Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 490
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

My pleasure... I'm starting the next one immediately as there's a few people with urgent brake needs... so if anyone is interested please pm me.

anybody know if it's possible/easy/cheap to get a bracket to allow fitment of a GTR sized rotor (324mm) in place of a GTST rotor (296mm).

its for an R33 if that matters.

d'ya reckon a bracket from a GTR would be a simple bolt on? cos i'm thinking it would be a good upgrade to just buy the GTR rotors from here?

edit:

don't worry, i'm an idiot, obviously the calliper is not going to provide the correct contact surface for a bigger rotor :blink:

anyhoo, can you put me down just for a set of regular slotted's for the front of a R33 (bills suck!)

Edited by made_guy

Hi mate,

This is an illustration of what Grooved rotors look like.

The dimples are not drilled through as to maintain the rotor strength, as too much cross-drilled section in a rotor may reduce it's strength and developing cracks starting from around the drill holes, the dimples also acts as an extra cooling in addition to the grooves - just like a cross drilled rotor.

Hope that helps. I have never put one on my car, but with the Gold Passivated material on the grooved rotors, I would believe that will reduce oxidation that mostly cause those ugly surface rust-look on standard OEM rotors.

post-328-1185167087_thumb.jpg

Could you please PM costing for front and rear slotted (only slotted) discs for S1 R33 GTST?

If possible please also include costs for all four corners of Greenstuff pads?

Thanks a bunch!

Chasing prices on rotors for front & rear of my S1 R33 GTS-T, frieght is to 4214

FRONTS = Slotted/Grooved & Dimpled

REARS = Slotted/Grooved

Cheers bloke. :)

Also, quick curiosity question.. Are the rotors a simple slip off & slip on job, with just the wheel bearings to freshen up & nip in ?? I had someone tell me that they needed a press to get the bearings on & off - sounds a bit much to me just to fit a pair of rotors. I've changed them on a SII RX-7 and a Gemini, and had no dramas or needed any special tools...

Edited by SHY 33
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
    • A 180SX has a much better look than a FD. The roofline is far superior being a fastback. It's popups look better. In a world where we all subconsciously add a little bit of low, and wheels of our preference, it's just more handsome than the FD is. The FD just looks 'bubbly' in comparison. It can come down to preference, sure. But "The FD is the BEST looking (on appearances alone) 90's JDM car without question?" Nah. Plenty of questions lol. I could think of 8 cars I think look fundamentally better, and probably a handful of ones that look about on par with a FD. (like say a SW20 MR2) I feel people like/overrate the FD because of it's mythicality/rarity, its rotary and it's unpredictable nature. It probably drives great, you can stuff a ton of tyre under there, has a unique sound, light as hell. I feel that people reading this thinking "YOU CANT RATE A 180 ABOVE A FD BECAUSE A 180 IS A CHEAP DRIFT BUCKET" prove the point about bias as to what the car represents, moreso than how it actually looks.. I feel the 80's boxy/squared off look is becoming better looking due to time, and 90's melted soap bar aesthetics have not aged well. (yet?) And this thread is purely about looks :p
    • A red or yellow S15 wins my vote, Ack that it just scraps in with the 90's cars theme, but they are great looking little sports car Next would be a A80 Supra (pre face lift), whilst the A80 has its own issues, I feel is the best looking larger GT car As for the FD, "I" feel that the reason it triggers me in a non-positve way when looking at one, is like looking at a high maintenance pretty girl who you know is mentally unstable and likely to explode for no apparent reason
    • Yes, it's because it has hips and bulges on the top/front surface, a tiny cockpit and roof, and the skin looks like it is stretched over muscle. The proportions are....perfect. Long nose, short rear, short roof. What's not to like? It continues the theme started with the S1, that peaked with the FC, being "looking like a front engined Porsche", while gaining a little more of the 60's Mustang coupe profile and stretching the skin more tightly over the understructure. The FD is definitely colour sensitive though. Like all Mazdas. There are plenty of details on it that changed over the years that were either better or worse, could have been done better the first time and/or never changed for the worse. But...the same can be said for the NSX. In fact, that's probably even more true for the NSX. I've also just worked out that part of the reason I don't like the rear of the NSX is that the integrated wing is too similar to that shitful R33 rear wing.  
    • I wonder if people like the FD because it reminds them of old 60's roadsters and such. It just gives me such a 'roadster/soft cruising' vibe as opposed to anything more hard-edged and purposeful. That, mixed with 90's melted soap bar styling. It's hardly ugly, but it's kinda oddly proportioned to me, relative to about 10 other cars I had a think about based on this thread. 
×
×
  • Create New...