Jump to content
SAU Community

Getting the R32 frontend lower


Recommended Posts

Has anyone moved the R32 FUCA outer pivot point down to allow more compression? It seems like the R32 front suspension is not happy about going low... I just swapped R32 strut towers (full GTR drivetrain, RB25/30) into my S13 and she sits a little high. I've also been looking for better control arms that don't bind but I only see bad feedback about what's on the market. Images show full compression (on jack) and then ride height with not much bump (1.5" maybe).

 

Knowing what I know now I would have gone R33 frontend but that ship has sailed. Looking to make the best out of the R32 bits.

2024-10-14_8-36-45.png

PXL_20241013_220552272.jpg

PXL_20241013_232033935.jpg

PXL_20241013_220654229.jpg

PXL_20240929_005310049.jpg

PXL_20241013_011107277.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that wasn't exactly a bolt in swap :rofl:

Generally the best option is just not to go too low since you can get reasonable handling out of an R chassis at a little below factory height.

If you want to keep going down, there are ball joint spacers for the bottom of the hub, not really much you can do at the top without going very custom (which...you already have...)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you can't move the outer pivot point down. Well, not far enough to obtain any benefit, anyway. There's only a few mm of clearance in there to the end of the control arm. You'd have to cut up and open out the pocket of the upright to make space, and then you start to encroach on tyre space. Choose your compromise. I know which one I'd choose - the one that doesn't require all that metalwork on the upright for almost no gain.

Given the surgery you've already done, the answer probably lies in moving the inner bracket upwards.

7 hours ago, Josh K. said:

I've also been looking for better control arms that don't bind but I only see bad feedback about what's on the market.

Use the GKTech ones. You just have to remember that you have spherical joints in there and perform maintenance regularly enough.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

No, you can't move the outer pivot point down. Well, not far enough to obtain any benefit, anyway.

Moving the holes down also allows me to shave material off of the top. This way it can travel farther without risk of hitting the strut tower up top. I might just buy another upright and start playing with different positions and check how the suspension reacts.

For now, I'll just get the GKTech FUCA's like you suggested. I was shocked the first time I cycled the suspension and found it had so much bind up top. I initially thought I got a dimension wrong for strut tower/crossmember placement... 

Here's my Instagram if anyone wants to follow along... 風水 (@feng_shui_garage) • Instagram photos and videos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want the car lower without having to do it by shortening the suspension unit itself (ie, conventionally, by shorter springs or lowered perches on coilovers) and thus causing yourself the geometry problems of the arms all pointing up at the sky, then you need drop spindles. Time to open up the wallet, swat the various moths that come flying out, and pony up for....

https://au.gktech.com/products/v2-super-lock-r32-r33-r34-z32-front-knuckles?_pos=173&_fid=057415f49&_ss=c

which gives you a free 20mm drop, along with some other geometry improvements.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

If you want the car lower without having to do it by shortening the suspension unit itself (ie, conventionally, by shorter springs or lowered perches on coilovers) and thus causing yourself the geometry problems of the arms all pointing up at the sky, then you need drop spindles. Time to open up the wallet, swat the various moths that come flying out, and pony up for....

https://au.gktech.com/products/v2-super-lock-r32-r33-r34-z32-front-knuckles?_pos=173&_fid=057415f49&_ss=c

which gives you a free 20mm drop, along with some other geometry improvements.

Those are RWD only unfortunately. 

I think at this point I may switch my plan from building the RB30 to building another motor. I have an RB25 bock/head and RB26 crank/rod/pistons. If I build that motor, I can raise the cross member up 1" which helps a ton with ground clearance and then if I modify the knuckle arm at the top I can get more bump without causing the geo to be all whacked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yes, this is why I end up being 'vocal' with executives. "I want it" can't be "Just because we should have it" you need reasons. It has way too big knock on effects to simply want something "Just because" at that level in orgs with 10,000+ employees. Currently, message labelling. Sounds great. Except there is no governance on how to actually HANDLE message labels, so I may as well implement the labels as "Pink Flamingo" or "Conrod" or "Massive Dildo" and force people to choose one for every message, with no framework underpinning any of it. It has no value and can actually have detrimental value if all it does is serve to annoy people into clicking something random, or just using the default for everything, especially if there's no repercussions for getting it wrong, no monitoring for people doing it right, and no guidance on what needs to be what label. "But we need message labels!" f**k sake.
    • It's worse than that. They cannot even picture the full scope of what it is that they are pitching or wanting. They see the core idea and cannot conceive of any of the side effects, compromises, losses of existing functionality that needs to be replaced somehow, etc etc, that come with doing these things. So how can they do a cost/benefit when they don't even know what the full set of changes actually looks like?
    • I mean something people seem to be WOEFUL at is doing a proper cost/benefit analysis. Going cloud is great, if it saves you time and money. Does it? I have found a LOT of managers just want 'the new thing' with SUB-zero understanding of what it is and how it functions and why they need it. I spend a lot of time on that point nowadays too.
    • I'm an engineer. I am not supposed to do IT. I have been doing my company's IT for 25 years, because initially there was no one else capable and since because I don't trust anyone. Back in the day, we used to run a Linux server with just sendmail level mail handling. Everything was POP and SMTP. Then, someone demanded calendaring and the like, so I implemented Scalix (an OS Exchange clone) - from scratch. Migrated all the numpties over, administered that system for years. Then Scalix started to decline. So I spun up a full Zimbra system. Same same as Scalix, but different (ie, not even a fork). Ran that for a while in parallel with Scalix as I tried to migrate old users over. Both of these were on prem, with local backup in the case of Zimbra. (No backup at all on the Scalix server! Gasp!) At some point, I spat the dummy, after years of this, and capitulated and bought O365 for the whole company and migrated everyone off the on prem stuff and shuffled them off to the cloud. It has been easier and shitter ever since, seeing as MS cannot leave anything alone for more than 3 minutes and have to keep changing everything and making it "better' (I read that as "harder"!). It's like their entire crew are ADHD squirrels on meth. Meanwhile, all our data has been kept on prem on file servers with decent backup. Now the higher ups are demanding that we migrate all the data to the cloud. I am shuddering at the idea that it will all be held to ransom on some shit AWS or, even worse, Azure/Sharepoint system where you're at the mercies of the above posted price hikes, commercial disputes, company collapses/takeovers/DOS attacks/etc etc. I hate it. But... if it can get me free of the bloody IT shit so I can finally concentrate on real engineering work for the first time in 25 years, then.... good?
    • This is so interesting, because I manage a Hybrid Onprem/Exchange Online environment/M365 Tenancy. I find 365 MUCH more intuitive than our On-Prem systems running Exch2019 for example. If my email servers could f**kin tell me in plain text WHY they are unhealthy it would have made my week so much fkin better. I am reading SAU instead of re-reading the event logs right now. Not to mention the less technical overhead of managing servers which more or less run an app. Then again, once you are entirely in a cloud, any cloud... it's very easy for Microsoft or whoever to just up the price x% and you just have to wear it. I suppose right now we have the worst of both worlds by having a hybrid setup. If you look at Powershell versus something like Logic Apps, you can see it's by far a better setup, because purely on intuition it's much simpler for many people, who simply want to say "When X, Do Y, Tell Z" for 99% of their stuff. Yes, it's less powerful at it's core, but do you need it? If you can articulate what you want to have happen in human-readable language it's a big step forward than attempting to translate that into on-premise/powershell code. I will echo Mr No Crust - Working in IT where the core business does something valuable to humanity is the way to do it. And honestly you can see it. I've worked in various firms over the years, in various countries. When you see the people work there for ~2-3 years, you can see why. When they're all there 10-20 years, you can also see why. Especially if the people working there 10-20 years on lower than average pay. This stuff is valuable in any work environment tbh, and you should be mindful to take 'advantage' or at least appreciate the good/acknowledge the bad sides of either type of environment lest you go insane in both of them.
×
×
  • Create New...