Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It's not close to the fluid channels. It's close to the hole where the bolt goes through the caliper to hold the caliper together.

I'm pretty sure the area is actually not load bearing, but it's still a major PITA and not great that it has to be ground away at all.

I would never grind anyway anything brake related (but that's just me).

Nissan designed it with all that material for a reason, now you're grinding it off.

I would be getting GKTech to refund all your money and replace your brake caliper, misleading & false advertising.

It's not close to the fluid channels. It's close to the hole where the bolt goes through the caliper to hold the caliper together.

I'm pretty sure the area is actually not load bearing, but it's still a major PITA and not great that it has to be ground away at all.

My bad. I didn't look closely enough at the pics.

It is load bearing though. Compressive force from the bolts holding it all together is only able to work where there is material. Sure, there is little material on that side to start with.....but now there is none.

Disc in lathe is the only smart answer if the brackets can't be designed to work properly without needing a huge bodge on the caliper.

Ok...before I did it, I was of the same opinion, no way in hell am I grinding my calipers. Automatic reaction that I think everyone has when they hear those words. While it is a pita to do it, having done it now I would find it extremely unlikely nissan designed the caliper to such fine tolerances that the minute amount that comes off is enough to make or break them. I could be wrong, sure, but it does seem unlikely.

I can that I have had none of this trouble with the 280-324 bracket.

that's interesting, could you confirm how the pad sits on the disc, as in, any overhang? Whilst exchanging emails with gktech their position was cos of the diameter change from 296>324 disc, it wouldn't fit into the caliper and still have the pad fit completely on the disc, it would have overhang in the middle of the outer edge, hence the need to remove a little at the ends of the caliper and allow the pad to sit on the edge of the disc rather than hanging over it.

That's a line they've fed you. The shape of the 280mm calipers and the 296mm calipers is essentially the same. And IF there was a difference in shape, it would be the smaller caliper that would have a hard time fitting onto the 324mm rotor, not the 296mm caliper.

The 280->324 adapters are classic dogbones. There is enough radial movement needed that the holes can be fit in quite easily. But the 296->324 change is so small that they've had to try to slip them off to one side, which causes the problem with making it all fit. This is why the 280->324 ones have been available since forever and the 296->324 ones have been "in development" for so bloody long. Because there's not way to make them work nicely.

can you stop talking about stuff you don't have first-hand experience with please? I'm always open to people's ideas and opinions but your self-righteousness really gets old. FFS, the caliper fitted onto the disc, your post above has nothing to do with what I asked the guy above with his brake pad fitment. When I overlaid the 324mm disc with the 296mm disc, the change in profile pretty much perfectly matched the area that needed to be taken out of the caliper....all part of checking for myself what needed to be done and if it was a good idea to go ahead with or not.

Yup, the pad hangs over the edge of the rotor by just a tad. A couple of mm at most. Hasn't made any difference. The rears make the noise not the fronts atm.

I wouldn't buy a product that requires modification of the calliper material. Dust covers, sure, not integral components, but I wouldn't be taking metal from the caliper itself.

  • 2 weeks later...

Makes me feel better for buying the UAS ones. Absolutely no grinding required, not even close. Just had a slight offset issue (fixed with 1.5mm spacer) and slight pad overhang that was 100% fixed by changing to DB1199 pads.

I guess they wanted to minimize the pad overhang issue by positioning the caliper closer to the rotor, but in doing so resulted in grinding required (which I wouldn't do). Would have been better if they worked with local pad supplier to provide DB1199 pads.

Edited by simpletool
  • 3 months later...

I have a question for the guys who have fitted these brackets. Included in the kit are 4 alloy shims/spacers - approx 3.5mm thick. What are these for, and where do they go?

Have only test fitted at this stage, and haven't ground the calipers. It looks like the caliper could move towards the outside of the car slightly to centre it on the rotor, but only 1-2 mm, not 3.5mm.

Funnily enough I mentioned to GKtech they should probably ship them with small spacers to centre the caliper. Their reply was that it wasn't needed due to the "proper" engineering.

Edited by simpletool
  • 4 weeks later...

Finished fitting our brackets today, thought I'd share a few things:

We started on the caliper grinding with Dremel type grinding stones & a file - this was an absolute waste of time.

Ended up going to Bunnings and buying a carbide burr with a 6mm shaft, and used it in an air powered die grinder. This was fantastic, until it started to clog with aluminium as we were almost finished the first caliper. Cleaned it out a few times with a wire wheel on a grinder, but it got more & more clogged with melted ali & stopped cutting at all.

I then remembered that I had some cutting burrs among the router bits I inherited from my dad, and found a more open cutter than the Bunnings one. We ground out the second caliper with this, also using some lubricant - this more open cutter didn't clog at all & made quick work of the caliper. The cutting edges on the Bunnings tool were just too fine.

We ground the calipers to give about 1mm of clearance to the rotor, then took about 1.2mm off the diameter of the rotors in a lathe (helps when the neighbor is a retired fitter & turner). Bolted it all on today and have heaps of clearance between rotor & caliper, and pad doesn't look like it overlaps the rotor.

My thoughts on removing material from the calipers - when in use the force acting in the area where the bolt hole was ground through is outwards - ie the 2 halves of the caliper are being forced away from each other. It wouldn't matter how much material was in the are of the bolt hole - there would be no affect on the strength in the direction of force. I was happy to remove a small amount of material, and I am confident that it will have no affect on the caliper.

Haven't driven it yet - the car is still on stands for other work. I was surprised how out of round the rotors were - they are brand new & putting them on the lathe really made it obvious.

I will post back if we have any issues when we get it on the track again.

Edited by GeeDod
  • 2 months later...

So, a couple of months down the track, thought I would post an update on the brakes.

We've done 2 supersprint events at Mallala, each with 2 drivers, so the equivalent of 4 track-days. We are both still alive, and the brakes are great. The extra rotor area seems to help a lot with reducing heat issues, and the extra "leverage" means the brakes work really well.

Would I fit these spacers if I had my time over again - shit yes. Would I remove a small amount of material from the calipers - yes. YMMV - make your own decision on what's best for you.

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

    • Getting a decent signal from all 6 throats is a challenge. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that the stock balance tube is not ideal for it. I have done it on an ALFA 4 cylinder (about 35 years ago, so don't ask for too many details). We drilled 4x holes in the manifold runners, put in some fittings and ran hoses to a decent sized (I think it was about 20mm diameter) pipe that ran the length of the inlet manifold. So, it was quite a decent volume. There is a "tuning" balance to be found between the volume of the common plenum on such a thing and the diameter of the pipes running from it to the runners. You need the volume to be large enough to damp out the sharp spikes in pressure signal you get as each runner gets sucked on by its cylinder, but not so large that it becomes too slow to respond to actual changes in MAP. And you need the hoses to be small enough to transmit the signal quickly, but not so small that they delay the signal. You might have to have more than one go at it, if there isn't any actual success based wisdom to be had here. Hopefully there is. Anyway, I would not do it on only a couple of cylinders. I would also not care about "permanently modifying a part". Just bloody drill holes and make stuff better. There is nothing sacred about any GTR unless it is a genuine museum piece that you shouldn't be modifying at all anyway.
    • He's still joining you, he's just delayed it and won't have the fulleh sick ITBs...
    • The strange thing is this is a URAS front bumper (or clone of it). The bumper actually does not sit flush with the GTT hood - You need the addon to make the hood 'long' enough to reach the bumper. I have no idea why they didn't incorporate this piece into the bumper itself.. instead of sticking it to the hood instead.
    • Another thought on this OLD topic: When you paint your bonnet lip, leave a small unpainted back lip/line along the back of the lip, where it rests on the bumper. That way, the line in the back is much more prominent than the gaps in the front/under the lip - and it breaks the hood-to-bumper connection at the "correct" place, when comparing to a GTR. I'm gonna do this with mine this week, so stay tuned for pics!
    • So I'm in the final stages of assembling my single turbo RB30/26 and had a question regarding MAP reference points.  I've seen several recommendations such as tapping the cylinder 2/3 ITB, tapping the intake manifold at cylinder 2/3, or using a point on IAC. First two are doable but require permanently modify part and the third is "out" as I plan to delete the IAC.  All that to say my question is can I used the "bleeder" in the center of the ballance tube as a MAP Reference? I'm running a catch can so I don't need it for the PCV system. My thought process is it "pulls" from all 6 cylinder, and it's between the ITB and the cylinders making it ideal for MAP reference according to what I can find. Thoughts?
×
×
  • Create New...