Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

R32 gtst 2 door

Advan RG2's 18x9 +29 all round.

235/40 Sumitomo's (minimal stretch)

Suspension lowered to minimum legal height ( pretty high )

Front guards untouched, rears slightly rolled but wouldn't need to be.

Rims sit flush with guards, perfect fitment.attachicon.gifimage.jpg

I hate you. I was watching these on eBay and had offered him cash when he told me they were sold. Dude had them on his Evo yes? They look great!

Edit: If you ever decide to sell - me first!

Edited by colourclassic

R32 gtst 2 door

Advan RG2's 18x9 +29 all round.

235/40 Sumitomo's (minimal stretch)

Suspension lowered to minimum legal height ( pretty high )

Front guards untouched, rears slightly rolled but wouldn't need to be.

Rims sit flush with guards, perfect fitment.attachicon.gifimage.jpg

needs moar low

  • 3 weeks later...

Opinion time. Deep dish rims for an r34 gtt. 18 inch or 19 inch (the rims look smaller with big dish)

18's would require pretty low ride height to achieve stance.

Going to be running 10-10.5 width at the front, and 10.5-11 at the rears.

Tyre size = 225/40/18

Lowered= yes, on king lows/bilsteins. not slammed.

Camber = whatever is possible with the stock eccentric bolts and arms. Not interested in mega camber.

Should be fine. Keep in mind rolling guards done properly will have no negative impact at all

Skyline model = 1996 R33 GTST

Wheel Brand = Volk TE37

Wheel diameter = 17"

Wheel width = 9"

Wheel offset = +22

Tyre size = 235/45/17

Modifications to fit = None (front wheels lightly nudge front bar at full lock, otherwise fine)

Hi mate,

Just wondering if you managed to do anything to fix this?? Was it much of an issue?? Looking at doing exactly the same for mine =)

Cheers!!!

Hi everyone!

Car: 1998 R33 GTST

Wheel brand: BBS LM replicas

Wheel diameter: 19"

Wheel width: 8.5 F, 9.5R

Offset: +20

Mods to fit: Fronts needed a 3mm spacer(spokes rubbed on the NISSAN writing)

Rears sit outta the guards still, the guards have bee rolled I think. Is there a way I can somehow "pull" the rear guards out by a couple of mm so they fit??

Opinion time. Deep dish rims for an r34 gtt. 18 inch or 19 inch (the rims look smaller with big dish)

18's would require pretty low ride height to achieve stance.

Going to be running 10-10.5 width at the front, and 10.5-11 at the rears.

The only problem with running those sorts of widths on the fronts on a gtt is the lack of guard. I had 9.5+22, and I had to remove the front liners for scrapage problems - and they sat completely flush with the guards. Now the issue here is, with a wider tyre, and non mexican spec, you will need a large offset, which you can't do as it will eat your suspension. I can't remember how much clearance I had with mine on, but I don't think there is much room for movement.

To get 10.5 to fit up front you will need something like +10 offset, 245/40 or less tyres, pumping guards, big camber, etc. Cause it will look mexican as fark with no camber.

Rears are 10.5+22 with natural camber and they sit nicely on the guard.

Rears shouldn't be out of the guards on those specs are u stock height? What size tyre?

Tyres are 265 35 19's

Car has tein coilovers, so it's lowered but not to excess....

Guards have been rolled a little(stuff all) but I can see where the tyres have scrubbed the guards on occasion :/

I will try and post photos(not working for some reason)

Edited by DGTS-T

Tyres are 265 35 19's

Car has tein coilovers, so it's lowered but not to excess....

Guards have been rolled a little(stuff all) but I can see where the tyres have scrubbed the guards on occasion :/

I will try and post photos(not working for some reason)

265 is a big tyre drop down a size still well within legal and should fix the problem I think

The only problem with running those sorts of widths on the fronts on a gtt is the lack of guard. I had 9.5+22, and I had to remove the front liners for scrapage problems - and they sat completely flush with the guards. Now the issue here is, with a wider tyre, and non mexican spec, you will need a large offset, which you can't do as it will eat your suspension. I can't remember how much clearance I had with mine on, but I don't think there is much room for movement.

To get 10.5 to fit up front you will need something like +10 offset, 245/40 or less tyres, pumping guards, big camber, etc. Cause it will look mexican as fark with no camber.

Rears are 10.5+22 with natural camber and they sit nicely on the guard.

I have gtr front fenders, and the rears are pumped and rolled +40mm.

Currently running 18x9.5 +15 all round.

I have gtr front fenders, and the rears are pumped and rolled +40mm.

Currently running 18x9.5 +15 all round.

Depenging on how much extra poke you want will depend the offset obviously.

I would go 18's, because of the possible slammage. 19's fit the wheel guard better, but also limit how low you can go.

Anyway 10.5+27 is essentially the same fit as what you have now, so depending how wide you want to go. I am not familiar with GTR fenders, but I believe they are around 20mm wider than GTT.. How wrong am I? Based off 20mm wider, I would go 10.5+15, which is 13mm more poke then what you have now.

On the rears... 40mm pump. Oh this is going to be sexy.

You could go 18x12+0? Or 18x11-12. The 11's are going to give dish all day, all week, probably most of next month.

Needs pictures.

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...