Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Im in the process of putting together the SK Gb setup for my 33 and so for have the complete Camber/Caster Kit and Pineapples (Not installed yet) and I was measuring up the ride hieght the other day to discover 260mm front and 350mm rear centre of wheel to guard hieght.

Now Ive always thought my line sits a little lower than most so is there such a thing as Factory lowered suspension on the 33 GTST???

Im fairly sure that I have factory suspension but not 100%

The suspension travel still feels fairly tight so I dont "think" it is past its use by date but again im not sure

Car is 98 GTST with 100k (Genuine with books)

Hey guys,

Im in the process of putting together the SK Gb setup for my 33 and so for have the complete Camber/Caster Kit and Pineapples (Not installed yet) and I was measuring up the ride hieght the other day to discover 260mm front and 350mm rear centre of wheel to guard hieght.

Now Ive always thought my line sits a little lower than most so is there such a thing as Factory lowered suspension on the 33 GTST???

Im fairly sure that I have factory suspension but not 100%

The suspension travel still feels fairly tight so I dont "think" it is past its use by date but again im not sure

Car is 98 GTST with 100k (Genuine with books)

260 mm front, I don't think so?

Standard (new) height is 375 mm front and 365 mm rear, settling 15 mm from standard is not unusual.

Cheers

Gary

GTR V-Spec's factory suspension are generally lower than the normal GTR's. Check your VIN through Nissan FAST, might shed some light on the suspension.
Car is 98 GTST with 100k (Genuine with books)
Eh, 15mm in 100kk's isn't "sagging", it's well in the region of "acceptable settling". :P

Cheers

Gary

Thanks SK looks like I still have a bit of time to get new gear. As I said earlier it still feels very tight and the car has been meticulously looked after since ive had it so I wouldnt think they are shot.

As long as they will hang in for at least this year ill be happy.

Now to just put the camber and caster kit on

Thanks again for the advice

Eh, 15mm in 100kk's isn't "sagging", it's well in the region of "acceptable settling". :P

Cheers

Gary

true, 350 is still legal (at the limit), and 360 is well over legal for the front. if he wasnt gonna buy new stuff anyway, you'd probably get away with it. last thing u want however is to get defected for being a few mm too low with stock suspension because u just put in a full tank of fuel. so honestly there isnt a lot of point having stock suspension if theres still a good chance of getting defected anyway.

true, 350 is still legal (at the limit), and 360 is well over legal for the front. if he wasnt gonna buy new stuff anyway, you'd probably get away with it. last thing u want however is to get defected for being a few mm too low with stock suspension because u just put in a full tank of fuel. so honestly there isnt a lot of point having stock suspension if theres still a good chance of getting defected anyway.

Unless I'm mistaken he's in NSW, we don't have ignorant Nazis doing rego here like you do in SA. We actually follow the ADR's, which means 345/335 is OK as long as it has a well designed 3" exhaust and the bump stops have been trimmed.

Cheers

Gary

Unless I'm mistaken he's in NSW, we don't have ignorant Nazis doing rego here like you do in SA. We actually follow the ADR's, which means 345/335 is OK as long as it has a well designed 3" exhaust and the bump stops have been trimmed.

Cheers

Gary

is it 345/335 over there? bastards. its 350/340 here, i thought that was universal for all states.

SA may have nazi's, but technically if the car is a few mm before 350, it is illegal and against the ADR's.

There are basically 3 relevant ADR's;

500 mm headlight centre from the ground.

100 mm minimum ground clearance.

2/3rd suspension travel retained.

The 500 mm headlights is never a problem for a R32/33/34, because the engine subframe would be scraping on the ground if the headlights were 500 mm or less. Even standard length shocks don't have a problem with retaining 2/3rd the travel at 345/335. Then there are the options of lower profile strut tops and shorter shocks if necessary, remembering that 2/3rds is metal to metal.

The one that causes the most problem for R32/33/34's is the 100 mm minimum ground clearance, as the exhaust goes under the rear subframe. So a car with a 2.5" exhaust of decent design would have no problem with clearing 100 mm at 345/335. Even a 3" usually makes it, it's when you get to 3.5" and 4" exhausts that 345/335 isn't possible, there simply isn't enough room to fit that diameter exhaust under the subframe.

So the simplistic Nazis that say 350/340 is the ADR height are completely incorrect, there is no such measurement specified. The fact is I could have one at 320/310 that fully complied with the ADR's, if I used the appropriate parts, oval exhaust, short shocks and low profile strut tops.

Cheers

Gary

ahk, over here in SA the eyebrow height is the first thing they go for.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/post-a192357-

it's actually 355 and 345 for the R33/R32. so technically it would be illegal. but if they dont check for that over there then ur in business.

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

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • 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. 
×
×
  • Create New...