Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I have finally bought an awesome 2008 Dark Blue 370GT SP Coupe from Yokohama. I just want to be well prepared for compliance

to ensure fewer postponements ;)

The front Tyre dimensions are very rare! Front: 225/45R19 / Rear: 245/40R19

I can't just get anything.. to ensure I get the right ones that match the Tyre placard

Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Thx in Advance,

Marty

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/
Share on other sites

Hey Marty.

I use Achilles ATR Sports on my 19" on my v35 skyline coupe. They're good bang for buck tyres. I order them through this website: http://www.thewheeldeal.com.au/product_info.php?cPath=279_274&products_id=2413.Not bad in terms of pricing. Shipping is about $80 depending on where you are. Hope this helps.

Hieu

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7347704
Share on other sites

Are you sure that is the correct size for the front - the 225/45R19 is actually a larger diameter (685mm) than the rear 245/40R19 (678.6mm). I would expect the fronts to be 225/40R19 (662.6mm), to give the correct staggered fitment. If it had 18" rims I would expect 45 profile front & rear.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7347720
Share on other sites

Hi GeeDog, Yep 100% correct.

Maybe to allow for the Big 4 Pot brakes?

This is from compliance.

Wheels
10-spoke Front: 19x8.5” / Rear: 19x9.0” Type S and SP coupe

Front: 225/45R19 / Rear: 245/40R19T base model, Type P coupe
Brakes
Front 4 Pot caliper, 355mm rotor / Rear 2 pot caliper, Type S and SP coupe

Edited by N3ptuNe
  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7347759
Share on other sites

I don't know, was just a guess mate. This is the 100% correct dimensions for a 2008 370GT SP Coupe though. I even looked up the 370Z and there the exact dimensions! but in a R18
I cant answer why there different dimensions sorry, I'm a network Engineer :woot:

Also Supports me :P
http://www.jlimports.com.au/nissan-skyline-v36-370gt-coupe

There frigging hard to find came across 2 or 3 as opposed to the rear which comes in many flavors and colors metaphorically speaking.

Edited by N3ptuNe
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7348324
Share on other sites

Sure.. I can't help with tyre sizes or confirm if those tyre sizes are correct, but I can tell you that tyre profile has no impact on space avaialble for brakes.. Tyres go on the outside of the rim, brakes go on the inside, so only rim size will influence this.

Chances are 18in rims fit fine on the base model with the smaller brakes, but the type S and SP may need the 19in wheels to fit the larger brakes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7348346
Share on other sites

It seems an unusual combination - previous models (350GT) had staggered sizes with the fronts being smaller than the rear - in width & diameter - hence my post. Definitely not for brakes - the 19" rim takes care of that .

If it was mine I would strongly consider changing the front size to 235/40R19, if the width fits in the guard ok (and it's only 10mm wider). This size is 14.5mm smaller in diameter than the stock size - and the rules (in SA at least, but pretty sure it's Australia wide now) allow for +/- 15mm from the largest or smallest sizes listed on the placard. Being on the front it won't affect the speedo reading, and I wouldn't expect it to affect the ABS/DSC - someone else may know more about this. The 7.1mm difference in tyre radius is negligible - it would be like having new tyres on the rear & bald ones on the front. 235/40R19 is available in several brands & models at reasonable prices.

I know virtually nothing about getting through compliance, but would be surprised if tyre size changes within the road rules were not allowed. I'm sure someone with more knowledge will be along soon.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7348408
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you all regarding going 245 However will Compliance comply? seeing the placard is stating 9x8.5” / Rear: 19x9.0 I would hate to buy some nice Dunlop Direzza's or Pirelli Pzero's and the compliance bloke says sorry mate aint gonna fit em they dont comply.. Know what I mean?

Edited by N3ptuNe
  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7348659
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

G'day mate,

You are spot on with The sizes. I just purchased an Australian Q60 S coupe (this is top model spec, same as 370GT SP in Japan)

Wheel & Tyre

• 19-inch 5-triple-spoke alloy wheels (P225/45 R19 Front & P245/40 R19 Rear)

Front Rim Description 19x8.5

Rear Rim Description 19x9.0

The Base Model Q60 or in Japan 370GT

18 inch 10 spoke alloy wheels • (P225/50 R18 Front & P245/45 R18 Rear)

I will hopefully let you know tomorrow what brand.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7360534
Share on other sites

Just fitted 245/45 R18 all round on my 370 sedan yesterday. All fitted perfectly even on the different sized wheel.

Then I noticed that the compliance tyre placard has listed 225/50 R18 and 245/45 R18 as legal front tyre...

Nitto Motivo's by the way... Shipped from Sydney and fitted locally for just under $ 1,000.. Very happy and looking forward to quality non-comliance tyres..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7360603
Share on other sites

Will do Colin.

They might be getting a bit scarce as when I first asked Taleb Tyres about them, they told me that they didn't have any and were not able to import any more. Then they found the ones they sold me, and put the remainder on their eBay store. Otherwise it would have had Invo's for about the same money.

They already feel better than the Chineses tyres that went on for compliance, but will have better idea once all the mould release stuff has worn off.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445993-what-tyres/#findComment-7360814
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
    • A 180SX has a much better look than a FD. The roofline is far superior being a fastback. It's popups look better. In a world where we all subconsciously add a little bit of low, and wheels of our preference, it's just more handsome than the FD is. The FD just looks 'bubbly' in comparison. It can come down to preference, sure. But "The FD is the BEST looking (on appearances alone) 90's JDM car without question?" Nah. Plenty of questions lol. I could think of 8 cars I think look fundamentally better, and probably a handful of ones that look about on par with a FD. (like say a SW20 MR2) I feel people like/overrate the FD because of it's mythicality/rarity, its rotary and it's unpredictable nature. It probably drives great, you can stuff a ton of tyre under there, has a unique sound, light as hell. I feel that people reading this thinking "YOU CANT RATE A 180 ABOVE A FD BECAUSE A 180 IS A CHEAP DRIFT BUCKET" prove the point about bias as to what the car represents, moreso than how it actually looks.. I feel the 80's boxy/squared off look is becoming better looking due to time, and 90's melted soap bar aesthetics have not aged well. (yet?) And this thread is purely about looks :p
×
×
  • Create New...