Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys great thread. I have had a look but would like some recoomendations as to what numbers to use on my R33 GTS-t. This car will be used predominantly on the track and I prefer 17" wheels (thinking of Rota grid, or P45R or something similar). Im also thinking of going with a staggered set up (9-9.5 rear and 8-8.5 front). I want to run some nice wide tyres also. Questions is, what do those who do track days recommend from their experience?

Cheers

Amir

Hey just want a quick answer. Going to buy a set of Lenso D1R's for my daily R33. Would 18x9 +32 (Front) sit flush in the guards

18×10 +22 (Rear) sit flush in the guards

Or what issues am I gonna get

Just like to hear some feedback to help me out.

Edited by WLD MAN

Assuming Gtst. Fronts will sit inside about 10mm, and rears outside about 15mm. This depends heavily on camber though. I have 18x10+38 which after resetting camber to 0 now sit flush, maybe the tiniest bit of poke, whereas previously looked like they had heaps of room.

12mm wider rim, so 6mm either side. But 8mm larger offset, so will sit in 2mm more than 18x9+32.

You'll also have clearance problems on inside with offset larger than around +25 with 9.5" wide rim.

Best if you learn how to calculate offset, or use a calculator on the net.

My recommendation would be to use 18x9.5+22 with 235s and roll guards to fit. Not too difficult or expensive and proven to be a good combination for 33 gtst.

Hey guys great thread. I have had a look but would like some recoomendations as to what numbers to use on my R33 GTS-t. This car will be used predominantly on the track and I prefer 17" wheels (thinking of Rota grid, or P45R or something similar). Im also thinking of going with a staggered set up (9-9.5 rear and 8-8.5 front). I want to run some nice wide tyres also. Questions is, what do those who do track days recommend from their experience?

Cheers

Amir

I went for a staggered set of track rims last year (17x8.5 +30 front and 17x9.5 +38 rear) but changed to a square setup this year (17x9 +35 with 255/40 tyres) for the increased frontend grip and being able to rotate the wheels around the car as they wear.

I went for a staggered set of track rims last year (17x8.5 +30 front and 17x9.5 +38 rear) but changed to a square setup this year (17x9 +35 with 255/40 tyres) for the increased frontend grip and being able to rotate the wheels around the car as they wear.

Similar to what i have done, just with 18's :)

  • Like 1

What's a good offset for Rota Grid Rs in 18x9.5 all round on a 33 gtst? Thinking +35 all round. Will only go as far as rolling my guards.

Cheers

I think heaps of people run +22 all around with little tyre. Might want to check front clearance before you go putting money down.

I went for a staggered set of track rims last year (17x8.5 +30 front and 17x9.5 +38 rear) but changed to a square setup this year (17x9 +35 with 255/40 tyres) for the increased frontend grip and being able to rotate the wheels around the car as they wear.

Did you notice any oversteer with the square setup?

Cheers

Amir

I think heaps of people run +22 all around with little tyre. Might want to check front clearance before you go putting money down.

Agreed, you'll definitely run into inner clearance issues with +35.

Honestly, if you're willing to roll guards just get +22 with 235/40/18s and be happy. I didn't get 9.5 +22 and sometimes wish I did.

Im thinking of getting 17x9 +25 for my r33. The guys at Rota recommended this and said the widest tire I can run would be a 255. They also said I will have better clearance with +25 than with +35.

Does this sound right to you guys?

Cheers

Amir

  • Like 1

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...