Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

GENTS THE MOST URGENT OF HELP IS REQUIRED......

im about to purchase some rays sebring, heres the details

18 x 8.5 +40 front

18 x 9.5 +45 rear.

will these FIT A 94 GTST.......................help me ladies and gents!

Depending on whether you prefer the wheels to stick out more, or sit nicely in the guards. However, with those offsets, the wheels will be sitting right inside the body, and it might look a bit weird.

Not only that, as someone has already mentioned, because of the widths of the wheels, such a high offset may cause clearance issues on the in-side of the wheel, ie: fouling on suspension components.

I would say that the front will very likely fit, but the rear is anyones guess.

A safer, and better looking offset (in my opinion) would be anything between +36 and +30

They'll fit, but....

I've got 18x8 +42 all round ('94 R33 GTST). There's about 5-10mm clearance inside to the upright on full lock (need to get out and measure this properly), and rears have about 25 mm clearance inside.

Mine looks anorexic though, which is why i've been trawling threads like these for the last 2 months trying to work out best fitment for a new set.

The lads are right, if you're going to get new wheels; might as well get a lower offset.

If it helps, here's what i've measured on my car:

Fronts

Hub to flush with guard ~84 mm

Rim edge to flush with guard ~24 mm

Inner clearance ~8mm

Rears

Hub to flush with guard ~94 mm

Rim edge to flush with guard ~34 mm

Inner clearance ~25mm

You should be able to use these numbers to see how different width and offsets will sit in relation to the guards and suspension using one of the offset calculators on the web. I'm pretty sure these numbers are accurate, but I hold no responsibility if they're wrong! ;)

Finally, in my opinion for what it's worth, don't shell out for those Rays unless you've really got your heart set on them. The fitment won't be that great.

18x9.5 +15 with a 235/40 18. guard lip rolleds up 100%, camber is set at - .2 with whiteline camber arms, about 3mm off guard, will put camber to -1 before the next track day. front is -2.5 camber, hits guard liner, no big deal

pyiue.jpg

Do you have any scrubbing on this, i dont have any camber arms but i hope i can the same sizes ok

Do you have any scrubbing on this, i dont have any camber arms but i hope i can the same sizes ok

The post is right there, how can you not read..

You will need camber arms for this exact fitment, if you don't, you are going to have to raise your car a lot for your fronts to clear. And he said there were no scrubbing issues except for the front liner. If you are lucky, you will have coilovers that allow up to 2deg camber, then you can do this without camber arms.

Do you have any scrubbing on this, i dont have any camber arms but i hope i can the same sizes ok

I run 18x9.5+12 all around. You will need to get your guards rolled all the way and pulled slightly. I'm not running any camber arms it's stock suspension apart from coilovers.

You might need to remove part of your front / rear guard lining. You might get slight scub on full lock shouldn't be an issue. I didn't have that issue as all my guard lining has been removed. It depends on how low you want your car.

Edited by DarkRyda

Skyline model = R34 GTT

Wheel diameter = 18

Wheel width = 9.5 fronts, 10.5 rears

Wheel offset = +22 fronts, +30 rears

Tyre size = 225/40 fronts, 245/40 rears

Modifications to fit = Guards rolled all round, coilovers to drop - not needed though. Can probably afford to slam the car a little more, but happy where it is for now. Poking about 3 mm all round. Perfect fitment in my mind. No scrubbing issues, except on full lock - fronts hit the liner, which is no issue in my mind. Will upload better pictures when I get the chance.

133860_533859553307108_1792813029_o.jpg377288_533859569973773_1154939089_n.jpg

Edited by voncina

The post is right there, how can you not read..

You will need camber arms for this exact fitment, if you don't, you are going to have to raise your car a lot for your fronts to clear. And he said there were no scrubbing issues except for the front liner. If you are lucky, you will have coilovers that allow up to 2deg camber, then you can do this without camber arms.

wont need the camber arms... the front guards are soft as all hell and will easily accomodate 9.5+15 w 235/40 if pulled enough

thanks mate for an informative reply unlike some people here which seem to be having their period this month

I said IF (->IF<-) you wanted that EXACT fitment you would need camber arms. Sorry for me trying to help you, ungrateful douche.

^^ Looks awesome mate, keen to see more pics of the car further away to see what it looks like. Also, are your rear lights tinted?

Yeah they are.

I have a track day today. More then likely there will be some nice shots of the car from afar. I will get some good ones up later on in the weekend. Fitment is almost perfect [=

Edited by voncina

^Mate, looking good. keen for more pics, needs moar r34 :P.

In other news, figured out my offsets a while ago, just haven't had any time to consider it further... so busy these days, sigh. They should be 17x8 +35 all round, with 225/45 tyres all round I believe.

Recommendations for some spacers size for some flush fitment? (Guards will be rolled if going flush).

^Mate, looking good. keen for more pics, needs moar r34 :P.

In other news, figured out my offsets a while ago, just haven't had any time to consider it further... so busy these days, sigh. They should be 17x8 +35 all round, with 225/45 tyres all round I believe.

Recommendations for some spacers size for some flush fitment? (Guards will be rolled if going flush).

Safe but as flush as possible fitment with those rims, I would go 25mm fronts, (30mm if you are daring, still won't poke as much as my rims if you do go 30, but you will be close.) and for rears 35mm would be very close to my fitment as well. Factor in some camber for when you drop the car, and she should sit quite nicely.

And yes I do know my car is dirty and has swirl marks, etc etc. Working on it.

218944_534374796588917_1329772205_o.jpg

Edited by voncina

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...