Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok, I came to the conclusion that i need some new wheels with more dish so i thought i would ask you guys what fits under a 4 door without flaring ( and prefer not to roll as i dont want to crack the paint, But will if needed). Something in a 17 X 8/9 i would imagine but some help with offsets would really help.

Thanks for your help.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/297119-calling-r32-4-door-owners/
Share on other sites

Front 17 x 8 +35

Rear 17 x 9 + 42

front offset looks crap though, but I don't think you can get much more offset than my rears, my rear rims are around 1/2 cm from my hicas rack.

I think the insides of my rears are rolled though, but not flared

^^^ your doing it wrongggggggggggg^^^^^^^^^^^

Most rims (each rim is different, this is just a gernalisation) the wider and lower the offset you go the more dish it will create. A +45 9 inch rim will usually have next to no dish while a +5 9 inch rim will have a noticable amount. Remember this is just a generalisation as each rim differs - some create taper, some have different disk clearance etc et

PM Nisskid and he will be able to tell you exactly what you need being a 32 4 door owner.

Here is a link to my mates 4 door to give you a rough idea to work off -

http://nissansilvia.com/forums/index.php?s...p;#entry5461524

There is plenty of infomation on here and nissansilvia for 32 4 doors and rims.

Edited by Habler
Front 17 x 8 +35

Rear 17 x 9 + 42

front offset looks crap though, but I don't think you can get much more offset than my rears, my rear rims are around 1/2 cm from my hicas rack.

I think the insides of my rears are rolled though, but not flared

yep thats a fail.

mate get 17*9 all round with an offset between 24 to 16 depending on how baller you want to go (or how much guard work you want to do)

17*9 + 24 would be nice, and would just stick outside the stock guards ;)

edit - with that said, r33 GTR wheels look sexy on 32s (17*9 +30)

racey (URAS NS-01 17x8/9 +30)

00001qb9.jpg

racey (33 GTR wheels)

dscn0042zz4.jpg

newschool dish (Volk GT-P 17x9 +16)

DSCN8977.jpg

old school (17x8.5 +20 and 17x9.5 +38)

dscn0029smalltp6.jpg

old school racing (17x9 +24)

wallpaperuf.jpg

if you want maximum dish with aggressive fitment, something around 10" +22 with 235 stretched onto it, standard camber arms (decent amount of camber), then on the front 9" +15 with 215 stretched on, with a decent amount of camber.

yep thats a fail.

mate get 17*9 all round with an offset between 24 to 16 depending on how baller you want to go (or how much guard work you want to do)

17*9 + 24 would be nice, and would just stick outside the stock guards :bunny:

edit - with that said, r33 GTR wheels look sexy on 32s (17*9 +30)

I'll agree my front offset is shithouse, but i don't particular want my rims sticking out of my guards, and the rears have a reasonable amount of dish

marq29.jpg

nisskid, is that yours in the last pic? looking tuff bro. how'd you go about doing your guards? i'm after a simliar roll/flare on mine. did you just use a bolt on hub guard roller and bog? and also how far can you roll 4dr rear guards withou getting a pressure dent? the swage through the middle should mean you can get a heap more than silvias etc? only limiting factor would be the door

nisskid, is that yours in the last pic? looking tuff bro. how'd you go about doing your guards? i'm after a simliar roll/flare on mine. did you just use a bolt on hub guard roller and bog? and also how far can you roll 4dr rear guards withou getting a pressure dent? the swage through the middle should mean you can get a heap more than silvias etc? only limiting factor would be the door

yeh it's what mine looked like about a year ago, looks a bit different now lol

that was just pulling the flare out with some clamps, then bogging. honestly i probably wouldnt recommend doing it again, it really doesnt give u a lot of clearance with the shape of 32 guards. i pulled mine a decent way, but i know of mates who've popped their rear 4dr guards, as i personally havent popped mine myself, not sure how far u can go before it does.

  • 7 months later...

hey guys, im looking at buying some new wheels for my 4 door but its a 4 stud ....

is the offsets different in N/A's due to smaller brakes ??

and what would be perfect size and offset to fill out the guards without modifying the guards at all ??

ive read somewhere that if you get 18's they will clear the brakes and you wont need to worry about offset??

im just really confused so yea

cheers guys

Nope.

But you will find it can handle more dish as the NA 32 4dr's had shit house tiny brakes.

I'd upgrade brakes to the Type M items which are the R33 brakes.

Then if you had enough cash do the 5 stud hub conversion and then the world is your oyster.

I had 17 x 8 +18 on the front and 17 x 9 +24 on my old 4dr.

But as nisskid has stated you can go wider and lower offsets.

  • 2 weeks later...

hey guys,

found some rims i like and that will fit my budget (either koya drift teks or koya rg teks).

will 18x8.5 and 18x9.5 +34 all round fit under a 32 N/a 4 door Without Modification ??

if not will 18x8 and 18x9 +34 fit ??

cheers

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

    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...