Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Mine is a 2000 but I highly doubt that would make any difference. If you go back a heap of pages there's a s2 rs4s running 18x10 +15 with coilovers. That's even less clearance than 9.5 +12 and he doesn't seem to have an issue. Maybe pm him?

at this point all i can do it get the wheels here and fit them up, see what happens and fingers crossed.

if they dont fit i will probably ask someone with an RS4S to trial fit on theire car to see whats different.

Good place to start I'd say. And also 235 won't really give you any more clearance than 245. Both are stretched do they'll angle away from the rim edge, but they're both still locked into the rim at the bead which means theoretically they would be the same. Get my point? Just depends on how much stretch and how much road contact you want I guess. Just another thing to think about.

yeah, havnt decided on the tire size yet, all going to depend if i need to run spacers on a wheel which will sit 60 mm out from where im at now and the guard fitment becomes an issue,

a little streatch is good for look sbut i dont want stupidity, eitherway the tire wont be what will contact with the strut.

I have 19x9.5 +12s all 'round, with 245s, 35 profile I think and coilovers on a 99 rs4s.

Perfect guard clearance and a couple of mm on the strut in the rear.

Was pretty sketchy when i ordered them.

Have had them on the car for 20000k now, no dramas....

Mind you, mines not as low as yours, so not as much rear camber pulling the top of the rim in closer.

I had trouble getting standard skyline rims (V35) to fit without spacers to get rego.

I ended up having to use some scabby R32 rims on for rego.

wheels should arrive soon, i was hoping today.

i have been doing some more digging.

firstly:

Can anyone CONFIRM for me the width of the standard R34 GTT 17" wheels

cannot seem to confirm if they are 17X7+40 or 17X7.5+40??

7.5 =]

which means i will be gaining clearance.

also i have been mashing through the 55 page stag suspension thread.

realising i have several degrees of - camber. i am ordering camber arms which will straighten the wheels back up and give more clearence from the strut again so this should be fine, they should fit without spacers.

i hope :ph34r:

It must be the camber you've got because I'm also running 18x9.5 +12's with 245 45's and no issue at all. stock suspension with nismo springs

is that to me?

new wheels noton yet but yes the camber must be my issue at the moment as the current wheels fitted beffore the coilovers went in. camber arms and new wheels this week i hope

yeah sorry i was replying to you ghost. That's interesting to know if i go adjustable suspension later on, that i'll be limited my my wheels. food for thought.

hope you get it all sorted.

OOOOK

test fitted the wheels today and if it does fit its gonna be seriously snug.

ok so outsude fitment is going to be nice

Front

IMAG2109_zpsca441ba8.jpg

Rear

IMAG2105_zpsfa8cffdc.jpg

however as you know im worried about the strut clearance.

fronts clears everything as far as i can tell

IMAG2104_zpsd19596f4.jpg

the rears are not

remember this is in the air

IMAG2103_zps9071e7dd.jpg

IMAG2102_zps58ffdbe8.jpg

i cant fit my finger between them.

ok so the camber is the first issue

this WILL be fixed with camber arms

as it is the hub falls 10mm inwards when loaded up

their is NO way these work without spacers with the current camber arms.

im going to need to run no camber and see if it clears over bumps and around corners.

failing that spacers then slight camber into the guards

tires go on soon and camber arms should rock up any day now.

will roll the lips and hope i wont need to pull the inner guards out.

OOOOK

test fitted the wheels today and if it does fit its gonna be seriously snug.

ok so outsude fitment is going to be nice

Front

IMAG2109_zpsca441ba8.jpg

Rear

IMAG2105_zpsfa8cffdc.jpg

however as you know im worried about the strut clearance.

fronts clears everything as far as i can tell

IMAG2104_zpsd19596f4.jpg

the rears are not

remember this is in the air

IMAG2103_zps9071e7dd.jpg

IMAG2102_zps58ffdbe8.jpg

i cant fit my finger between them.

ok so the camber is the first issue

this WILL be fixed with camber arms

as it is the hub falls 10mm inwards when loaded up

their is NO way these work without spacers with the current camber arms.

im going to need to run no camber and see if it clears over bumps and around corners.

failing that spacers then slight camber into the guards

tires go on soon and camber arms should rock up any day now.

will roll the lips and hope i wont need to pull the inner guard

I came across the same problem i had 245/40/18 tyres on 18x9.5 offset 20 on rs4s rear and once i had the suspension underload the tyres use to scrap the coilovers, you could set the camber to almost no camber at all, but personally it looks too weird for me, so i ended up getting longer nismo wheel studs, spaced out the wheel and getting the camber right and 225/40 tyres..

Edited by shotpointblank

im going 235/40 tires, i really didnt want to go spacers, i really didnt.

hoping i take some caber away and run about -1deg and it wont touch under load.

under load now it gains f**king heaps of camber with the stock arms

im so confused, noone with an RS4S with 18X9.5 +12 has had this little clearance. why mine?

i.e.

Just took a pic of mine for you (sorry it's sideways, uploading from phone and it rotated it). As you can see there's quite a bit of clearance with the stock shocks, I'd say a good 15mm. Obviously BC's are thicker though. I'm not sure how much but you can work that out. Mine is as stated earlier s2 rs4s running 18x9.5 +12 with 245 40's.

post-81631-13838105438716.jpg
Edited by GH05T

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...