Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmm , so looks like R32GTST's get the 15/16 bore master cylinder .

Some more possibilities , these Nissans have 25.4mm (1") master cylinders .

Maxima 5/90 on 3L , Pathfinder D21 VG30E 4x4 10/92 - 11/95 , Pathfinder R50 V6 4x4 11/95-00 .

Patrol Y60 (GQ series) had both the 1" and 1 1/16 BMC .

Going to have to look through wreckers or pester some poor parts person .

Cheers A .

I had a dig through Pick and Pay Less today and mainly found out what doesn't have what I need . Just about all the larger heavier cars like 280ZX's , Z31 300Z , 300C's use some form of BM44 15/16 bore master cylinders .

The only useful thing I did find was a D21 Navara (5/87) with a Nabco BM50 1" cylinder , perfect except it had no proportioning valve . It also only had 1 front and 1 rear hydraulic line outlet so would need a "T" for the front and some kind of external rear line pressure limiting valve ie like JDM R30's and Bluebirds had .

They had no Y60 (GQ) Patrols or later D50 Pathfinders to look at .

Cheers A .

Maxima 5/90 on 3L , Pathfinder D21 VG30E 4x4 10/92 - 11/95 , Pathfinder R50 V6 4x4 11/95-00 .

Patrol Y60 (GQ series) had both the 1" and 1 1/16 BMC .

Interesting....this means you have a good chance finding something local. PBR make local master cylinders for early D21s. Not sure where the lines come out though?

The kindest thing anyone ever did to an Australian built Nissan was to throw all PBR/Girlock hydraulics as far away as possible . Irks me to say it but local content brake components are rubish compared to JDM bits .

Rally fraternity hate PBR/Girlock cylinders because they are built to a price not to a standard .

Thanks anyway cheers A .

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

discopotato03, I'd like to wade in on this discussion. I'm currently looking for a solution for my S13 Silvia I'm building that now has a set of R33 GT-R Brembo's fitted:

Pics

http://www.sillbeer.com/2007/01/and-now-wh...ew-hotness.html

Now I also saw the article on the US site where they had used a Z32 300ZX Brembo brake upgrade and went for the 1 1/16" non-ABS BMC. Unfortunately like you I've realised they're only in LHD guise (UGH!!!!).

So if anyone can help in identifying if Nissan (ie. Nabco/Tokico) make a 1 1/16" non-ABS BMC for RHD situations from a car with a similar weight distribution as a Skyline/Silvia, please speak up...otherwise a 1" might have to do. Part numbers would be very helpful too.

Cheers

Brendan

Just a thought, but according to most specifications around the web, the R32 GT-R N1 versions had the ABS removed to reduce weight, would that then point towards the possibility of them having a 3 port brake master cylinder in the larger BM57 size?

Anyone?

Edited by VSPEC32
Dayam aye, why is the R33 one smaller? You'd think less travel, more force would be better (except when you lock them up too easily)

Just remember to think about the correct meaning of the words you are using....and never forget these two equations.

Pressure (P) = Force (F) / Area (A) .................... Eqn (1)

Friction = uN (Normal force N) .................... Eqn (2)

A few things impact on the general setup...but we can neglect pedal ratio as we are using all this different gear on the same car (Assumed).

So you put a smaller master cylinder in your car. That means you have less area of piston. So making the denominator smaller does not affect the numerator. So that is using a smaller master cylinder doesnt directly affect the force...it affects the pressure. It increases the pressure in the brake lines.

Now that is related to the caliper and pistons/pads as its the pressure in the brake lines that apply a normal force to the pad onto the rotor.

So there are two types of friction, static and kinetec. Now whilst static friciton is higher then kinetic, we dont want to be locking brakes. As that means we have less grip with the road as a locked tyre is modelled as kinetic friction. (remember thats the lower of friction values...bad if we are tryign to stop a car) So remember a rolling tyres grip level is modelled by static friction, ie no relative slip between the two surfaces.

So not wanting to lock a tyre, we must ensure the pad is moving relative to the rotor. ie Kinetic friction.

Now we only want enough force that brings the pad and rotors to the brink of lock up. If we lock up we lose tyre grip with the road.

So remembering that P = F/A. You havent changed your calipers, so the Area of pitons is the same. Having increase the pressure in the lines means that F=PA. A is constant, so the more pressure we have the more force we have.

So that all said, this all assumes the same pedal effort all the way back at Eqn 1. So you apply a 10kg load onto the brake pedal with a smaller master cylinder you will be closer to locking up the brakes with a smaller master cylinder then you would a larger master cylinder. If you have bigger pistons in your caliper and combine that with a smaller master cylinder then you will again have brakes that lock up too easily.

So if you increase the piston size in your calipers, then its not a bad idea to increase the diameter in your BMC. It helps not to have a hair trigger brake pad ready to lock your rotor as soon as you look at the brake pedal. Looking at Nissan it seems they have done the same thing.

Now take this with a grain of salt, but i have driven an R32 GTSt with Brembos it stopped realy nicely. Loved how it stopped. I have driven an R33 GTSt with Brembos and i jumped on the pedal and instantly locked them all up and crashed into witches hats. Now i dont know what pads and tyres were like, and the R33 was on a slippery skid pan...but its something that is in the back of my mind.

So why did Nissan drop the BMC size on the R33. I dont know. But if ppl can tell me the coeffecient of friciton of the R32 and R33 std pads...i suspect they dropped the BMC size as they reduced the friction in the pad used as the car had bigger rotors and would handle the heat better then an R32. Lower temp pads normally means lower friction coeffecient.

The GTRs which would have had more performance orientated pads woudl have had a higher u level meaning that a pedal offering more modulation / travel would be desirable.

Just a thought, but according to most specifications around the web, the R32 GT-R N1 versions had the ABS removed to reduce weight, would that then point towards the possibility of them having a 3 port brake master cylinder in the larger BM57 size?

Has anyone got any solid information on this?

Has anyone got any solid information on this?

Our Targa car is a genuine R33 N1, it has ABS. I'm pretty sure i've heard duncan taling about the R32 N1 ATTESSA unit, as it's ABS functions are deleted, so R32 N1 (and Nismo) have no ABS.

Better late than never.

Late 1992 R32 GTST Non-ABS Master Cyl.

Excellent pedal feel. Almost too easy to lock all 4 wheels but that comes down to the pad that I run.

Hasn't had a flush for 1yr. :S

Only markings I can see on it are:

BM-44

NAB00

I had a mate with a Late 1992 GTS4 check his he said it says..

Japan Nissan Tokico BM50

post-382-1173415001.jpg

post-382-1173415006.jpg

post-382-1173415011.jpg

post-382-1173415018.jpg

Just had a look at mine

car was originally an 1993 R32 GTS and it has a Tokico BM38.

pedal feel is good with the crappy single piston callipers but i am going to have to upgrade it now that gtr32 calipers and 324mm rotors are going on or I am guessing the pedal would hit the floor before lockup :glare:

OK, still trying to track down information on the brake master cylinder from an R32 GT-R N1 (BNR32 N1) - I did manage to find a Chassis number...would that help anyone in tracking it down?

R32 GT-R V-SPEC N1 > KBNR32RBFS ZN

R32 GT-R V-SPEC II N1 > KBNR32RBFS8 ZN

Cheers

Brendan

Edited by VSPEC32

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

    • Get an inspection camera up there. 
    • Yeah, but look at the margin in viscosity between the 40 and the 60 at 125°C. It is not very large. It is the difference between 7 and 11 cP. Compare that to the viscosity at only 90°C. The viscosity axis is logarithmic. The numbers at 90 are ~15 and ~35. That is about half for the 40 wt oil and <half for the 60. You give up viscosity EXPONENTIALLY as temperature rises. Literally. That is why I declare thicker oil to be a bandaid, and a brittle one at that. Keep the oil temperature under about 110°C and you should be better off.   Having said all of that, which remains true as a general principle, if you have indeed lost enough oil from the sump that the pump was seeing slightly aerated oil, then all bets are off. That would of course cause oil pressure to collapse. And 35 psi is a collapse given what you were doing to the engine. Especially if the oil was that hot and viscosity had also collapsed. And I would put money on rod or main bearings being the source of the any noise that registered as knock. Hydraulic lifters should be able to cope with the hotter oil and lower pressure enough to prvent too much high frequency noise, although I am willing to admit it could be the source.
    • Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
×
×
  • Create New...