Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking of getting an R32 GTR front bumper and lip, but i've heard that i cannot fit one on my R32 GTS-T as they are to wide.

My alternative is a fibreglass replica. I've heard that they break very easily and get cracks etc... are they really as bad as what i've heard? My car is quite low so im a little worried. I don't mind having to take alternative routes to avoid speedbumps and steep driveways, but i don't wanna buy something that's gonna crack in two weeks.

I'd prefer a response from someone that actually owns (or has owned) a fibreglass bumper that can offer some of their experiences and recommendations with a replica fibreglass bumper.

Cheers

well ive got a gtr front end (fibreglass one from UAS) on my 33 and its doin fine. It is super light (as u would expect) and in my opinion is tougher than the weight would suggest. Now my car is lowered and doesnt have a helluva lotta room for clearance between the ground and bottom of the front bar, and its been scraped along a few driveways and humps but has come up fine. It sounds terrrible when u do scrape it but its just in the underside of the bar and no one can see it anyway.

i think they are the goods at least...

fibreglass is crap.

i have a crack on one side of my front bar and its being held up by "race tape" on the other - both of which had to do with incidents involving driveways.

if you can get the real deal, get the real deal. original plastic absorbs a shitload more imho.

You can't get the "real deal" to fit on the GTST without getting the front guards and bonnet too.

gtst89 all the aftermarket kits are fibreglass apart from a couple of carbon fibre ones. The quality varies depending on who it's made by. The good news is it's tougher than you would think and is very easy to repair ....even diy with a little practise

i agree with gtst89 on that one.. just because you have a GTR bar doesn't make you a "GTR wannabe" just that it looks a heck of a lot nicer. Being a GTR wannabe would be putting GTR rims on it, flared front guards, and incorrect badging on there.

anyhow, when you can break it (not if), you can read my guide on how to fix it :) just be a bit careful and you should get a couple of years out of each bar.

I've also got a fibreglass bar on the front of my R33. It's been cracked, but I've repaired it myself... They're stronger than you might think.

I also don't think there's anything wrong with putting a GTR style bar on a GTS-t, the GTR bar's look cool I reckon. I like them.

Can you spot where it's been repaired??

gtst 89, nah sorry dude i don't have any, but there are afew people on here that have them, I am looking out for a genuine one that is a good price.

The "bend" isn't obvious when you put them on just makes the front look a little wider (which is good). But what ever you do, don't put the GTR badges on.

GTR bar will fit on GTS with VERY minimal work. GTR grille also clips in to headlight mould, and you can cut the front off the bonnet to let the grille fit. A Nismo air seperating bonnet lip tidies the front edge of the modified bonnet nicely.

It IS WORTH CHECKING with Nissan the cost of a new genuine bar and lower lip, they have recently halved in price! I reckon plastic is far superior to glass re longevity, and legal as well?

Cheers.

Can you spot where it's been repaired??

A good guess here, but right hand side at the vertical bar lowest point, a crack that has run up slightly from the left over to the right along the joint point of the right vertical bar, to the hole on the right.

It doesn't have the same look as the left hand side.

If that's not the repair then the bar wouldn't have been made right.

Fibreglas is two times stronger than an Iron I bar, The I bars are mainly used to hold up roofs in warehouses and stuff.

Carbon fibre is 4-5 times stronger than fibreglas.

The reason why it breaks is because it's usally thin, this saves on weight but it's strength should handle small bumps but if you bang scrape it badly or enough times it'll also break it, carbon fibre is lighter again as it isn't glass fibres, it's something else, it looks like yellow weaved mat when it hasn't been made into anything, it goes clear so the black stuff is black coloured resin.

In auto salon, they had a thing about this they were saying you should buy the real thing rather than buy a copy because most copies are made crap and won't look right, vilside get copied a lot and you can tell because one of the wings on the side isn't the same size as the other side.

Apprantly the companies also don't allow the resin to cure in the mould properly, and it can also have weak points, They have it make 100's per day so they can't aford to be waiting long times etc.

Also gelcoats etc might not have been applied correctly, so when you goto paint it some parts might ot paint properly, also could get osmosis if there's no gelcoat on fibreglas.

Depends I don't really like the copies myself as they have the trailer lights on them in the front which I think makes any cars with copied front bars look tacky and cheap ass.

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

    • 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.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...