Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

That looks nuts Nisskid. Love it!

I have a 32 GTSt. Guards are rolled and pumped a bit.

I have Advan RS 18x9 +22 with 235/40/18 street tyres. They scrub a little but not too much.

For the track I use R33 GTR wheels (17x9 +30) with 235/45/17 semi's. No scrubbing at all when at the track.

post-10715-1242036471_thumb.jpgpost-10715-1242036518_thumb.jpg

post-10715-1242036394_thumb.jpgpost-10715-1242036436_thumb.jpg

f**king love it, very tough :P

if guard mods dont worry u, go the -4 and modify the guards to fit.

depends what tyre u wanna run tho, personally i think 8" is too thin for the stretch fitment as to stretch a tyre properly u need to go into the 100's like a 195 or 185, u can get away with 205's, but even then i think they are a bit thin if ur wanting to go fast. if its just a daily, or a street skidder, then the 205 will be fine.

Skyline model = HR31 Passage GT

Wheel diameter = 17"

Wheel width = 9" (front and rear)

Wheel offset = +15

Tyre size = 235/45R17

Modifications to fit = front guards rolled

could do with a ~15mm spacer on the rear.

100_2798.jpg

DSC02982.jpg

Hey nisskid/SAU

im looking at a set of rims for my gts-t

Fronts are 17 x 8.5 +30

Rears are 17 x 9 +28,

i already have tires

235/45/17

i have height adjustable coils but its lot very low at the moment. also stock guards

how is it going to look? major issues?

ive read the whole thread but couldnt find a combo that matched.

Thanks guys?

Hey nisskid/SAU

im looking at a set of rims for my gts-t

Fronts are 17 x 8.5 +30

Rears are 17 x 9 +28,

i already have tires

235/45/17

i have height adjustable coils but its lot very low at the moment. also stock guards

how is it going to look? major issues?

ive read the whole thread but couldnt find a combo that matched.

Thanks guys?

17x9 +30 and 17x8 +30 both with 235/45's (closest ive got)

car7.jpg

rear:

DSCN7708.jpg

DSCN7706.jpg

this is a close up of a 17x9 +30 on the front, will be fairly similar to a 17x8.5 +30

DSCN7807.jpg

your guards may need a roll depending on alignment and suspension. mine was very borderline at the rear with stock arms (fair bit of camber). front i had no issues with, but that was because my suspension never compressed enough to really push the tyres into the guard. so i would try them on, and see if u can get away with them, if not get ur guards rolled and ull have plenty of clearance.

can sumbody please confirm that 19x10.5 +9 Volk GTC face 1's will fit on a r33 GTR with standard brembo brakes.

Also what size tyres will i need

Edited by UWISSH!
  • 4 weeks later...

Skyline Model = r32 2 door

Wheel diameter = 17

Wheel width = 9

Wheel offset = +22

Tyre size = 235 front 255 rear

Modifications to fit = role heck out of guards. mainly because front of car is so low and rear tyres are too wide

post-57363-1245126265_thumb.jpg

hey guys been reading through this

need help

from what i gather (have a r34 gtt 2 door)

if im after 18s and want to avoid modifications, safer to go with 18 x 8s ? rather than say 18 x 8.5 or 18 x 9.5

will 18 x 8s also allow me a lower offset? from what i gather this would be the case? and this would mean a deeper dish effect? would this look good?

correct me if im wrong

also atm my car rides high at stock height, if i get rims i'd lower it a bit... does this help or detract?

cheers!

dish comes from distance between disk, and the outside of the barrel, this same distance determines the wheels clearance from the gaurd. if u just want clearance, go 6" wide with +40 offset. my point being u need to provide us with a bit more details, do u want the wheels to sit up near the guard? do u want wide tyres? etc etc

after speaking to a couple ppl, i've changed my mind, i am willing to roll the guards now

if i did 18 x 8.5 front and 18 x 9.5 back

would this fit on my car and with wat sort of offset, i was looking at +15 or +22 ?

regards to tyres i don't have too much knowledge on tyres atm but from what i've read here for the tyres im after im thinking 255/35/18 for front and for back 265/35/18

would this be a nice look withou being too bumpy a ride?

Edited by vudoo

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...