Steven C GTi

sorry ross :sweatdrop:

the rota's steve has are 690kg same my old kei racing wheels 690kg, which to hold are lighter than the GTi's alloys. the GTi alloys are really face heavy i thought. *205/40/r17 vs 195/50/r15

ed 205/40/r17 are the most common sized tyre for fwd cars with aftermarket 17's. imho not really that small.
david
 
The 17" torque's + t1r tyres seemed to be noticeably heavier. Maybe it's cos the tyre needs to be more solid being such a small sidewall I don't know but the GTi wheels with T1r's were certainly lighter to hold.

I noticed before that my 16" Grids were insanely light just as a wheel but when added to tyre...the weight wasn't too much of a difference.

Ride comfort is just heaaavveeennnllyyyyyy lol.
 
Ken it's boring and looks like a standard car taken on a camera phone but that's eh pretty much what it is.

How she sits at the moment...
172971_10150089585465796_537435795_6595340_2169205_o.jpg
 
What are the plans now then Steven? :) keep rocking gti wheels? they look nice but such a shame gti wheels weren't 16".

David just cause its common doesnt make it any less of a small profile.

-mobile phone post-
 
mera red gti said:
sorry ross :sweatdrop:

the rota's steve has are 690kg same my old kei racing wheels 690kg, which to hold are lighter than the GTi's alloys. the GTi alloys are really face heavy i thought. *205/40/r17 vs 195/50/r15

ed 205/40/r17 are the most common sized tyre for fwd cars with aftermarket 17's. imho not really that small.
david
Click to expand...

690kg is the maximum load on the wheel not the weight of the wheel

come on man do some research...
 
To quote the wheel weights spreadsheet that's knocking around the internet:

The 17x7.5J Torques weigh 8.5kg and 15x6.5J Velocities weigh 7.8kg.

That's all I could find but you can make the comparrison.
 
The wheel is probably quite light, but the extra re-inforecement needed on the tyre could mean the extra weight. Either way, the ride comfort is just soooooo good on the standard wheels.

I think I'm gonna rock the GTi wheels for a bit. Might get some 16's but then that means having to buy tyres as well and tbh, these have 4 practically brand new t1r's on them so need to wear them out first. I sold the 17" tyres I got to a mate with a lexus for same price so I'm all good.

Just back from CLCM where this was the result:
172050_10150089626115796_537435795_6595620_7028690_o.jpg


Looks like a fucko'd bottom arm or strut is to blame as on closer inspection the ball joint on the passenger arm was sitting at a pretty crazy angle compared to driver's side. New arm will be here tomorrow. I don't want to put off the Rolling Road, but as it's still pulling to the left due to the castor being out, I'm worried about the results.
 
Not the best caster, want more of the left or so guy at supertracker tells me due to camber of the road etc

Buypartsby have wishbones for £50 each.. good quality too

Try weighing the total package (wheel & tyre) would be interested to know for reference

Psycho_Eddie said:



Also got round to weighing the alloys:

My beloved Rozest's with tyres 12.4Kg's (195/50/15)
GTi Alloy & tyres = 16.5kg's (195/55/15)
Aez Xylo 17'' was a whoppin 20.4kg's :feint: (205/40/17)

Might not seem a great deal but if you look at the front axle alone my Rozest's come in at 24.8kg's vs 40.8kg's for the Aez 17's

Or complete rolling rotational mass (all four rolling wheels combined) = 49.6kg's for the Rozests vs 81.6kg's vs 66kgs for the GTi's

With a rotational mass being accelerated that forced is amplified.. on driving feel it makes a difference everywhere much more rimble in sharp left right turns. Acceleration much improved but mostly noticed is breaking just soo damn smooth!
Click to expand...
 
Ok so I was at Hypertech's Dyno Dynamics dyno yesterday for AFPR fitting and set up. Dunc was recommended to me by Steve @ FC Tuning as he knows the SR better than most up here. Hypertech's dyno is famous up here for giving low (some would say realistic) readings, however as he was recommended to me, I wasn't going to complain about this.

So we did a double run when I first turned up which was 154.7 bhp then 156.6. Torque was 135 lb/ft and 133whp.

He showed me through the AFR's being very lean (15.0 at it's worst point) down the revs then being quite sporadic an coming down to around 13.2/5 at the top of the revs. He said an NA should be about 13 so was looking good up the revs bit not so hot in the middle. He also showed me a number of points RPM "load" AFR being bad i.e. about 14.5.

So off came the standard FPR and on went the Nismo. Vac off and set to 3.5 Barr. Couple of runs and peak power went down to 153.7 but peak torque raised a smidge, as did the area under the graph altho not by much. Throttle response i.e. load AFR came nicely to around the 13/13.5 mark. Peak power went down as the AFR graph clearly showed the whole map just moving down a step or so. Starting at 14.0 and coming down to 12.5.

We brought the timing back to 15 deg (from 17deg btdc) and peak power dropped some more but torque stayed the same so back it went. Upped the fuel to 4.0 barr and peak power went down to 151bhp but showed very rich top end (about 11) and he said fuel economy would be woeful so we stuck with the original 3.5barr fuel pressure and 17deg timing.

He said not to worry about the figures and Steve also said he couldn't remember any stock ecu'd car running same mods getting more than 160bhp on any of the RR's he uses. Dunc is in no shadow of a doubt that Nistune would see gains, however he also said my air filter looked pure shite (a shiny apexi).

To drive, it seems a bit sharper on throttle and the power seems smoother.

I was very impressed with Duncan and how he worked. Total for about an hour and half's work was £85.
 
Im glad you posted this up as I saw what you said about the AFPR in the WILT thread yesterday and Ive just bought a Nismo AFPR, trying to decide whether to bother fitting it or not, Im thinking that a Nistune ECU would mean that an AFPR is a bit of a waste of time if you are only upping pressure by .5 bar?
 
it's not just the adjustability, it's the rate of increase that's better over a stock fpr when you hit the pedal, this gives better throttle response :)
 
Correct.

If you want a bit better drivability then go for it however it's not going to fix the car's map to any cams you might have - only increase the fuel pressure at the rail which will effect it accross the board. You'll gain the middle but lose at the top etc.

The standard ECU copes quite well by the looks of it.

I'm undecided about Nistune. It's a lot of money but when you consider the performance increase you'd get by doing this over, say, just buying an ASP header then it makes a lot of sense.
 
Yeah I was aware that its an adjustment for the full rev range, not a specific area of rev range, I wouldnt expect it to affect the map or anything as that isnt what it does, Ill have a think over it.

I am thinking Nistune at some point in the future as I know I will put bigger cams and more mods on mine, which will need a map much more so than my current set up and I think its a good idea to be getting the most out of all the mods.
 
There's a black primera that Steve did which he's used to show me the potential increases. Same enginge spec really and started with 153, ends up consistently running 160's.

The fuel AFR ends up so flat it's silly. Lookin at mine you'd think someones trying to draw a straight line while lying on a water bed next to an oranguntang with fleas.
 
Yeah seen that black Primera on NPOC, had 4-2-1 mani, S3RS, catback, Nismo FPR and an intake and made 160 with Nistune map. Not too bad tbf for the age of car and miles, but then Im not going to go into dyno figures or anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom