djr81

Settle down fellas. I said it was a one off because of the time spent on developing it in the years prior. Not that it was a one off because it was a good car.

Well if they fail to attract any sponsorship, like this year, how are they going to compete with Ferrari? Assuming the Fiat team don't make a complete dogs bollocks of their car again next year. This years Brawn was a one off. Arguably no car had as much design work done before it hit the track & so few upgrades after. They got lucky (to a degree) in that KERS fkd everyone who ran it. The teams who didn't bother with Kers did well. Anyone who compromised their car to accomodate it got owned. Clearly Brawns lack of budget this year will compromise next years design. Without much cash to catch up they will struggle. Not all of it can come from Mercedes.

Because the Tomei cam has a longer duration - hence the inlet is open longer when the piston is on the compression stroke. So you get a lower compression test number at however many rpm it is done at. The nature of longer duration cams is that the motor works less well at lower rpm. The question is, other than the comrpession number, was there anything wrong with the motor with the 260 degree cams fitted? Reason being that the compression number may be perfectly normal for that duration cam (Assuming it is degreed properly, ofcourse).

Brawn will be fine as long as they get some money to develop the car for next year. Remember they swapped Rosberg for Rubens so they won't be short on driver talent. Oh and here is hoping the Campos is a half decent thing.....

Have you confirmed what cam you have? Specifically the lift. The base circles & lifts are at the bottom of that sheet in the second post. Easy enough to measure to be sure.

That is not correct. They are the SAME camshaft. The old convention was that a Procam needed mods to fit. Now that Tomei call any cam a Procam you cannot make that distinction anymore. From what I understand they are Poncams when sold as a pair (For an RB26 you get 260 inlet & either 252 or 260 exhaust all with 9.15 lift, ie a type A or B) & procams for the high lift versions & for single cams. You can according to the Tomei listing buy inlet cams in 252, 256, 260, 270, 280 & 290 degree durations. All of which are called Procams. But the listing states "equal as Poncams" for the relevant ones.

Tomei have taken to calling some of their Poncams Procams when sold as a single cam. The difference inthe cams is simply that a low lift cam can be fitted without modification. A medium or higher lift cam cannot. See here NISSAN_RB26DETT.doc

If you want the events that are on go to the cams website under the clubs ection under events & pick your state: http://www.cams.com.au/Sport/Events/Event%...;to=&page=1 As for the secondary bonnet restraints - I have never had anything other than the standard bonnet - no clips, belts or any other 'secondary device'. Reason being is there are two restraints already built in to the bonnet - which is why you have to pop the bonnet then go around the front & release it.

Well I guess there is only one way to learn. The team will probably be as Malaysian as Renault is French. Or Toyota Japanese. But you are right a highly regulated, sheltered economy is no way to learn how to get on in F1. Anyway hard to see them stuffing it up worse than Renault just did.....

As much as I miss Lotus not being in Formula one - it isn't really Lotus anymore, is it? Malaysian money backing a German team doesn't have much to do with CBAC does it? In retrospect how badly did Ford stuff up backing Stewart & letting Lotus die in the 90's? Money spent on a Lotus Ford would have paid far greater dividends than that wasted on Stewart then Jaguar.

Anyone up for this? http://www.piarc.com.au/ASC/

Nothing wrong with the local product either. http://www.harrop.com.au/products/brake_assemblies.html As for the 17" rim size - you will be pushed to get anything much more than a 355 rotor under there & even them you will have to be carefull to get the right rim/calliper/rotor combination.

Group A homologation was done prior to any GT-R's being sold in Australia. The two are not related. In any case the Nismo model homologated was never actually sold in Australia. With regard to 15 year rules & quarter panel indicators if the car lacks them it usually means it was complied under the 15 year rule before the state regulatory authority in your state got their act together. I had a GT-R without & one with them. Other stuff that appears to have gone by the wayside as far as SEVS compliance goes are the fuel restrictor & the dash light dimmer. If you can find a 1992 model with an allowable build month (ie late, not sure how late) they can tend to be a bit of a bargain as every other dopey %*@# only ever contemplates 93 & 94 model years.

I should try & clarify something I wrote a couple posts back. I used to run a stock arm with a Whiteline offset kit on the outer & a home built (er, sorry, fully sik custom) offset pin on the inner. The inner pin meant a 3mm shorter arm length. But the drillings on the front of the Nismo bracket meant the arm bound when you tried to run an offset bush. So no offset bush meant less neg camber. If you compare like for like you do get more neg camber with a Nismo bracket. I fixed it by making the new arms that little bit shorter again. Gary, In your redrillings have you played around much with the inclination of the upper arm to change the roll centre? Or is it something best left for the LCA? The problem is that Nismo only sell the stuff as a kit in which you get a bracket, a lower control arm (stock drilled differently & painted silver) and some shorter castor rods. They no longer sell adjustable length arns hence the reference on their website about the benefits of running Nismo arms makes no sense any more.

Well according to the event publicity Beyonce & ZZ Top will be performing at the Singapore GP. So you are guaranteed to see both talentless hacks & faded "legends" trading on past glories. See I didn't even mention the drivers. See how much restraint I showed?

Yes it would. But I don't think (ie don't really know) that it amounts to a big difference. IMHO the (mis)alignment issues in the front end are what constrains the amount of castor you can run - that & the tyre hitting the plastic at the front of the guard. Importantly it increases camber - which sounds contradictory given you end up with less with a Nismo bracket. As an aside it means you cannot fit an offset inner bush to the Nismo bracket. The arm binds if you try it. The brackets are a &*%$ to get out too. You start by removing the abs system.....

Here are a couple of drawings and three photos. The first shows what Nismo do to the standard upper link bracket to allow for more castor/camber. Essentially it is a stock component but with the holes drilled differently - the front moved closer to the centreline of the car & the rear lower. Thus the upper link is rotated on two axes - allowing for more castor. The second shows a stock LHS bracket. The third shows the Nismo bracket installed with a stock upper arm. Interestingly (or not) the bracket ends up giving you less camber for the same arm length. The shot was taken before I installed some new arms that I had made. The fourth is a drawing of a Cusco arm - these are 10mm shorter than the stock arms. Note the trail. Unfortunately I don't have a drawing of a stock arm. Mostly due to being lazy. The last shows the whole lot bolted up with the new arm - in rattle pack black, no less. I drew the arms to use the Whiteline bushes. As an aside note that Nismo used to do a sliding bracket for the R32, but now all you get is a stock item with harder bushes. Also their castor rods are approx 5mm shorter than the stock items.

This may be a profoundly stupid question, but can the Nistune ECU be used with any of these devices to work in conjunction with the Race-Tech gear? http://www.race-technology.com/ecu_interfaces_8_7550.html

new custom one piece tail shaft is where to start looking.

If it is for the road go with bushes. Nismo make some nice swaybars which should match the springs.

IMHO I can completely understand why other teams told Ferrari to get stuffed. It stems from the multitude of occasions that the Ferrari team were the only ones preventing common sense rule changes from being exercised or for that matter fair & equitable agreements from being enacted. I would imagine the people at Williams, Red Bull & Torro Rosso p!ssed themselves laughing at the request. All Ferrari have to do is use their nominated test drivers....

A few thoughts - I don't have an axe to grind either way with all this. 1. Quoting Ultimate Tensilte strength for a component is a bit pointless - you need the yield strength. 2. Grade 8.8 is a high tensile bolt - a 4.6 is mild steel. 3. A rod end needs to be higher in strength than a bushed end simply because the lack of compliance results in much higher loadings.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/77534 and http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/77540

So carefully worded. Reads like he didn't ask Montezemelo for the money on Wednesday. "...when he met with the Scuderia's president, Luca di Montezemolo, on Wednesday...." Which leaves approximately 87,000 permutations of who asked what from whom, when.

Even the Whiteline stuff will get you those sort of numbers on an R33, ie 5.5 degrees castor. They have more castor stock than the R32's & better front suspension anyway.