Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys.

I've got Nismo S-Tunes in my R33 GTR.  I like the ride comfort and handling but at times you can still feel the car could do with something better.

I'm hoping to retain good comfort that the S-Tunes give but get better handling.  Has anyone here on a R33 GTR personally switched from S-Tunes to something else
and can give feedback?

I have read reports from a guy who went from S-Tunes to Ohlins and loved the difference in both handling with still soaking up the bumps well.
Having heard that feedback they will have to be the go, unless there is something locally produced in Australia that can be just as good if not better

Other option is MCA Reds which always appear to get recommended.    Oddly, Nismo and Ohlins have spring rates almost even, while MCA have the front almost double of the rear.

Hell even if the entry level MCA Comfort-Pro's are going to be better than dated Nismo design, I could start with them.

The car also does have 700hp, currently grips perfectly with no wheelspin, I was thinking to go the Ohlins as they aren't too heavy spring rates to help give some squat under power

Any advice appreciated keen to hear your experiences

Cheers.

Edited by RB335
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/480997-r33-gtr-upgrade-from-nismo-s-tune/
Share on other sites

Going off spring rates alone to gauge how harsh/firm they are doesn’t tell you much at all. You have valving and fluid used also to consider.

The springs in my current setup are 15 mm front/9 mm rear and are much better at soaking up a bad road than a set of “softer BC’s” (which feel like you have railway sleepers as suspension) and even Nismo S tunes.

You get what you pay for here and a $1099 set isn’t worth the box they come in. Might be 36,000 way adjustable but it’s hard, hard, hard, harder and hardest.

Bilstien PSS9’s and the Ohlin DFV’s are probably a good place to start or as you have already said, the guys at MCA. 
 

FWIW, I’ve had stock, Nismo S tunes, Nismo R tunes and the current setup which is Modified PSS9’s. 

  • Like 1

Do you have standard sway bars? If you do, and you're currently happy with the Nismo's, upgrade the sway bars first before looking at different shocks. They'll make the car more planted, especially during spirited driving, and if you get adjustable ones, you can tune the cars handling characteristics. How's the rest of the steering/suspension set-up/condition? Tyres etc. Must be okay if it hooks up with high h/p?

1 hour ago, White GTS-T said:

Do you have standard sway bars? If you do, and you're currently happy with the Nismo's, upgrade the sway bars first before looking at different shocks. They'll make the car more planted, especially during spirited driving, and if you get adjustable ones, you can tune the cars handling characteristics. How's the rest of the steering/suspension set-up/condition? Tyres etc. Must be okay if it hooks up with high h/p?

Whilst this is all true, it will conflict with MCA's approach, should you go down the path of getting coilovers from them. They are very much more in the "control roll with spring rate" camp rather than "control roll with bars" camp.

I can see the benefits of both approaches. Loss of independence side-to-side from using big bars is a negative. Hasn't stopped me from putting big adjustables on though. But then, mt spring rates are only in the 5kg/mm range.

16 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

Whilst this is all true, it will conflict with MCA's approach, should you go down the path of getting coilovers from them. They are very much more in the "control roll with spring rate" camp rather than "control roll with bars" camp.

I can see the benefits of both approaches. Loss of independence side-to-side from using big bars is a negative. Hasn't stopped me from putting big adjustables on though. But then, mt spring rates are only in the 5kg/mm range.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to hint towards. If the OP is currently happy with his Nismo's, upgraded sway bars might be just the thing he is looking for. Put it this way, it is cheaper and easier to upgrade the sway bars first, than go all out with some new shocks. 

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

    • https://www.facebook.com/share/19kSVAc4tc/?mibextid=wwXIfr
    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
×
×
  • Create New...