Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

think it's worth getting Cusco rear/Whiteline front, or just buy the nismo kit for front and rear?

This has been shitting me for a while, about time i got around to it.

Or should i say worth buying the nismo kit as it is more kesh....

Edited by Anfanee

think it's worth getting Cusco rear/Whiteline front, or just buy the nismo kit for front and rear?

This has been shitting me for a while, about time i got around to it.

Or should i say worth buying the nismo kit as it is more kesh....

The problem with it all is the different manufacturers use different tube/rod – some are hollow, some (Whiteline) are solid and none quote the same figures for comparison purposes. I haven’t yet seen anyone quote an inside diameter – not for the standard type or the aftermarket stuff either. You can make some guesses (I haven’t seen spring steel in tube) as to the wall thickness but they are just guesses. Anyway here is what I can find.

Standard

Front 20mm od - hollow.

Rear 25.4mm

Nismo

Front 22.2 od (hollow) and quoted at 18.1N/mm whatever that means.

Read 27.2 od (hollow) and quoted at 113.9N/mm

Cusco

Front 24mm and 190% stiffer than standard. I take this to mean 1.9 times the standard rate but may be 2.9. 1.9 appears more likely.

Rear 30mm and 162% stiffer than standard.

There also may (MAY) be a 24mm adjustable front (Part number quoted 282 311AJ24) and a 28mm non adjustable rear 282 311 B28 (quoted at 185% compare to standard). These I have never seen.

Whiteline

Front 22mm solid bar.

Rear 24mm solid bar.

Both are adjustable. Extra stiffness is not stated.

ARC

Front No diameter shown but 2.4 x standard rate. Adjustable.

Rear No diameter shown but 1.8 x standard rate. Adjustable. Also $$$$’s.

Maybe someone else has some figures or an idea or what tube would be used – the Cusco appears to be metric in size, the other Japanese Imperial.

FWIW I have a Cusco rear and a Whiteline front. Can always add front stiffness in if the rear is too much.

I own both a R32 GTR and a S2000.

I can assure you, the S2000 will always out brake you and have a higher mid corner speed, stock for stock.

Mod for mod, same again.

Your only saving grace will be the ability to get on the power quicker and pull away on the straight sections.

Then watch the S2000 start pulling you in on the corners and twisties. :)

If it upsets you, stick to tracks with long straight sections, minimal corners or wet days......

Too true.

Except I wouldn't say minimal corners. The tighter the corners the more a 32-34 GTR will lose to S2000's, 86's etc. Fast sweeping corners on the other hand the GTR's will do well on. (i.e Phillip Island)

  • Like 1

N/mm would say that you require X Newtons of force to deflect the ends of the bar apart from rest position by 1mm.

The Cusco bar claiming 190% stiffer would not be 190% stiffer. It would be 190% of original stiffness. So 90% stiffer. That's just based on doing (24^4)/(20^4) and coming up with a ratio of 2. That would be about right regardless of the difference in wall thickness between original and the Cusco bar, and would easily explain the difference between 1.9 climed and 2.0 calculated.

The Whiteline front 24mm bar will be a bit more than double the stiffness of the original, seeing as it is solid and the original is hollow.

None of the these bars would be made out of tube or pipe type products. You can buy hollow bar in various sizes. I would suspect that most hollow bars have very thick walls.

If you want to know how to calculate the effect of the hollow centre, the stiffness of a 24mm solid bar is proportional to the 4th power of that diameter. So just call it 24^4. The stiffness of the hollow bar is proportional to the difference between the diameter of the that is there and the the diameter of the steel that has been removed (from the solid bar). So a 24mm OD 18mm ID bar would have stiffness 24^4 - 18^4, which is only 68% of the solid bar. Hence why I suspect that hollow bars must have very thick walls.

All of the above assumes the same material properties between different manufacturers, which is of course not necessarily true. Probably close enough most of the time, but certainly not to be relied upon if trying to pick them to within 10%.

Okay....

So....

Full whiteline, full nismo, or full Cusco?

Cost i don't really care about.

Opinions on what to buy........

If it helps Anf I have whiteline front and rear with HD links at both ends

Car is muff stiffer all round (especially front end) yet to test it out on track but on the road you point where you want it go and it shoots there instantly where before it was sluggish.

Whiiteline is fairly reasonable price wise and even got a free strut front strut brace (no doubt still managed to pay for it somehow)

But since you mentioned you dont care about costs - you know you want nismo :D

FWIW i emailled support@whiteline.com.au the question "Can you tell me how much stiffer this bar is, when using the hard setting, over standard?" (subject of email was BNR26XZ stiffness spec over standard). The response was:

"This bar is much bigger than OE and as a result, you will see an increase of approx. 230-250% in rate."

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

    • Well, after the full circus this week (new gearbag, 14 psi actuator on, injectors and AFM upgraded, and.....turbo repair) the diagnosis on the wastegate is in. It was broken. It was broken in a really strange way. The weld that holds the lever arm onto the wastegate flapper shaft broke. Broke completely, but broke in such a way that it could go back together in the "correct" position, or it could rearrange itself somewhere else along the fracture plane and sit with the flapper not parallel to the lever. So, who knows how and when exactly what happened? No-one will ever know. Was it broken like this the first time it spat the circlip and wedged itself deep into the dump? Or was it only broken when I tried to pry it back into place? (I didn't try that hard, but who knows?). Or did it break first? Or did it break between the first and second event of wierdness? Meh. It doesn't matter now. It is welded back together. And it is now held closed by a 14 psi actuator, so...the car has been tuned with the supporting mods (and the order of operations there is that the supporting mods and dyno needed to be able to be done first before adding boost, because it was pinging on <<14 psi with the new turbo with only a 6 psi actuator). And then tuned up a bit, and with the boost controller turned off throughout that process. So it was only running WG pressure and so only hit about 15-16 psi. The turbo is still ever so slightly lazier than might be preferred - like it is still a bit on the big side for the engine. I haven't tested it on the road properly in any way - just driven it around in traffic for a half hour or so. But it is like chalk and cheese compared to what it was. Between dyno numbers and driving feedback: It makes 100 kW at 3k rpm, which is OK, could be better. That's stock 2JZ territory, or RB20 with G series 550. It actually starts building boost from 2k, which is certainly better than it did recently (with all the WG flapper bullshit). Although it's hard to remember what it was like prior to all that - it certainly seems much, much better. And that makes sense, given the WG was probably starting to blow open at anything above about 3 psi anyway (with the 6 psi actuator). It doesn't really get to "full boost" (say 16 psi) until >>4k rpm. I am hopeful that this is a feature of the lack of boost controller keeping boost pressure off the actuator, because it was turned off for the dyno and off for the drives afterward. There's more to be found here, I'm sure. It made 230 rwkW at not a lot more than 6k and held it to over 7k, so there seems to be plenty of potential to get it up to 250-260rwkW with 18 psi or so, which would be a decent effort, considering the stock sized turbo inlet pipework and AFM, and the return flow cooler. According to Tao, those things should definitely put a bit of a limit on it by that sort of number. I must stress that I have not opened the throttle 100% on the road yet - well, at least not 100% and allowed it to wind all the way up. It'll have to wait until some reasonable opportunity. I'm quite looking forward to that - it feels massively better than it has in a loooong time. It's back to its old self, plus about 20% extra powers over the best it ever did before. I'm going to get the boost controller set up to maximise spool and settle at no more than ~17 psi (for now) and then go back on the dyno to see what we can squeeze out of it. There is other interesting news too. I put together a replacement tube to fit the R35 AFM in the stock location. This is the first time the tuner has worked with one, because anyone else he has tuned for has gone from Z32 territory to aftermarket ECU. No-one has ever wanted to stay Nistuned and do what I've done. Anyway, his feedback is that the R35 AFM is super super super responsive. Tiny little changes in throttle position or load turn up immediately as a cell change on the maps. Way, way more responsive than any of the old skool AFMs. Makes it quite diffifult to tune as you have to stay right on top of that so you don't wander off the cell you wanted to tune. But it certainly seems to help with real world throttle response. That's hard to separate from all the other things that changed, but the "pedal feel" is certainly crisp.
    • I'm a bit confused by this post, so I'll address the bit I understand lol.  Use an air compressor and blow away the guide coat sanding residue. All the better if you have a moisture trap for your compressor. You'd want to do this a few times as you sand the area, you wouldn't for example sand the entire area till you think its perfect and then 'confirm' that is it by blowing away the guide coat residue.  Sand the area, blow away the guide coat residue, inspect the panel, back to sanding... rinse and repeat. 
    • The detail level is about right for the money they charge for the full kit... AU$21.00 each issue, 110 issues for a total of $2,300 (I mentioned $2.2K in the first post when the exchange rate was better). $20/week is doable... 😐
    • If planning on joining us for the day(s) please indicate by filling in this form. https://forms.gle/Ma8Nn4DzYVA8uDHg7
    • You put the driver's seat on the wrong side! Incredible detail on all of this. It looks like you could learn a lot about the car just from assembling the kit.
×
×
  • Create New...