chassis that normally flex and deform, will do something rather than nothing. It has to. I cant imagine a under-body or fender brace, or trunk brace is going to stretch or flex much , but I I can imagine that a long ass 4-5 metre long chassis un-braced will.

Here is your error. They WON'T do what you want them to do. They WILL NOT stop the motion in the direction you need them to stop.

The fender brace will help a bit. Almost anything that goes flat across the underside of the car can only do precious f**king little. If you do not box something in in 3 dimensions, then you are adding almost no resistance to twist. And twist is what YOU want to get rid of. And all those braces are pretty much only 2D.

/engineering.

  • Like 1

I don't think I have those hole predrilled though but will check tomorrow. Mine is a series 1 GTS-t let alone series 3 GTR lol. If they are not pre-drilled I wonder how hard it would be to drill them in and prevent rust?

Certian models of the s15...hmm? I guess I'll post in the WTB section and look around on ebay and maybe some wreckers.

Judging by your post, it sounds like bracing is not your problem so i would go with what others have suggested and try something else

Tie rod ends wouldn't wear down that quickly if you have just recently replaced it, check wheel bearing or LCA bushes

As for the brace, they are standard on ALL s15s

Here is your error. They WON'T do what you want them to do. They WILL NOT stop the motion in the direction you need them to stop.

The fender brace will help a bit. Almost anything that goes flat across the underside of the car can only do precious f**king little. If you do not box something in in 3 dimensions, then you are adding almost no resistance to twist. And twist is what YOU want to get rid of. And all those braces are pretty much only 2D.

/engineering.

200% agreed. That's why I suggest a full cage. It will make that uni-body chassis have nearly .0001% flex. I understand cages are a pain in the ass for a daily but what the guy is wanting is literally the only way to achieve it. You can't achieve a stiff anti-flex chassis with braces. You might get a couple done but it will allow other areas to flex that can't handle it. I've crack front and rear glass before twisting frames up. But first thing I'd do if I had his car is take it to a body shop to get the doors realigned. Then work on stiffing.

they are standard on ALL s15s

spec-R I believe, not S?

That back-of-boot brace for the r33 gtr got a "noticeable difference" from the driver. I'm inclined to make something myself though which I don't think will cost that much and will be a bit more solid, ie, exhaust shop to bend a section of tube to run across back between mounting points, then welded to probably 3mm steel plates, bolted to chassis rails using existing 4xbolt holes as mentioned.

I could see the benefit of the front 1/4 panel triangular braces and it seems they're pretty popular/widely used so will be looking into that further too.

The B-pillar/floor brace - i get it in principle, as in using a 20?cm section of chassis rails either side joined to reduce twist, but given overall length of car/chassis rail, could see it making minimal difference.

Problem is, OP says his 33 is a lot sloppier than others he's driven (IIRC - a while since I read the full thread). If that's the case, then start with bushes and joints as they're consumable items and likely to wear out. If it isn't the bushes, and the chassis is indeed as flimsy as OP says, then we (he) have a big problem. Why is the chassis so loose? Putting in "cheap, bolt-on" braces will only partly mask the underlying problem, and will treat the symptom but not the root cause. This will never end well and I strongly suggest finding the root cause of the problem before it can be properly fixed. The bolt on braces may improve the car, but it will still be only as good as a standard car. Where's the fun in that?

/reliability engineering

that chinese place I can't remember the name of (KLS maybe?) also have r33 cages on ebay for $450ish new. No idea of fit/quality but if it was more for bracing purposes, it would be a good price.

even tho OP has said multiple time he doesn't want a frickin cage;) ...just putting it out there tho..

To the OP... if the chassis is as bad as u make it out to be... then braces may not work. a case of being "pound foolish penny wise" ?

if its really THAT bad, maybe u shd take a long hard in-depth look and figure out the problem before spending $$ on cheap braces. although cheap, they are not free and costs will add up eventually...plus... it sounds kinda unsafe to drive in if it flexes that much...

Would be cost effective to pay someone on here to have a look at your car.

They will be able to give you a run down sheet on what needs fixing and what will give you the best bang for buck and where to start.

From what you said about your wheel alignments and steering wheel shake, you REALLY NEED TO CHANGE YOUR BUSHES. :) Please just trust us on this. Start from the basics, which is to have somebody on here who knows skylines and who is a mechanic who will give you a list to get you to where you want the car to be. Once this is done, brace up.

I been reading this and heres my 2c:

Something isnt right with this car. If its actually flexing as much as described, its either been badly bent and not repaired properly, has huge mileage or been hammered over bad roads for a long period of time. Skylines are pretty robust in general and take a lot of punishment but any car has its limits. Even my 35 sedan flexes a tiny bit, but lubricating the door seals gets rid of all the noises

As suggested above, take it to a pro first before buying bracing bits. A decent panelbater would be a good place to start, chuck it up on a hoist and check the rails, floors, subframe mounting points, rust, cracks, bad repairs etc. A lot of stuff can be hidden under sound deadener

And if it really is that bad, the cost of fixing wont be worth it. Part it out and scrap the shell instead

another idea for some bracing, not hugely popular here, is sill/rail rigid foam injection. nissan did this with the infiniti Q45 back in the 90s

this stuff is meant to be good for it - http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/Marine/Home/Products/Catalog/?PC_Z7_RJH9U5230GE3E02LECIE20S4K7000000_nid=GSLTMTP63TgsQH8HT14PGTglJ3XN7JWC1Cbl

slight hijack, but since relevant to the thread topic - after not finding the chassis braces I want, thinking I will just make my own. My understanding is, given an equal diameter and wall thickness, square tube will be stronger and flex less than round tube, is that right?

No. Two things need to be considered. When you say "equal diameter and wall thickness" you have to declare whether you mean the length of a side on your square is the same as the diameter of your round, or whether you mean "the same equivalent diameter".

If you mean the exact same dimension, then the square tube actually has more material in it (the perimeter of the square is 4.D but the perimeter of the round is only Pi.D, or about 3/4 of the square). This gives the square an advantage simply from having more material. If you mean the same equivalent diameter, then you're effectively making the square smaller so that the perimeter is the same and the amount of material is the same. Then the square should be weaker.

Square tube has corners. Corners are weak. Round tubes transfer load like an arch, all the way around.

Round cromolly tube. But it is an engineering exercise. You have to know what sort of loads will be put into the braces you want to make in order to know how heavy you have to make them. If you just guess you will most likely end up with one of the unacceptable solutions rather than falling into the narrow acceptable range. The unacceptable solutions are a) you underdo it and have a brace which deflects under the load applied or b) you overdo it and the brace is far too strong and therefore far too heavy for the benefit gained.

As most of these braces are intended to go between two (or more) points that are actually not supposed to move relative to each other and are not supposed to have loads running between them, it's a little hard to know how to go about working out what the real loads are so you can design for them. So you probably have to fall back on guessing, and so you don't end up with unacceptable solution a) which is totally useless, you need to overdo it. But whether that means that you need 1" 3mm wall tube or 1.5" 5mm wall tube (or any other size that comes to mind), I dunno.

cheers

  • Like 1

Lol...since the weight difference we're talking will be a matter of 100g, not even kilos, the weight i don't think will really become a factor. If we look at the stock strutbraces fitted front/rear as an example, i don't think it even has to be that thick-walled, so will use them as a comparitve starting point and see hos it goes.

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

    • Well, that's kinda the point. The calipers might interfere with the inside of the barrels 16" rims are only about 14" inside the barrels, which is ~350mm, and 334mm rotors only leave about 8mm outboard for the caliper before you get to 350, And.... that;s not gunna be enough. If the rims have a larger ID than that, you might sneak it in. I'd be putting a measuring stick inside the wheel and eyeballing the extra required for the caliper outboard of the rotor before committing to bolting it all on.
    • OK, so again it has been a bit of a break but it was around researching what had been done since I didn't have access to Neil's records and not everything is obvious without pulling stuff apart. Happily the guy who assembled the engine had kept reasonable records, so we now know the final spec is: Bottom end: Standard block and crank Ross 86.5mm forgies, 9:1 compression Spool forged rods Standard main bolts Oil pump Spool billet gears in standard housing Aeroflow extended and baffled sump Head Freshly rebuilt standard head with new 80lb valve springs Mild porting/port match Head oil feed restrictor VCT disabled Tighe 805C reground cams (255 duration, 8.93 lift)  Adjustable cam gears on inlet/exhaust Standard head bolts, gasket not confirmed but assumed MLS External 555cc Nismo injectors Z32 AFM Bosch 023 Intank fuel pump Garret 2871 (factory housings and manifold) Hypertune FFP plenum with standard throttle   Time to book in a trip to Unigroup
    • I forgot about my shiny new plates!
    • Well, apparently they do fit, however this wont be a problem if not because the car will be stationary while i do the suspension work. I was just going to use the 16's to roll the old girl around if I needed to. I just need to get the E90 back on the road first. Yes! I'm a believer! 🙌 So, I contacted them because the site kinda sucks and I was really confused about what I'd need. They put together a package for me and because I was spraying all the seat surfaces and not doing spot fixes I decided not to send them a headrest to colour match, I just used their colour on file (and it was spot on).  I got some heavy duty cleaner, 1L of colour, a small bottle of dye hardener and a small bottle of the dye top coat. I also got a spray gun as I needed a larger nozzle than the gun I had and it was only $40 extra. From memory the total was ~$450 ish. Its not cheap but the result is awesome. They did add repair bits and pieces to the quote originally and the cost came down significantly when I said I didn't need any repair products. I did it over a weekend. The only issues I had were my own; I forgot to mix the hardener into the dye two coats but I had enough dye for 2 more coats with the hardener. I also just used up all the dye because why not and i rushed the last coat which gave me some runs. Thankfully the runs are under the headrests. The gun pattern wasn't great, very round and would have been better if it was a line. It made it a little tricky to get consistent coverage and I think having done the extra coats probably helped conceal any coverage issues. I contacted them again a few months later so I could get our X5 done (who the f**k thought white leather was a good idea for a family car?!) and they said they had some training to do in Sydney and I could get a reduced rate on the leather fix in the X5 if I let them demo their product on our car. So I agreed. When I took Bec in the E39 to pick it up, I showed them the job I'd done in my car and they were all (students included) really impressed. Note that they said the runs I created could be fixed easily at the time with a brush or an air compressor gun. So, now with the two cars done I can absolutely recommend Colourlock.  I'll take pics of both interiors and create a new thread.
    • Power is fed to the ECU when the ignition switch is switched to IGN, at terminal 58. That same wire also connects to the ECCS relay to provide both the coil power and the contact side. When the ECU sees power at 58 it switches 16 to earth, which pulls the ECCS relay on, which feeds main power into the ECU and also to a bunch of other things. None of this is directly involved in the fuel pump - it just has to happen first. The ECU will pull terminal 18 to earth when it wants the fuel pump to run. This allows the fuel pump relay to pull in, which switches power on into the rest of the fuel pump control equipment. The fuel pump control regulator is controlled from terminal 104 on the ECU and is switched high or low depending on whether the ECU thinks the pump needs to run high or low. (I don't know which way around that is, and it really doesn't matter right now). The fuel pump control reg is really just a resistor that controls how the power through the pump goes to earth. Either straight to earth, or via the resistor. This part doesn't matter much to us today. The power to the fuel pump relay comes from one of the switched wires from the IGN switch and fusebox that is not shown off to the left of this page. That power runs the fuel pump relay coil and a number of other engine peripherals. Those peripherals don't really matter. All that matters is that there should be power available at the relay when the key is in the right position. At least - I think it's switched. If it's not switched, then power will be there all the time. Either way, if you don't have power there when you need it (ie, key on) then it won't work. The input-output switching side of the relay gains its power from a line similar (but not the same as) the one that feeds the ECU. SO I presume that is switched. Again, if there is not power there when you need it, then you have to look upstream. And... the upshot of all that? There is no "ground" at the fuel pump relay. Where you say: and say that pin 1 Black/Pink is ground, that is not true. The ECU trigger is AF73, is black/pink, and is the "ground". When the ECU says it is. The Blue/White wire is the "constant" 12V to power the relay's coil. And when I say "constant", I mean it may well only be on when the key is on. As I said above. So, when the ECU says not to be running the pump (which is any time after about 3s of switching on, with no crank signal or engine speed yet), then you should see 12V at both 1 and 2. Because the 12V will be all the way up to the ECU terminal 18, waiting to be switched to ground. When the ECU switches the fuel pump on, then AF73 should go to ~0V, having been switched to ground and the voltage drop now occurring over the relay coil. 3 & 5 are easy. 5 is the other "constant" 12V, that may or may not be constant but will very much want to be there when the key is on. Same as above. 3 goes to the pump. There should never be 12V visible at 3 unless the relay is pulled in. As to where the immobiliser might have been spliced into all this.... It will either have to be on wire AF70 or AF71, whichever is most accessible near the alarm. Given that all those wires run from the engine bay fusebox or the ECU, via the driver's area to the rear of the car, it could really be either. AF70 will be the same colour from the appropriate fuse all the way to the pump. If it has been cut and is dangling, you should be able to see that  in that area somewhere. Same with AF71.   You really should be able to force the pump to run. Just jump 12V onto AF72 and it should go. That will prove that the pump itself is willing to go along with you when you sort out the upstream. You really should be able to force the fuel pump relay on. Just short AF73 to earth when the key is on. If the pump runs, then the relay is fine, and all the power up to both inputs on the relay is fine. If it doesn't run (and given that you checked the relay itself actually works) then one or both of AF70 and AF71 are not bringing power to the game.
×
×
  • Create New...