Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have tried searching for a new set of press in bushings for the front transverse link because they have tears in them. I cant seem to find any bushings for the r34 gtr and now i am wondering if I need to buy the whole link/arm on both sides? Are these bushings not ment to be pressed in and out or something?

On 8/6/2022 at 6:13 AM, The Skyline Guy said:

I have tried searching for a new set of press in bushings for the front transverse link because they have tears in them. I cant seem to find any bushings for the r34 gtr and now i am wondering if I need to buy the whole link/arm on both sides? Are these bushings not ment to be pressed in and out or something?

You may be able to get the bushing for them if you're willing to do a lot of digging and experimentation. As far as I can tell they look an awful lot like the R33/R32 GTR tension rod bushings. The trouble is Nismo does not cross-list compatibility for those bushings with the R34 GTR. To me this implies that they are in fact a different spec. If you are willing to convert to R33 GTR/R34 N1 spec lower control arm + tension rods then the bushing is 54476-RS580 if you want the Nismo part, 54476-05U00 if you want Nissan OEM. Unlike the street-spec R34 aluminum control arm these are steel and increase unsprung weight but they are adjustable. Nismo sells this conversion still if you want the silver paint and Nismo logo under part number 54460-RRR45. If you look at the Nissan parts diagram they mention explicitly that the "components are not for sale" so this will be an uphill battle. The easiest way if you can just parts cannon your way out of this is to buy the now Nismo Heritage part number for the whole control arm, LH is 54501-RHR40, RH is 54500-RHR40.

On 8/6/2022 at 3:03 PM, Duncan said:

Got a pic or diagram of the bush you are after?

https://nissan.epc-data.com/skyline/bnr34/3957-rb26dett/trans/401/54501/

image.thumb.png.665d981057bce2bc364cddda0ac2b5ca.png

But. But. But..... No-one puts standard bushings in the (I assume you mean the) radius rod. Urethane at the minimum, otherwise bin the stock arm and put something with spherical joints in there. The stock rubber bushings are horrible. All squishy and allow ridiculous amounts of fore-aft movement in the lower arm.

On 8/6/2022 at 11:07 PM, GTSBoy said:

But. But. But..... No-one puts standard bushings in the (I assume you mean the) radius rod. Urethane at the minimum, otherwise bin the stock arm and put something with spherical joints in there. The stock rubber bushings are horrible. All squishy and allow ridiculous amounts of fore-aft movement in the lower arm.

Only reason why I'm skeptical of poly bushings is because they can make a lot of noise, for now I'm just running the Nismo rubber bushings. I'm still unclear on why the various poly bushing vendors out there crosslist the R34 and R33/R32 GTR radius rod bushing when Nissan does not.

On 8/8/2022 at 5:53 AM, joshuaho96 said:

Only reason why I'm skeptical of poly bushings is because they can make a lot of noise, for now I'm just running the Nismo rubber bushings. I'm still unclear on why the various poly bushing vendors out there crosslist the R34 and R33/R32 GTR radius rod bushing when Nissan does not.

You're talking about a joint that hardly has any rotational motion at all (in degrees) but takes a simply massive longitudinal load. Hydrolastic OEM bushes can go die in a fire in that application.

I had urethane bushes in my front radius rods for 10 years and they never made a noise. They don't even require lube to not make a noise, as they don't move (rotationally) more than the urethane will take internally anyway. But I abandoned even urethane for the simple joys of sphericals. And please do not bitch about NVH. For the same reasons that urethane is not a problem (not that it's a problem anywhere, anyway), the radius rod bushes are the single least likely place for you to notice any extra NVH from sphericals, yet they are the single best place to have them to improve the feel of the front end.

As to urethane bushing manufacturers/vendors cross listing radius rod bushes between 33 and 34 GTRs..... perhaps the most trusted such manufacturer, Whiteline, does not. They only list the bushes for the 32&33, not the 34. A la Nissan. However, as nearly everything else in the 33/34 chassis is interchangeable, I'd be surprised that the physical dimensions of the bush are different. It would surely just be that Nissan had a change of spec of the squishy juice they kept inside them, rather than anything truly incompatible. Or....maybe there was a difference in the lower control arms that I'm not aware of....that actually rings a bell. Did they not go to alloy, or something? But the upshot is, bushes are typically only ~$200, so don't cost/lose much if you (or, the OP in this case) buy, try and fail. But I wouldn't even bother. Just go straight to sphericals.

And, for further corroboration, or confusion if you want to take it that way, several trusted manufacturers of radius rods do not cross list the 33 and 34 GTR either.

On 8/7/2022 at 4:05 PM, GTSBoy said:

You're talking about a joint that hardly has any rotational motion at all (in degrees) but takes a simply massive longitudinal load. Hydrolastic OEM bushes can go die in a fire in that application.

I had urethane bushes in my front radius rods for 10 years and they never made a noise. They don't even require lube to not make a noise, as they don't move (rotationally) more than the urethane will take internally anyway. But I abandoned even urethane for the simple joys of sphericals. And please do not bitch about NVH. For the same reasons that urethane is not a problem (not that it's a problem anywhere, anyway), the radius rod bushes are the single least likely place for you to notice any extra NVH from sphericals, yet they are the single best place to have them to improve the feel of the front end.

As to urethane bushing manufacturers/vendors cross listing radius rod bushes between 33 and 34 GTRs..... perhaps the most trusted such manufacturer, Whiteline, does not. They only list the bushes for the 32&33, not the 34. A la Nissan. However, as nearly everything else in the 33/34 chassis is interchangeable, I'd be surprised that the physical dimensions of the bush are different. It would surely just be that Nissan had a change of spec of the squishy juice they kept inside them, rather than anything truly incompatible. Or....maybe there was a difference in the lower control arms that I'm not aware of....that actually rings a bell. Did they not go to alloy, or something? But the upshot is, bushes are typically only ~$200, so don't cost/lose much if you (or, the OP in this case) buy, try and fail. But I wouldn't even bother. Just go straight to sphericals.

And, for further corroboration, or confusion if you want to take it that way, several trusted manufacturers of radius rods do not cross list the 33 and 34 GTR either.

The R34 GTR in specific (all but N1 spec) had a special lower aluminum lower control arm that combined the "transverse link" with the radius rod into a single non-adjustable piece. You can see it in the linked parts diagram, they have the N1 part which has the same design as the R33 with the separate transverse link and a radius rod that bolts into that and the normal R34 GTR part. As mentioned earlier Nismo actually sells this conversion with a bit of extra welding and a coat of silver paint for big money. So I am skeptical that sites listing the same bushing for both generations without qualification.

If I ever do need to replace a bushing I'll probably do more research but that's probably immaterial to what OP is asking about.

34 GTR has a stupid idea with the one piece lower control arm and caster rods. These can just be changed out to R33/R32 GTR separate caster and lower control arms apparently. @GTRNUR on here did this

On 8/7/2022 at 7:04 PM, BK said:

34 GTR has a stupid idea with the one piece lower control arm and caster rods. These can just be changed out to R33/R32 GTR separate caster and lower control arms apparently. @GTRNUR on here did this

I suspect the R32 GTR is not a perfect interchange, R33 should be though. A surprising number of suspension revisions occurred between the R32 and R33. It vaguely looks like the same general design but almost all of the actual parts are different numbers and the upper control arm especially has been noticeably redesigned.

Mate, I have r32 and R33 GTRs, - the front lower control arms and caster rods are identical. The old man actually pinched one of my spare 33 ones and has it on the white 32. Nissan isn't very good at always superceding part numbers for new ones in fast and just change the number a lot. Ikeya formula actually sell an adjustable 2 piece lower control arm and caster rod set that bolts into 32/33/34, which is what @GTRNUR was trying to avoid buying because of the price of them. This would be the easiest solution on a stock 34R.

https://www.rhdjapan.com/ikeya-formula-roll-center-adjuster-lower-arm-kit-pillow-ball-type-bnr32-bcnr33-bnr34.html

The big difference in 32 to 33/34 is the front upper control arm design.

The rear arms between 32 GTR and 33/34 have a slight difference in offest though, even though they physically fit.

Given Ben's input above, it would seem that the crush tube length would be the same between R33 and R34 GTRs. Given the crush tube is the same length, then the length of the outer is v.likely the same also. And so the only unknown would be the ID of the outer tube. This leaves a better than 50/50 chance that the R33 bush would go into the R34 radius rod.

On 8/7/2022 at 7:50 PM, BK said:

Mate, I have r32 and R33 GTRs, - the front lower control arms and caster rods are identical. The old man actually pinched one of my spare 33 ones and has it on the white 32. Nissan isn't very good at always superceding part numbers for new ones in fast and just change the number a lot.

The big difference in 32 to 33/34 is the front upper control arm design.

The rear arms between 32 GTR and 33/34 have a slight difference though.

Good to know, they looked identical but I'm always reluctant to say whether they are truly identical if the part numbers don't line up. 

  • 1 month later...

I've been through this a year or two : bushing of front lower arm is different between R33 and R34. Outer Diameter of the bushing is not the same (the R34 is larger). And there is no replacement part for the R34 bushing : you have to change the complete arm (what a bad idea).

Or you can put the R33/Nismo lower arm: the cheapest and best option as you will be able to have adjustable front arms and you can change the bushing latter if needed.

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

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...