Build Threads

Rochester's new G

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-28-2014, 10:31 PM
  #376  
blnewt
Movin On!
iTrader: (13)
 
blnewt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 24,877
Received 4,943 Likes on 4,176 Posts
Originally Posted by Rochester
I think I'd like to discuss this with you some more, Brad. Because tomorrow I'm considering swapping one of the front wheels to the back, to see how I felt about these rims as a square set-up. But of course, going down that road is a huge hassle and expense. Doubt N4S would accept the rear rims back... IDK. Either way, big money to "fix" what may or may not be a problem.

Love these rims. The design and finish is very appealing on a Moonlight White Sedan. But this poke is making me miserable.
Considering what you've invested thus far another $800 for the Nismo kit isn't too bad IMO (assuming you DIY the install or have a friend help w/ that). I know you're pretty rigid on your budget for mods and the time frames that those entail but maybe you can switch a mod that you had planned for the Nismo. I know handling is a big priority so this wouldn't just be a mod w/ a singular purpose.

Seriously, if you can get some compression on one side of about 3/4" just to see if the tuck would be enough to make you satisfied then at least you'd know what to expect, and if there's still some poke then you can reevaluate. I suspect you'll be pleasantly surprised. There is also the Tanabe NF210 option that (if you DIY) would be pretty cost effective and not a drastic drop. Here's some pics on their site of the OEM vs the springs FWIW
Tanabe USA R&D Blog | All posts tagged 'infiniti g37 sedan springs'
Old 03-28-2014, 10:38 PM
  #377  
RexHavoc
Premier Member

iTrader: (7)
 
RexHavoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,795
Received 164 Likes on 144 Posts
If you can wait until the meet I could be the fat friend?

IMO Brad makes a very good point. I would consider a suspension change prior to going squared. Naturally, you may still decide you want to square depending on the final results but if there is a way to try and confirm the compression "poke removal" you may be able to get that two-fer by installing the Nismo kit.
Old 03-28-2014, 10:51 PM
  #378  
rm2342
Registered User
 
rm2342's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ma
Posts: 670
Received 40 Likes on 36 Posts
It will work out. I know that sinking feeling when you research and plan and it doesn't quite work out they way you hoped.

^These guys make good suggestions with the spring compression test to see if it helps the poke.

Hang in there, It looks great as is and likely only because you are focusing on that one aspect now.
Old 03-29-2014, 12:11 AM
  #379  
twin_snails
Premier Member

iTrader: (2)
 
twin_snails's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,071
Received 177 Likes on 116 Posts
Originally Posted by blnewt
Like I said before, you're SO close to being Aces. IMO that small Nismo drop would be the ticket. Love those McGards w/ those wheels, couldn't have found a better choice. If you've got a couple fat friends just have them hang on one side of the car to compress about 1/2-3/4" and check the poke, I'm guessing it would be right at flush
LOL on "if you've got a couple fat friends"
Old 03-29-2014, 12:21 AM
  #380  
twin_snails
Premier Member

iTrader: (2)
 
twin_snails's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,071
Received 177 Likes on 116 Posts
Originally Posted by Rochester
I think I'd like to discuss this with you some more, Brad. Because tomorrow I'm considering swapping one of the front wheels to the back, to see how I felt about these rims as a square set-up. But of course, going down that road is a huge hassle and expense. Doubt N4S would accept the rear rims back... IDK. Either way, big money to "fix" what may or may not be a problem.

Love these rims. The design and finish is very appealing on a Moonlight White Sedan. But this poke is making me miserable.
What's your front offset again Rochester? I hear you on the poke. It drove me crazy too. I got mine from Element wheels at the time and they allowed me to ship them back for the 5mm backplate decking.

Yeah you're probably out of luck on them taking the rear rims back unfortunately, but never hurts to try. Maybe they can machine some off the back??

Love the wheels, and the McGuard lugs. Definitely looks "in motion" with the wheel design. How are you liking the handling upgrade? The 245/275 setup changes our cars dramatically.

I would characterize it as "more flat". It transmits more of the road irregularities and some may not like that but I didn't mind it. It's like you have 4 giant planes for contact patches with the road and endless amounts of grip.
Old 03-29-2014, 12:29 AM
  #381  
twin_snails
Premier Member

iTrader: (2)
 
twin_snails's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,071
Received 177 Likes on 116 Posts
Originally Posted by rm2342
It will work out. I know that sinking feeling when you research and plan and it doesn't quite work out they way you hoped.

^These guys make good suggestions with the spring compression test to see if it helps the poke.

Hang in there, It looks great as is and likely only because you are focusing on that one aspect now.
FWIW, I'm not lowered as well and Element Wheels and Discount Tire told me that when the car was on the ground under it's own weight, that the compression of the suspension would add in some negative camber and correct the problem. I test-fit them first with no tires. I think it was because they didn't want to deal with having to take the wheels back. Oh no, no Senior. I wasn't buying it and the poke continued to be a problem.

Others have mentioned lowering and I admittedly don't know what effect that would have, but I know R wasn't planning on lowering.
Old 03-29-2014, 07:50 AM
  #382  
rm2342
Registered User
 
rm2342's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ma
Posts: 670
Received 40 Likes on 36 Posts
^ The correct offset is crucial. But depending on the camber and lowering the poke can likely be minimized.

If the plans are to remain without a drop, I would look into contacting the vendor. Any good businessman helps after the sale is made, not just before. If they work with Rochester, it builds their credibility and reputation for future business.

Was the vendor the one who provided the specs on the wheels? Or were those independently decided? Was there an understanding that a more flush stance was required? This would go a long way in potentially negotiating.
Old 03-29-2014, 08:08 AM
  #383  
blnewt
Movin On!
iTrader: (13)
 
blnewt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 24,877
Received 4,943 Likes on 4,176 Posts
If the backplate decking that T_Snails mentioned is possible that would be the easiest solution. I know John wasn't wanting to lower his G soon, and if he did it would just be minimal, so that would be worth looking into for sure.

I remember when I got my wheels I went around & round w/ the guys at GOTO racing to be quadruple sure we were on the same page. I imagine Rochester did the same, there's that gray area that comes when you add +1 setups on non lowered vehicles since it seems most are lowered.

Hopefully the easiest & most cost-effective solution has been found. I know John pretty well and if something isn't quite as planned it will really fester to the point where he won't enjoy the car. His attention to all the details is remarkable so this is a biggie.
Old 03-29-2014, 08:46 AM
  #384  
rm2342
Registered User
 
rm2342's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ma
Posts: 670
Received 40 Likes on 36 Posts
^ Yeah, I'm afraid of the same things. I want a semi concave rim, but will the offset be right, will the tires be properly matched to the rim size in relation to the drop etc, etc.. It's tough when you want it just right.

What is the back plate decking? Just shaving off the rear back spacing essentially?
Old 03-29-2014, 09:26 AM
  #385  
Lego_Maniac
Registered Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Lego_Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 4,012
Received 514 Likes on 442 Posts
Originally Posted by Rochester
I think I'd like to discuss this with you some more, Brad. Because tomorrow I'm considering swapping one of the front wheels to the back, to see how I felt about these rims as a square set-up. But of course, going down that road is a huge hassle and expense. Doubt N4S would accept the rear rims back... IDK. Either way, big money to "fix" what may or may not be a problem.

Love these rims. The design and finish is very appealing on a Moonlight White Sedan. But this poke is making me miserable.
Just curious, but have you considered koni shocks + sedan specific springs?

Everything I've read says that the konis raise the car a bit, so coupled with sedan springs it should be a slight drop. I would just think that you're paying a premium for the nismo name on what is otherwise an oem shock. Adjustability would allow flexibility for a suspension that isn't 100% designed for the G sedan. The cost difference isnt that much either, and konis have a lifetime warranty.

I wonder what the 370 nismo guys upgrade too?
Old 03-29-2014, 09:46 AM
  #386  
Rochester
Administrator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
 
Rochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 19,159
Received 4,711 Likes on 3,519 Posts
I'm no mechanical engineer, but the crazy warning lights are flashing over my head at the thought of shaving the back plate of those rear wheels. Cast aluminum VOSSENS don't exactly have a reputation for being strong wheels, AFAIK.

As stated, the offset choice was dictated by VOSSEN, and recommended by Diego here on the forum, because they only build these with two offset options.

I've never ever before considered dropping the car, and truth be told I'm pretty aggressively critical of that mod (LOL, did I say that right?). But now that I've installed 19" rims, particularly these wide concave rears, it's dragged me kicking and screaming into a whole new world of considerations.

So somebody please talk to me like I'm a noob, and explain how lowering the car reduces the poke. I don't understand the physics, and the ramifications of that configuration. Seems to me the tires would not be happy if the camber (?) weren't flat.
Old 03-29-2014, 09:50 AM
  #387  
Rochester
Administrator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
 
Rochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 19,159
Received 4,711 Likes on 3,519 Posts
Also, thanks for your help, guys. I had the talk with the wife last night, how for the last three months I was so psyched for these wheels, only to put them on the car and get this uncomfortable WTF feeling. Particularly in the context of why I bought them and the events leading to this decision.
Old 03-29-2014, 10:03 AM
  #388  
Lego_Maniac
Registered Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Lego_Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 4,012
Received 514 Likes on 442 Posts
I dont think dropping the car is going to do anything abouy the poke.

Sorry this didn't work out as you planned it. Its so hard to match aftermarket wheels to a car. Probably why in 20+ years of modding cars I've never changed wheels, despite the performance increase the mod offers.
Old 03-29-2014, 12:11 PM
  #389  
Rochester
Administrator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
 
Rochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 19,159
Received 4,711 Likes on 3,519 Posts
I took off the front rim from the passenger side, and moved it to the back. Note the original duckfeet temporarily on the car:



It still pokes. At first glance, it looks identical to the concave rim poke:



Upon reflection, I'd say there were about 2mm or 3mm difference, but that could just be me misinterpreting things. Here's a pic where the plane of the rim's surface is just about to fade to 180* from the camera angle. Both the 8.5" and the 10" rims introduce approximately 1/2" poke, give or take a few millimeters.


Last edited by Rochester; 03-29-2014 at 12:55 PM.
Old 03-29-2014, 12:14 PM
  #390  
Rochester
Administrator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
 
Rochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 19,159
Received 4,711 Likes on 3,519 Posts
I know it looks like nothing, but in my head I feel like Fred Flintstone. Can't seem to shake that. What this effort of swapping front to rear has taught me is that with a square setup any mitigation to the problem is really, really minor. And it would come with a huge compromise in going square... smaller rear footprint, forgoing the nice concave rears, not to mention whatever huge expense it would be to buy 2 more wheels & tires to match the square set-up. On the up-side, it would allow me to rotate. Whoop-dee-doo. That's something that never mattered to me. I don't put many miles on the car.

Ugh.

And my TPMS is flashing now, but I seem to have misplaced my nice pressure gauge. God Dammit.

There it is. Now I have to go swap the wheels back, and take my kid to a birthday party.

That's probably no fun, being chauffeured around by Grumpy Dad in his Clown Car.

Last edited by Rochester; 03-29-2014 at 12:21 PM.


Quick Reply: Rochester's new G



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:44 AM.