Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Skyline model = R33 GTS-T

Wheel diameter = 18"

Wheel width = 8.5J (F) & 9.5J (R)

Wheel offset = NA

Tyre size = 235/40//18 (F) & 255/35/18 (R)

Modifications to fit = none... so for. (Yet to test drive)

 

 

20230107_174908.jpg

20230107_185852.jpg

20230107_185815.jpg

afternoon all,

Im looking at rims for my 32gtst.

Im liking the work emotion XT7 range.

The guards will be rolled and have front adjustable and rear adjustable arms. I dont want top pull the guards at all but happy to run some camber. 

they come in 18 X 9.5 - [5-100, 5-114.3 / +12, +22, +30, +38] - Deep concave

10.5 +22 Ultra deep

What do you think my go to will be front and rear

You're not getting 10.5s on it at either end, without wider guards. So just forget that.

The real question will be whether you could ever get 9.5s on the front. They might just be able to squeeze on the back, given camber arms.

I go back to the one true known thing, which is that R33 GTR wheels fit and they are 9" +30. A 9.5 will need to find up to an extra half inch of clearance, probably on the outside. it might be better if there was a +25 option.

The other thing to remember is that the rear subframe tends to sit off to one side, so you have different guard to wheel alignment from side to side. This is fine most of the time, but when you are trying to cram absolutely everything in......

You gotta keep in mind when people talk fitment in 2023, the rim and tyre are two seperate entities.

a 9.5 +27 fits in the same space a 9 +30 does... if the measurement you are actually using is a 265/35/18 tyre mounted to it..... I am sure you know where I'm going with this.

Of course, to a degree a rim will physically hit suspension components or be 30mm outside the guard even if the tyre is inside it. Of course you and I would say that's stupid, but instagram may disagree.

42 minutes ago, Adz2332 said:

Haha I definitely don't want to go hella flush lol. It's more about liking the deep concave wheel look over the semi concave. 

 

www.willtheyfit.com

Very useful. Or measure. As GTSBoy said, 17x9 +30 just about lines up perfect with the outside of the guard.

10.5 +22 is 27mm beyond the guard.

  • Thanks 1
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 31/01/2023 at 10:41 AM, niZmO_Man said:

Yeah. You could re-lip the rears to 9-9.5" if you like.

Thanks for that. Should they be a flush fit do you know. I did think of a re-lip but a decent price and quality in the UK is hard to come by.

They won't be flush at 8"+28.

2 hours ago, CHRISSID6 said:

I did think of a re-lip but a decent price and quality in the UK is hard to come by.

Say what? There would have to be hundreds of trustworthy wheel houses in the US. You have 15x Australia's population and I can think of 5 people I would trust to do work on wheels, just in my state of 1.7M people. And price is not a factor. Quality work on wheels is not cheap anywhere.

12 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

They won't be flush at 8"+28.

Say what? There would have to be hundreds of trustworthy wheel houses in the US. You have 15x Australia's population and I can think of 5 people I would trust to do work on wheels, just in my state of 1.7M people. And price is not a factor. Quality work on 

Will they stick further in or out do you know? 

By the time I have shipped the wheels out to the US it will cost loads so ideally somewhere local in the UK.  

There is a company called Rimscarnated

that seem to do nice work which is a option. 

  • 3 weeks later...

Just bought an R34 GTT from Garage Defend and want to get some more aggressive wheels for it to fill these fenders (guards). My car has a GTR front end conversion with some sort of rear overfender which I don’t know how much the extension is from stock. I’m guessing +25mm wider?

Couple questions I have is how much wider is the GTR OEM fenders than stock GTT?

How much wider are GTR Ztune fenders compared to stock GTT?

I am looking to do a 19x9.5 -3 and 19x10.5 +/- 0. 

245/35/19 Front 

265/35/19 rear 

 

E791633F-D135-4C9F-A8E8-7B5A817A518C.jpeg

D6E8E5AF-3CE7-4877-B039-A6A4AF02A396.jpeg

EE7CBC4B-26C1-4FE8-A326-94539F9A203D.jpeg

54177075-DB81-4263-A470-C5B033D0681E.jpeg

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...