djr81

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.

Well to be honest I don't know if they will fit - probably with a bit of work but its one of those why bother things. Not sure that many people would have ever tried but RB25/20's & 25/30's exist so you would think you could get a 20 head to fit on a 26 if you really tried. But: The Rb26 head is a pretty good thing and given that most RB26's fail in the bottom end I would recommend you go looking for an Rb26 head. As for the flow thing, no. The car a 2 or 4 door?

Why do you want to put an RB20 head on an Rb26?

Sent you an SMS.

I bought some KU36's which had a tread wear of 180. Manufacture date was late last year. From tempetyres for $205ea for 255/40/17. Cheapest I could find on the Nittos was $280ea from Ozze tyres. Treadwear is 200.

So did the McLaren show any speed at any point before Nando passed out through boredom?

You have to worry a bit that they don't appear to be getting on top of much. But then again most of the runners last year had more problems than the early settlers. Doesn't look good, however. Still you be happy with Lotus' efforts?

You talking about the soft compound Z221 - the C7? How are they relative to the A050's?

Nothing here? http://www.nismo.co.jp/en/products/competition/lsd/repair.html

The problem with all this is you are running out of shock travel - note shock travel not spring travel. I don't care how good the shock absorber is if you don't have any stroke for it to work in it wont work. See here. http://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/374385-bilstein-coilover-conversion/page-1 Part of the fix is to replace the strut tops which gets you shock travel back. As an aside replacing all that old stuff will also get rid of your squeeeeeking & clunking.