Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The DBA catalogue is a little unclear.

Base model GTRs (R32, all dates) had 296x 32mm discs. They run a grey/green rotor with either nissan or sumitomo brand (can't remember)

Vspec GTRs (R32) had the same brembos as R33 and R34, 324 x 32mm. The caliper is black and has Brembo on it

So, unless you have the brembo brakes, you need the smaller discs. They are still a pretty capable setup compared to most facotry cars.

For interest, R33 GTSt had 296x30mm discs, so in practice the base model r32 gtr and the 33 gtst brakes are interchangeable

My R32 GTR is a February 1994 build, and I have standard Nissan sumitomo's that every other BNR32 has. Only diff between R32 GTR and 33 GTST is that one is 30mm thick and the other is 32mm thck.

My R32 GTR is a February 1994 build, and I have standard Nissan sumitomo's that every other BNR32 has. Only diff between R32 GTR and 33 GTST is that one is 30mm thick and the other is 32mm thck.

Yep, as Duncan says only the Vspec 32 got the brembos.

Also, weren't the 324mm rotors with the brembos only 30mm wide?

  • 4 weeks later...

If I can revive this thread...

Will Nissan/Sumitomo calipers (i.e. non brembo) work with aftermarket 324mm rotors? Or will I have to upgrade my calipers as well if I go to 324mm rotors?

Thanks in advance!

You can space the caliper out with an adapter that makes the sumitomos work with the gtr 324mm rotors - i had the UAS one for a while. The caliper seems to work fine despite the 324mm rotor being 2mm thinner if that's what you're worried about.

You can space the caliper out with an adapter that makes the sumitomos work with the gtr 324mm rotors - i had the UAS one for a while. The caliper seems to work fine despite the 324mm rotor being 2mm thinner if that's what you're worried about.

Thanks for the reply. It is exactly this conundrum I am facing at the moment - stick with 296mm rotor and use a DBA4000 for a cheap upgrade; or getting bigger wheels (e.g. R34 GTR) and go to a 324mm rotor with the UAS adapter.

When you say you had one for a while, what was the rest of your setup/why did you get rid of it/did the car stop good while you had it?!

Cheers

When you say you had one for a while, what was the rest of your setup/why did you get rid of it/did the car stop good while you had it?!

I had a lot of problems with brakes at the track - and made a number of changes, some of which werent required in hindsight..... I dont think there was any problem with the UAS adapters (though there is a fair bit of grinding to make them fit). I still have them in a box somewhere.... The DBA4000s i got cracked tho, so I would you avoid them if they still have that retarded, almost radial, slot design.

I'm running the D2/G4 330mm kit now. Its definitely better, but more expensive.

What are you running now and what problems do you have? Are you up for rotors now?

What are you running now and what problems do you have? Are you up for rotors now?

Currently everything is stock as a rock - OE 296mm rotors and the standard Nissan/Sumitomo caliper with an unknown pad. At the cars first track day at Wakefield on 28/5/2011, I had a lot of vibration and not a lot of stopping power by the end of the day. Stopped well enough at first though, but I wasn't pushing it too much.

I am definitely up for rotors now and have been quoted for a pair of DBA4000 XS which with decent pads I understand will do the job for a while. It's relatively cheap (under $800) which is a factor.

And here's the but: I'd like to be doing more track days ideally once per month or every two months at least. If I spend more on a brake upgrade now, will it save me more later and most importantly will I be doing better lap times sooner? If the answer to this is yes, then I need new, bigger wheels and tyres as well so the costs are escalating exponentially!

Who thought motorsport would be expensive?! haha

Who thought motorsport would be expensive?! haha

Yeah the vibration is what caused me problems....

If I were you, i'd start with;

- Check rotors with verniers, if 30mm or over, keep them

- get a set of track pads in the fronts at least - Ferodo DS3000, EBC Yellow etc. Swap them in just before you drive to the track, then put the current ones back in when you get home

And see how that goes.

My car already had 17s, so the 324/330s weren't a problem.

Currently everything is stock as a rock - OE 296mm rotors and the standard Nissan/Sumitomo caliper with an unknown pad. At the cars first track day at Wakefield on 28/5/2011, I had a lot of vibration and not a lot of stopping power by the end of the day. Stopped well enough at first though, but I wasn't pushing it too much.

I am definitely up for rotors now and have been quoted for a pair of DBA4000 XS which with decent pads I understand will do the job for a while. It's relatively cheap (under $800) which is a factor.

And here's the but: I'd like to be doing more track days ideally once per month or every two months at least. If I spend more on a brake upgrade now, will it save me more later and most importantly will I be doing better lap times sooner? If the answer to this is yes, then I need new, bigger wheels and tyres as well so the costs are escalating exponentially!

Who thought motorsport would be expensive?! haha

Vibration is usually because the rotor is warped & they need skimming.

The stock R32 gear is really not up to much. The rotors are too small, the callipers flex alot and the pads are too small. Upgrading will save you mone in the long run but it is expensive up front.

As for performance you can generate nearly the same amount of retardation with the original gear just not for long. There is stuff all time in it.

I hope for everyones sake the DBA4000 series is alot better than it was. I would check the price on some Project Mu rotors on import.

As some free advice (Worth every cent) a cheap data logger that shows you how many gees you pull under brakes (& laterally) is one of the best investments you can make. Try the new GTech stuff (fanatic?) or just an app for your phone.

Yeah the vibration is what caused me problems....

If I were you, i'd start with;

- Check rotors with verniers, if 30mm or over, keep them

- get a set of track pads in the fronts at least - Ferodo DS3000, EBC Yellow etc. Swap them in just before you drive to the track, then put the current ones back in when you get home

And see how that goes.

My car already had 17s, so the 324/330s weren't a problem.

Dont use a vernier. They dont clear the lip on the outside of the rotor & hence dont measure properly. Use a micrometer.

If you are doing sprints get a pad that works from cold. Eg a DS2500 rather than a 3000. Then you dont have to swap them all the time.

Edited by djr81

If I were you, i'd start with;

- Check rotors with verniers, if 30mm or over, keep them

- get a set of track pads in the fronts at least - Ferodo DS3000, EBC Yellow etc. Swap them in just before you drive to the track, then put the current ones back in when you get home

Front rotors were 31.86mm before the track day and they now need to be machined at the very least. That being the case, my mindset is to spend a little bit more and get new rotors for the front. I'm definitely going to switch to a better pad.

I just can't shake the feeling that the smartest thing to do would be to upgrade the wheels to 17 or 18" and go with a bigger rotor.

Yep...the best thing to do is to change to 17x9, eg 33 GTR wheels. Plenty of reasonably size semi slicks, and decent sized brakes will fit under them. Then buy ksport/g4/d2 etc 330mm brakes to fit under them.

That will keep you in relatively cheap tyres and brakes up to a reasonable level of power mods

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

    • I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
    • In the context of cam 'upgrader' I mean generally people who upgrade headers/cams - not my specific change. I mean it makes sense that if I had a bigger cam, I may get more false lean readings. So if I went smaller, I'd get less false lean readings. To a point where perhaps stock.. I'd have no false lean readings, according to the ECU. But I'm way richer than stock. My bigger than normal cam in the past also was giving false rich leanings. It's rather odd and doesn't add up or pass the pub test. Realistically what I want is the narrowbands to effectively work as closed loop fuel control and keep my AFR around 14.7 on light sections of the map. Which is of course the purpose of narrowband CL fuel control. So if I can change the switch points so the NB's target 14.7 (as read by my WB) then this should be fine. Haven't actually tested to see what the changed switchpoints actually result in - car needs to be in a position it can idle for awhile to do that. I suspect it will be a troublesome 15 min drive home with lots of stalling and way too rich/lean transient nightmare bucking away for that first drive at 2am or whevener it ends up being. Hopefully it's all tune-able. Realistically it should be. This is a very mild cam.
    • Messing with narrowband switchovers is a terrible bandaid. I don't want to think about it. You are a cam "upgrader" only in concept. As you said, your new cam is actually smaller, so it's technically a downgrade. OK, likely a very small downgrade, but nevertheless. But the big thing that will be the most likely suspect is the change of the advance angle. That change could be equivalent to a substantial decrease in cam lobe duration. I haven't gone to the effort of trying to think about what your change would actually cause. But until someone (you, me (unlikely), Matt, someone else) does so and comes to a conclusion about the effect, it remains a possibility that that is the change that is causing what you're seeing.
×
×
  • Create New...