frozenpod

Yes I know what dot 3 and 4 is hence my question. There are huge differences between brake fluids even if they are the same ie dot 4 rating. I have found the nissan fluid to be I think thinner providing a noticeably lighter pedal than castrol dot 4 and only slightly lighter pedal (better) than castrol super response dot 4. I would like to find out what the original nissan fluid is exactly check the temperature specs to see if they are suitable for my track car as I would preffer to use it from a pedal feel perspective.

RDA Blacks, purchased to go on the Pulsar as an OEM replacment pad. Car only sees daily and shopping duties so the pads were not super important to be the best in terms of performance. I am not overally impressed, less stopping power than the Hitachi OEM pads and the modulation isn't that great. I can live with them and I thought I was being picky until my partner drove the car for the first time today with the new pads and she isn't happy with them at all. Long story short they have to go and I will be using TRW Lucas pads or OEM pads instead. PS does anyone know exactly what the OEM brake fluid used on an N16 is. I don't mean dot 3 or 4 but which particular brand or is it a custom nissan fluid.

In the case of a grey import the compliancer is listed as the manufacture on the compliance plate. What I was refering to was that perhaps in this case the compliancing organisation is responsable to insure the vehicle complies with all ADR's and EPS requirements just as in the above example Holden is for a VE. Yes the vehicle is 100% original in all aspects except it does not have the original factory cat as per the following. The turbo exhaust is all as factory but after checking the compliance paper work the cat was replaced durring compliance. The cat installed durring compliance has not been modified or removed.

Hi Guys, I am posting for a friend of mine owns a GTR and has ran into a problem we have both read through all 27 pages of this thread. His car is 100% stock not modified in any way and he is the first owner in Australia. His car has been very well looked after and has very low kms. The car has not been regularly driven until recently when he lost his job and was forced to sell is daily driver N15 pulsar. On his way to a job interview he was pulled up and asked to follow the the police to an EPA noise test. This was 10minutes out of his way plus time waiting and time doing the test. This resulted in arriving late and missing the job interview. His car even though unmodified failed the test and he has been issued with the fine ($584). After he was told the car was too loud he explained the car was as factory and not modified which the person doing the test by there agreed and then said "according to these results this vehicle has excessive noise." Given the posts in this thread the fine is real and can be issued in this mannor which I must admit I was surprised at first to learn this. Given the situation he does not feel responseable as it was not his intention to break the law and his vehicle is as factory and he would like to take legal action but would like to check two things. Is there any alternative outcomes in this situation ie is there any point speaking to a lawer as that will cost $200 only to find out he will still have to pay the fine and modify his car to meet the requriements. Given the car is no longer in factory warranty even though still in unmodified as it came from the factory state would this lead to an exception to meeting the test or the responsiblity not being the owners? An example situation if the latest VE from the factory fails to pass noise test from factory I assume that would not be the responsability of the owners as this was something they have not had control over nor the intention of not meeting the requirements. Hence Holden would have to rectify the cars so that they meet the requirements and mostly likely pay any fines incurred. What happens in this situation as the car is quite old out of warranty and is an import?

Just an update about these tyres. They drive really well, nice and smooth and quite with great feel. The design of the tyre allows it to generate some grip at high speed under high load and they are progressive at the limit but the rubber compound is hard and whilst they are wearing really well they don't quite have the grip levels I am looking for. IMO these are not ultra high performance tyres even though they are sold as such. They lack grip when accellerating off the line and low speed braking even though the corner grip isn't too bad they are not in the leguage of pilot sports goodyear F1's and not as good as the federals 595ss. I must say overall I am dissapointed with the tyres even though they do really drive well from a feel and ride quality perspective. If the rubber was a softer compound I think this would be a very good tyre. At this stage with about 2000km on the tyres I am ready to remove them and buy something else. I am currently looking at the new F1 or RE-001's but due to limited tyre sizes available I cant get the exact sizes I need so I am still looking atm.

Firstly back to my comments a couple of pages ago about the federal 595ss. Another mate of mine ordered ZR's they arrived as R's and sent them back. He receieved ZR's for the rears but only R's for the front. Originally he was told that ZR's are not available in Australia by the Federal destributors. I was hoping to drive on them but I haven't been able to organise it thus far. For my own car I have ended up with a set of V8RS Hannkooks, reason they are comming on a set of rims that I have purchased. I normally would never buy second hand tyres or use them but they are 90% tread left near new and the price was right. The tyre is regarded as very quite and grippy. If they are not what I hope I will use them on my dad's car which sees mostly FWY driving where they will be perfectly suited (size is also a perfect match to his rims). Secondly to the comments made about deformation, wow that is a huge call. There are so many things that come into play tyre pressures, tyre size, car weight, driving style and surface conditions not to mention that tyres are very subjective just like brake pads and suspension setups. The federal 595SS from what I have seen are a good tyre for the money but they are not as good as a pilot sport then again I haven't seen anything that compares. Would I put the 595SS on my own car, not the R's but maybe the ZR's but due to supply issues it probably isn't worth the effort. I will see how the Hannkooks go and keep saving the $$$ for the pilot sports.

Two of my friends recently purchased Federal SS595. They both ordered the ZR's compound and the R's arrived instead. Both questioned why they didn't receieve the ZR's and they were told after the R's arrived instead of the ZR's that the ZR's are not available in Australia. They were also told that the EVO was not available in Australia in the sizes they were after. The ZR's according to the federal tyre specification PDF on there website is the softer compound see link below. http://www.federaltyres.com.au/specs/ss595.pdf You will see that the R's have a 260 A A rating where as the ZR's have a 240 AA A rating. The 275/40R17 has the same 240 AA A rating in the spec sheet but both of my friends who ordered the ZR and ended up with this exact tyre ie the R version found the tyre was stamped with 260 A A. This appears to be a typo in the spec sheet but for the rest of the tyres you can see the that the R's are 260 A A and the ZR's are 240 AA A. The 240 AA A rating is the same or very similar to an number of ultra high performance tyres. This is the exact same specification of the pilot sports. This rating isn't the be all and end all of tyres but it can be used as a guide as to the compound and life of the tyre. From personally experience of driving on both pilot sports and the Federal R's there is no comparision in grip in both wet and dry conditions. I have not personally driven on the ZR's but given there ratings and reviews they should be top notch and a lot closer to the pilot sports. The 595EVO range appears to all have the 240 AA A rating and according to the distrubotors the EVO has more grip, is quieter and nicer to drive on than the SS. Can you please post links to the info saying the R's are the softer compound. Can you also provide details that the ZR's are still available and how I can buy some.

Bullet32, Question RE the 595SS, which version is this the ZR's or the R's. From what I have seen the R's have a longer tread wear and are a harder compound. They have an A traction rating where as the ZR's have a AA traction rating and a shorter tread wear. Which 595SS are you using?? From what information I have been able to find and reports from people that have used them the ZR's are an ultra high performance grade tyre but the R's are not. The ZR's are no longer available in Australia, I don't know when they were dropped but as I understand it around 12 months ago most retailers stopped stocking them as the harder compound was all that was available and regarded as an ok but not an ultra higher performance tyre. I would and am very keen to buy a set of the ZR rated 595's but being no longer available and the new 595EVO is also not available I will be buying another brand. After reading this review I am currently thinking about getting a set of the new Goodyear F1 asymmetric http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartD...ay.jsp?ttid=101 My only issue here is I have used the previous version of the F1 and I found them quite good for grip but they wore quickly lasted about 20k. With the previous F1 tread pattern they were a great tyre for the first 10k but after that they started to humm and tramline. I have also had Michelins in the passed and they were exception tyres. They had great grip, super smooth, ultra quite and had great driver feedback. The best thing about them was that the rubber didn't go off with heat cyceling like other tyres. I got 65k out of them before I replaced them with exactly the same tyre, there was on a slight increase in grip between old worn out tyres and brand new ones. Alternatively I am staying away from Dunlop as they performed well when brand new but very quickly the rubber went off and the grip levels were poor. The newest Dunlops may have improved here but I expereienced the same problem with 3 sets so it appeared to be a trend. My current tyres Bridgestones the rubber has also gorn off due to heat cycling. They have about 60% tread depth, they lasted longer at peak performance than the Dunlops I had previously but still no where near as long as the Michelins that were almost as if the rubber never went off. I would be interested to here your thoughts. Thanks