Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yeah had them on the rear of my R33 N/A (235/17's)

were really quite good in the dry but seemed to slide really easy in the wet (but predictable n controllable).

not sure if i would have liked them on a 200hpatw+ GTST... Depends what size you are going for too i guess. If you are going for a 255 or 265 then the grip is going to be better for the turbo application...

Good budget tyre. I emphasize the word budget tho. U get what you pay for.

These are supposed to be a "made by Bridgestone" tyre. That being the case, I would be happy to try them.

Anyone used these things, and has comments (good or bad).

Tx

Hey Justin How are you?

Yeah i remember those tyres, when i bought them from bob jane the guy told me the same thing that they were made by bridgestone and the tread pattern reduces road noise.

I drive very slow lol so they worked alright.

But as Justin Said they are good budget tyres.

These are supposed to be a "made by Bridgestone" tyre. That being the case, I would be happy to try them.

Anyone used these things, and has comments (good or bad).

Tx

that wont mean they are good, just that they probably wont blow out on u lol

a lot of the cheap brands are "made by big name companies" as its a big market they want a part of, but dont want to associate their name with because they are made on the cheap.

it depends what car they are going on, if they are going on a skyline id have to ask why buy a performance car if you're going to make it perform poorly by cheaping out on tyres. if its a shitter daily then fair enough lol

Thanks for the feedback, guys.

They'll be going on the R32 GTS4 - 235/45x17s. As you can see from the panel at left, I've done the RB25 upgrade, so there is a bit more punch than your ordinary GTS4.

If they're a bit sus in the wet, maybe better to spend a few more $$$ for brand-name.

you mention GTS4 n RB25 so im assuming you mean non-turbo and awd.

In which case, i think they would be fine. That is if you are on a budget. Otherwise always spend more n get better.

But if it is a price range thing and also going on a non-turbo i think you will be plenty satisfied. They hung on just fine in my R33 N/A.

N even though not massive outright grip they are very predictable. Which is worth its weight in gold if you ask me(i come from a biking background)

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...