Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Offset subframes issue.....anyone got a cure

I've got the same problem that a lot of the S-Chassis and R-Chassis suffer from, the subframes on my R32 GT-R cause the wheels to fill the guards differently. I have the left rear wheel sticking out further and the right front wheel out further......it looks odd!

i have searched and read everything on the site and there are quite a few people who have the same problem but no one seems to have a cure.

i have talked to a few Nissan and alignment specialist and it is quite when you run big offset wheels.

Does anyone make an offset subframe bush set for the rear? What about the front.....slot the subframe and machine some inserts? Whiteline make some offset bushes to adjust on the caster and top front camber arms, what about using the offset metal inserts in these with some custom urathane bushes?

Any thoughts?

yes adjustable lower control arms, and adj camber/traction arms. Set it exactly how you want to the mm, and get a better wheel alignment too.

Anything else I can help you with :P

Is there an actual misalignment problem or does it just look like it? If there is an actual problem then how much by? A good laser aligner will show this which tells you how much change is needed. From then on it's just a matter of making the appropriate changes, I had some vague idea that eccentric subframe mounting bushes were available.

  • Like 1
38 minutes ago, 260DET said:

Is there an actual misalignment problem or does it just look like it? If there is an actual problem then how much by? A good laser aligner will show this which tells you how much change is needed. From then on it's just a matter of making the appropriate changes, I had some vague idea that eccentric subframe mounting bushes were available.

A lot of S14/R33 era cars had the subframe a good 10-15mm to one side.  It's real.

  • Like 1

 

8 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

A lot of S14/R33 era cars had the subframe a good 10-15mm to one side.  It's real.

Up  to 15mm? That's a warranty issue surely although it may be just a bit late for that. The local excellent aligner reckons up to 3mm is common, that's on any car.

When they're up on tippie toes with skinny arse stock wheels, you can;t really notice.  When you drop them and try to fill the guards is when you notice it.  It may have been for a reason, but everyone is buggered if they can come up with a good one!

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...

You can buy SPOON Rigid Collars from here...

http://www.rigidcollar.com.au/HOME.html

 

I just bought the rear set and will be putting them in when I have a chance as I noticed my rear wheels are to the left by about 3-4mm.

1 hour ago, GTSBoy said:

That's not really a solution to this problem though.  That's just solid bushes that are probably still concentric.  To move the subframe one way or the other to change its centering relative to the body, you need eccentric bushes/collars/whatever.

I have the exact same issue as you.. Read up on what these things actually do and how they fix the problem.. The holes where the bolts from the chassis go through the subframe have become larger over time which enables this to happen..

http://www.speedhunters.com/2011/06/car_life_gt_gt_fitting_rigid_collars_to_the_gt_r/

1 hour ago, GRKGTR said:

I have the exact same issue as you.. Read up on what these things actually do and how they fix the problem.. The holes where the bolts from the chassis go through the subframe have become larger over time which enables this to happen..

http://www.speedhunters.com/2011/06/car_life_gt_gt_fitting_rigid_collars_to_the_gt_r/

The holes in the sub frame do not become larger over time, they are drilled larger from factory to help with the assembly process. These are cars that are built on an assembly line, not hand built like a Bugatti Veyron or a Ferrari 458, Nissan gives zero f**ks for a something that is out up to 5mm (case in point the rear of the car being offset in one direction) all they care about is how cheaply they can make something.

With the rear of the car the diameter of the pin that holds the sub frame are 20mm and the holes drilled in the sub frame bushes are 21.4mm. How is the spoon kit going to push the sub frame 5-10 mm to one side?

I did have a laugh at Mr speedhunters article, this quote was one of the best

This picture perfectly shows the problem the Rigid Collars address. You can see how the subframe has moved around and the bolt is far from centered, not to mention the offset bolt marks left on the subframe.

If the sub frame was moving around there would be paint off everywhere around the nut, the sub frame was bolted up that way from factory and hasn't moved since, it looks like that was the first time is has been undone since new. Another thing that i found weird is why didn’t he post a picture of the nuts done up once the collars were installed to show the difference they made?

9 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

The little bit of slop available from the OEM tolerance is not enough to explain the 10-15mm offset that you see in many R33s though.

This guy gets it.

  • Like 1

I had this issue, fitted some lower offset rims to my R32 GTR and immediately noticed that one side stuck out further than the other. Dropped the subframe out, replaced with solid alloy mounts which fixed it to some degree. Then installed adjustable lower LCAs which really only needed a couple of mm adjustment on one side, now got it looking sweet. It's a pain to fix but you can get it done if you're that anal, like me.

  • Like 1

I was always under the impression that "offset" issue was caused by flogged out OEM subframe bushes. 

I removed and replaced my subframe bushes with Hardrace ones and don't really have the said issue. Running 255 semis  (which stick out even more than normal tyres) with 17x9+30 wheels they have equal amounts of space each side.

Even when I had 18x9+20 BBS wheels with 265 tyres they were spaced equally. 

On 20/01/2017 at 2:13 PM, niZmO_Man said:

I don't read Speedhunters for their articles <insert something about playboy magazines>. They've proven themselves not to be that knowledgeable and have some 'product placement' in it as well.

Yep.. like how a set of Tomei ARMS turbos were installed for "response". LOL x 100000

  • Like 3
  • 4 weeks 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

    • 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...