Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

That fit is prefect. I can't believe they fit that well with just a roll!

How do you think the rear would go with a 255/35? Probably need a pull to get it under you think?

I've got the 9.5 +22's all round on a 33 gtst, and i am running 265's front and rear. Only a guard roll and splash guards removed.

I'm running about -2.5 front and -1.5 rear.

No scraping/rubbning at all

I've got the 9.5 +22's all round on a 33 gtst, and i am running 265's front and rear. Only a guard roll and splash guards removed.

I'm running about -2.5 front and -1.5 rear.

No scraping/rubbning at all

Much poke with that size on the rear? Pics?

awesome fitment im looking at 9.5 +15 all round on 235/40/r18. So 2mm further in on the front and 8mm further in on rear. How much camber are you running and what work did you do to the guards.

Cheers

i'm running 225/40 on the front with -3 camber it scrubs when i drift but it will depend how low you go to notice scrubbing. On the rear i've got a 235/40 but i'm running 0 camber at the moment and have a pre existing flare of 25-30mm

I have trawled through this thread and it seems no one is running a very aggressive fitment on a ER34 coupe. Everyone has shitty offsets with little if any guard work.

I am purchasing Varrstoens 2.2.1 18" wheels. I was initially thinking 18x9.5+22 front, 18x10.5+30 rear, but after talking to a few people and looking through basically every post in the entire thread, I have decided it is not flush/aggressive enough for my liking.

What I am not sure of is if the guards are the same front and rear. If they are, I am thinking 18x10.5 + 15 all round. Only problem is it may scrub inside the guard on the suspension or arm, which I have no idea how much clearance I have. I can't really go 18x9.5 because the lowest offset they offer is +12 and that is (I am quite sure) not enough poke for what I am after. I plan on running 245/35 on the 10.5 or 225/30 on the 9.5. I have my guards rolled, I have the front liners removed, I have up to -2 camber from the coilovers and I will put camber arms on if needed. I don't really want to flare the guards.

I need some REAL opinions from people WHO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Shoutout to nisskid for helping thus far.

Edited by voncina

I've got the 9.5 +22's all round on a 33 gtst, and i am running 265's front and rear. Only a guard roll and splash guards removed.

I'm running about -2.5 front and -1.5 rear.

No scraping/rubbning at all

pics???????????

I have trawled through this thread and it seems no one is running a very aggressive fitment on a ER34 coupe. Everyone has shitty offsets with little if any guard work.

I am purchasing Varrstoens 2.2.1 18" wheels. I was initially thinking 18x9.5+22 front, 18x10.5+30 rear, but after talking to a few people and looking through basically every post in the entire thread, I have decided it is not flush/aggressive enough for my liking.

What I am not sure of is if the guards are the same front and rear. If they are, I am thinking 18x10.5 + 15 all round. Only problem is it may scrub inside the guard on the suspension or arm, which I have no idea how much clearance I have. I can't really go 18x9.5 because the lowest offset they offer is +12 and that is (I am quite sure) not enough poke for what I am after. I plan on running 245/35 on the 10.5 or 225/30 on the 9.5. I have my guards rolled, I have the front liners removed, I have up to -2 camber from the coilovers and I will put camber arms on if needed. I don't really want to flare the guards.

I need some REAL opinions from people WHO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Shoutout to nisskid for helping thus far.

just pull the guards... it's a cheap import, not a bentley

if you want to put 10+15's all round you are going to want to pull the guards or run a LOT of camber. depends on how much power you want to make really.... if it's more than stock then i'd look at pulling them reasonably far so i could run the rears a little flatter.

you will get away without flaring, but you'll definately need to pump all 4 guards.

it's only 10mm more than what i'm running on a 33, and 34 guards seem to sit abuot 10mm further out and i managed it pretty easily and it's flat enough to put down 300+ rwkw

here took some better ones.

18x9.5 +22 with 265 hankook z221's

rears have 7mm spacers

Looks mint! I cant believe the 265's sit like that on a 9.5 +22, especially on the front. I think when i get new wheels, ill run a thinner tyre on the front and dial out a bit of camber to help with tyre wear.

What was the reason for the 7mm spacer in the rear? Inner scrub issues?

rota grid 18x9.5 +20 all round,

Those should only sit out 2mm more than the +22, yet the front sits out a fair bit more than other photos. I know yours is a 34gtt, but i didnt think they was that much difference between fitment for 33gtst and 34gtt.

What camber are you running front and rear? Loving the colour/look of your car !

yeah funny how the fronts look like they stick out more than the rear, but i get that with mine also, its hard to get the rears looking more aggressive than the front on a gtst, you car looks very purposeful, show and go...

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...