Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Would 17x8 +28 with 255/40/17 tires fit on the front of a R32 GTS-T without rubbing the fender or impacting the suspension?

This question comes from an argument I had with a guy who claims it would be fine. However I want to be proven wrong.

I have a '98 R34 GT-T. 

I had some Rota Grid 18x9.5 +35 and 18x10.5 +35 with 235/40 tires. 

Fitment looked good but the fronts actually scrubbed on the inside suspension when turning too far. The 235's on the 10.5's were also a bit TOO stretched for my taste.

So I just installed some Work Emotion 11R 18x9.5 +20's all around and kept the 235/40 tires. The fitment looks perfectly flush with the rear fenders but sticks out considerably on the front. VERY aggressive but it DOES fit with stock fenders and doesn't scrub. Sticks out more than I was hoping but I do like it. I don't intend to roll unless I somehow end up scrubbing. I'm running stock GT-R shocks/struts.

Pics:

C225EEB7-3802-4046-AD97-10790DA7A23C_zps

81050FCF-1B5C-40F3-94CB-92EF96C008E1_zps

97E5D908-5A53-46C5-A43C-5771137A6314_zps

Car definitely gets more looks now. :)

 

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm sure this has been beat to death but after searching and not having luck figured this would be the thread to ask my fitment question on.

 

Have a 91 r32 gtst

Trying to run 18x9.5 +20 with 265/35/18 on all 4 corners. Is this going to rub like crazy?

 

Current setup is as follows:                                   17x7 +47 215/45/17 and 15mm spacer up front. 17x8 +47 235/45/17 in back                                       

20160907_201410.jpg

Edited by Ed.williams5

Hi all

Just bought an r34 gtt. Currently has 18x9.5+22 front and back with 235 to the front 255 to the rear. Tyres are pzero but have 30 % tread left on them, so is basically undrivable in 1st-3rd with 300kw and 885nm.

I have hks coilovers lowered with about a 2 inch gap from guard to tyres. Guards are all rolled too. Currently the front scrubs but I think this is on the loose inner wheel plastic guard (so I don't think I could or would really want to go bigger than 235 as I would need some more camber or raise the car)

With the new tyres im thinking of buying, can I afford to go for a 265 or 275 on the rear or will a good quality 255 suffice?

When I ask can I afford to go, obviously anything is possible, but would anyone have a photo of this so I can see what it would look like?

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Guys please assist. Wheels and I just do not get along. Someone are good at it, I am not!

My r32 gtr is lowered on hks hypermax coilovers. Currently sitting on 17's with a 225 tire.

I want to purchase te37's preferably 18inch and be able to fit a wider tire. Nothing insanely aggressive, but proper looking.

I want 18's because I will most likely be upgrading the calipers and need them to fit. the stock brakes are garbage. 

Also, no rubbing issues!

Please suggest. 

Thanks

 

I'm not a noob, promise. Just suck with wheels

Edited by powerdbygarrett

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...