Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

See, there ya go, my experiences with A050's is different, we've found them faster at 32 hot, the Japanese Yoki guy suggested the same.

BUT, road rallying is completely different to circuit, and additionally, what works on a 1600kg GTR may well be diiferent to a 1400kg GTR.

Pretty sure Blaise found that same results as me in his 900kgs EMO.

(ok so maybe it was 1200kgs)

^^^^ Hahaha, beat me to it. My 2.8 litre 900kg Evo loved the A050's. ;) (ok...maybe a 2.0 litre 1260kg one) I found the max pressure in the dry to run was 34. Woo, also got the tip from the TA guys on the 32psi setting but mine seemed to go better and give more even temps across the tyre face at 34 hot. You definately start to hurt them over that. Although only exception being the wet. I found they offer more grip slightly harder in the wet.

Chris, you are spot on re Barbagallo. The surface in general is very abrasive on tyres, and particular hard on the front left due to the layout. You can never have enough front camber on the front left there. Re the tyre wear, if you are wearing the middle out, that may be an indicator they are too hard and crowning in the middle. Teh edge wear is more about alignment.

^^^^ Hahaha, beat me to it. My 2.8 litre 900kg Evo loved the A050's. ;) (ok...maybe a 2.0 litre 1260kg one) I found the max pressure in the dry to run was 34. Woo, also got the tip from the TA guys on the 32psi setting but mine seemed to go better and give more even temps across the tyre face at 34 hot. You definately start to hurt them over that. Although only exception being the wet. I found they offer more grip slightly harder in the wet.

Chris, you are spot on re Barbagallo. The surface in general is very abrasive on tyres, and particular hard on the front left due to the layout. You can never have enough front camber on the front left there. Re the tyre wear, if you are wearing the middle out, that may be an indicator they are too hard and crowning in the middle. Teh edge wear is more about alignment.

Surely though more weight requires more tyre pressure? A 1600kg (Full fat with driver & fuel) R32 would want/need a higher run pressure than an Emo.

^^^^ I'm not sure on the science Richard. Certainly heavier, more powerful cars (GTR's) hurt tyres more than lighter less powerful ones, but the pressure seems to be more dependent on the characteristics of the tyre and its carcass as opposed to the car its on. The tyre itself seems to have a sweet spot pressure wise.

^^^^ I'm not sure on the science Richard. Certainly heavier, more powerful cars (GTR's) hurt tyres more than lighter less powerful ones, but the pressure seems to be more dependent on the characteristics of the tyre and its carcass as opposed to the car its on. The tyre itself seems to have a sweet spot pressure wise.

If the RE55 is no more then it looks like I will need something different. Either Yokies or Dunlops. May not have a choice anymore if Bridgestone dont get their sht together & offer something decent. I had always stayed away from the Yokies because of the A048s reputation & the Dunlops because I'm not a squillionaire. Toyos are hopeless on a heavy car.

No idea where to source Dunlops from at a reasonable price in WA, however. From memory Wheels World does the Yokies (They sponser the SES & I cant remember the blokes name - how bad is that?)

Wish my tub of lard weighed 900kg!

^^^^ Speak to John at Wheels World. I was the same on the yokies initially. Was a dyed in the cloth Bridgestone user and took some convincing to come across to yokie, also based on the fact the A048 were so crap!! But they are an excellent tyre. The M compound is the "hard" (they do an S softer one) and is the way forward. Better price than the dunlops generally as well.

Nitto NT01's are a decent semi for those of us who are prepared to compramise in the grip -v- life equation just a bit. Bugger the local rip offs, import them.

AFAIK Nitto = Toyo.

Also Tyre rack do not offer R compounds in anything you would not be ashamed of.

AFAIK Nitto = Toyo.

...........

So people say. Certainly they have a business connexion but I've yet to see anything fairly definate that indicates they use the same compound. As well the NT01's have a good rep in the US, the post RA1 Toyos do not.

the 'business relationship' is that Nitto is a brand division of Toyo in the USA (& Canada), with the marketing advantage of being 'made in the USA'.

http://www.toyojapan.com/cgi-bin/column/data/release/1119852599.html

Did Nitto North America's 25 staff develop an entirely new semi slick construction and compound and sell it cheaper than the parent company's R888, or is it built with Toyo technology and differentiated by a new look for the North American market? I'd be looking for any evidence that it is different...

Edited by hrd-hr30

So people say. Certainly they have a business connexion but I've yet to see anything fairly definate that indicates they use the same compound. As well the NT01's have a good rep in the US, the post RA1 Toyos do not.

They have the same tread wear rating - 100 UTQG. Also the same construction.

And yes, Toyo are the parent company for Nitto.

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

    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
    • Holy hell! That is absolutely stunning! Great work!!!
×
×
  • Create New...