djr81

Can get odds on Fernando being down to 2 engines by FP3?

You mean DNS & P17.

The problem with it all is the different manufacturers use different tube/rod – some are hollow, some (Whiteline) are solid and none quote the same figures for comparison purposes. I haven’t yet seen anyone quote an inside diameter – not for the standard type or the aftermarket stuff either. You can make some guesses (I haven’t seen spring steel in tube) as to the wall thickness but they are just guesses. Anyway here is what I can find. Standard Front 20mm od - hollow. Rear 25.4mm Nismo Front 22.2 od (hollow) and quoted at 18.1N/mm whatever that means. Read 27.2 od (hollow) and quoted at 113.9N/mm Cusco Front 24mm and 190% stiffer than standard. I take this to mean 1.9 times the standard rate but may be 2.9. 1.9 appears more likely. Rear 30mm and 162% stiffer than standard. There also may (MAY) be a 24mm adjustable front (Part number quoted 282 311AJ24) and a 28mm non adjustable rear 282 311 B28 (quoted at 185% compare to standard). These I have never seen. Whiteline Front 22mm solid bar. Rear 24mm solid bar. Both are adjustable. Extra stiffness is not stated. ARC Front No diameter shown but 2.4 x standard rate. Adjustable. Rear No diameter shown but 1.8 x standard rate. Adjustable. Also $$$$’s. Maybe someone else has some figures or an idea or what tube would be used – the Cusco appears to be metric in size, the other Japanese Imperial. FWIW I have a Cusco rear and a Whiteline front. Can always add front stiffness in if the rear is too much.

Reckon so. Its bigger on the od and hollow but given the relationship between stiffness and od basically yes. I did some rough calcs once based on assumed wall thickness and it came out fatter. Just wish it was adjustable. Found a big difference in the turn in behaviour with less preload on the Nismo LSD - changed by putting some friction modifier in the diff. To the extent that I am looking at putting some more -ve camber in the back to calm it down on old tyres.

Just put the front full soft and the rear full hard.

For my ten cents worth. The GTR is an understeering pig. You can bandaid it with bulk -ve camber at the front (start at 3.5 degrees and increase it from there) but its only a bandaid. Don't bother with solid bushes. The rear diff is more influential on cornering behaviour that the front. A 2 way or even a one way with a lot of preload will push the front end wide. So think about how much diff you want in it. The front only has any effect on corner exit which isn't usually the problem. The Whiteline adjustability is illusory. You end up with the rear on full hard and the front on full soft. Chuck some suspension at it and then buy a Cusco rear bar and a Whiteline/Nismo front. Then adjust (Or not) the front bar, the camber and the rear diff for balance/taste.

Well as much as I agree with your conclusion - the German GP is usually boring. It was bad enough before they redeveloped Hockenheim now it is just hopeless.

Horner can go eat a dick. It was ok by the sport when his team was winning and he gave no fk for anyone else struggling. Now he is in a world of pain and suddenly the sport is under threat. Was then, is now. Maybe he will have cause to reflect and start by thinking of someone other than himself. How long that may last is another question.

You want a union or just the threaded part for the oil sandwich? If the latter try Nissan or otherwise. http://www.powerflowperformance.com.au/tees-elbows-unions-swivels-unions-male-flare-union-c-143_179_183.html

Having more money doesn't mean you always win. Just that when you get behind you can throw a heap of cash at the problem and hire the best people available. Which clearly if you aren't Ferrari/MB/RedBull you have trouble doing.

Dent in bonnet is elbow shaped. Dent in front guard head shaped?

You mean Ferrari made an actual improvement, as opposed to Renault.

No but atleast they had half a chance - tyre supply and the FIA aside.

F1 is dominated by one team with the others trying to catch up anyway. Therein is the problem this year. Four engines and a few tokens doesn't give much of a chance for people to catch up on the engine side. On the chassis side too few teams have any money to do anything good their either. Not to say MB don't deserve their advantage, just that the immense costs, the limited scope for gains and the week to week belting would give the likes of Renault cause to think why bother? Teams like Sauber and Lotus will be happy to survive the year in half reasonable financial shape - something that would be a massive improvement from where they are now.

Well sucks to have to get excited about 4th place in the constructors. What happened to Grosjean? Loss of power - is that a rod through the block or a gearbox or something other than that? As for Ferrari vs Williams. Ferrari has more money. Money wins. Plus now have to put up with Johnny Herbert all year. He is better on the mike than Alan Jones but that is like saying VD is a better STD than syphilis.

If Bottas doesn't come good they should get Nasr back for a race or two. Then Van de Garde can drive the Sauber for that time (Keeps them out of court) and Williams will have Nasr and Massa. In other news if that is the best F1 can do the formula is totally fkd. 5 cars didn't even make the start. Half the field either running 100's of hp down to protect their engines and no competition anywhere to speak of. Plus so many teams are either going broke or have no sponsorship. Probably only MB, RedBull and Ferrari are viable at present.

The good thing about good tyres is they tend to be good in terms of balance. Same with good rims. I had one fitted last week (just one, budget racing at its best) and no weights were needed- it balanced as fitted. This compared with cheaper road tyres and cheaper rims that need stupid amounts of weights (100 grams and more) to get them close. But yes you go get a lot of pickup on the track. Its easy enough to remove. Anyway the point being their start point for balance is a lot better than road tyres. But balance them anyway. Works great until you put a dirty great big flat spot on them.

Loads of cars not running. Preserving engine mileage?

Think that makes them 245/40/18 soft compound.

There are part numbers on the Hankook website for the tyres which may line up. So in 255/40/17 hard is 1010343, medium is 1012650 and soft is 1011508 apparently. http://www.hankooktyre.com.au/Product/MotorsportTyreSemiSlick.aspx?pageNum=1&subNum=5&ChildNum=3#Z221 Just curious because I would like something a little harder than an A050 and better than an RE55. Almost everything else appears to be sht.

Doesn't answer your second question but just drive to the track with the R comps on. They will be fine.

TL;DR. What spring rates do you have in the things? Sway bars? Basically more neg camber at the front is a good idea. You cant get on the power if you cant turn the corner.

http://www.superpro.com.au/superpro-parts/?p=superpro-bushing-kit-spf1485-25k&view=part&id=SPF1485-25K&cid=999500730&vid= So these should come in 25mm as well but don't appear to?

A standard rear R32 GTR anti roll bar has an outside diameter of 25.4mm or 1" in old school imperial. Says so in the service manual.

Yeah can understand why. Wouldnt an XR6 motor out of, say, an EB be better? Honestly having owned too many GTR's and RB26's they really aren't as brilliant as people make them out to be. I don't know that I would recommend one for a conversion. Not least for the reason that (From memory) the exhaust is on the wrong side for a Falcon.