Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 4 months later...
On 3/15/2018 at 9:17 AM, Fr3akyR33 said:

Would 18" 8.5 +30mm on the front and 18" 9.5 +30mm on the rear fit a r33 1994 gtst?

I'm not an expert, but I'd say yes, with a caveat on the front.


Your +30 on the front might be a problem pending the wheels. My 18x8.75 +35mm when fitted to the front scrubbed the caliper and just looked balls. I now run +20 on the front and it's much better.

I also had 18x8.75 +35mm on my rear and it left wayyyy too much air in the guard. I now have 18x8.75 +20mm and it fits much better, almost flush. Therefore I reckon your extra inch of rim on the rear will suit a +30mm fine.

From earlier in this thread

On 24/05/2011 at 7:32 PM, jrm said:

Nismo LMGT4 I have are 18x8.5+30 & 18x9.5+38

You can easily find pictures of RWD Nismo wheels. I'd say they would stick outside the guards. Depends how hektikstancenationhashtagvapebro you want your car to be, you can make them fit.

As for brake clearance, offset isn't an indicator, standard R33 GTS-t wheels are 16x6.5 +40. If those XXR wheels can't clear the brakes at 8.75", their caliper backspace is too small (i.e. "deep dish wheel design").

14 hours ago, inmaniac said:

I'm not an expert, but I'd say yes, with a caveat on the front.


Your +30 on the front might be a problem pending the wheels. My 18x8.75 +35mm when fitted to the front scrubbed the caliper and just looked balls. I now run +20 on the front and it's much better.

I also had 18x8.75 +35mm on my rear and it left wayyyy too much air in the guard. I now have 18x8.75 +20mm and it fits much better, almost flush. Therefore I reckon your extra inch of rim on the rear will suit a +30mm fine.

Ahh okay the others i was looking at are 18x9 + 30mm fronts and 18x10 +18mm rears they are work GT5 set

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
Anyone with bnr32 running 18 x10.5 295/35 ?
thx

I’m running 18x10.5 +15 with 295/35/18’a on my 32 GTST. Extensive work to make em fit but not too hard on a GTR. My front guards are GTR but they’re not a direct fit. Pretty sure they’ll fit rears with a light guard roll.
  • 3 months later...
17 hours ago, Ryline34 said:

I take it even flaring is pointless or trying to get GTR gaurds is out of the question?

Anyone want to buy some genuine LMGTs ?

Its theoretically possible, but you need custom/different guards.

No, you can't flare it to fit that much, not without getting them repainted etc etc. The cheapest way is to replace the guards. You're about 15mm too far out as it stands. I was able to fit a 9.5 +27 inside my R34 GTT guards.

Sell and buy some different wheels. The LMGT2's do actually come in 18x9 +32. I would have bought a set of these but they don't clear my (much larger than OEM) brakes.

http://www.importmonster.com.au/shop/product_info.php?products_id=2190&osCsid=e79e232cd40b61bcc04cab09633119d6

  • 1 month later...

Hello,

I'm a new '93 R33 GTST skyline owner from the US. Can you guys help me if the following sizes will fit? Or do I need to modify the fenders?

Front: 18x8.5 +35 245/40 or 235/40

Rear: 18x9.5 +22 245/40

The wheels are Varrstoen ES2

Thank you in advance!

Edited by Ecua

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...