GTT, Clio 16v, 172/182 Hubs for use on a GTT [Archive]

Woznaldo

14-07-2009, 12:47

Andy Cooke got me thinking about what other hubs could be used on the GTT as an upgrade for strength with the bonus of being able to use the bigger brakes without adaptor brackets.

Lots of peeps have gone down the 285mm R21 TXi big disc route like this thread:

http://www.rtoc.org/boards/showthread.php?p=84966#post84966

But, wouldn't be advantageous to get a better hub at the same time? The question begs, why when the GTT hub does a good job as is? A few in the club who push their cars a little harder on track days, hill climbs, sprints and race may have already experienced a hub failure? Renault saw fit to upgrade the hubs of a 172/182 for use with the Trophy?

So let us compare:

1. GTT Hub - already there and does the job - 238mm Discs

2. Clio 16v Hub - plentiful but are they stronger? - 238mm Discs

3. R19 16v Hub - as per Clio 16v - 259mm Discs

4. 172/182 Hub - pretty sure they're stronger and use bigger bearings but will need to be machined down to fit a GTT strut and driveshafts may not be compatable?- 280mm Discs

If anyone can add to or correct any mistakes, please do.

Woz

Winston

14-07-2009, 13:16

2. Clio 16v Hub - They are abit chunkier and use larger bearings - 259mm Discs

3. R19 16v Hub - Yes the same part as Clio 16v - 259mm Discs

4. 172/182 Hub - The hubs are huge and heavy... they would need machining to fit the 5 GTT shock ( few mm either side).... 172's run fatter driveshafts splines... but you can press the stub axel from a clio 16v into the 172 hub... that way you can use the 5 GTT shafts

You also get the bonus of the larger calipers and discs... but this is also a hike in weight

hope that makes sense

Andrew Cooke

14-07-2009, 13:22

you can look at my Twingo project thread to see the 172 hubs being thinned down.

Or you could go for the Laguna 2.2TD hubs like I'm fitting on the GTT, they are monsterous :laugh:

Woznaldo

14-07-2009, 21:49

Interesting. I didn't think they'd be too much heavier but, I suppose you don't get extra strength without some compromise in weight.

I, unfortunately, may be forced down the 172/182 route as I can get parts here in Oz. I might get some soon and see what can be machined to bring the weight down to a similar weight of a GTT hub.

Best solution would be some, rare as rocking horse poo, Clio Gp A Hubs but, then everything else would need modifying or custom parts?

Thanks for the info Winston & Andy.:)

Scoff

14-07-2009, 21:55

Markey Mark (BD)

14-07-2009, 22:24

I've looked into clio 16v hub's too Scoff.

I've checked a few over in past years and all the hubs i come across are same dimension as a 5 one other then the larger bearing. Only difference is on the caliper, the carrier has a slightly longer extension so to allow the fitment of the 259mm disc's. Calipers are the same as gtt too.

After owning my 19 and doing the wheel bearing on it the 19 ones didn't look any differnt either, i think its just the bearings that are larger again.

rich-hgtt

14-07-2009, 23:17

I'm sure only the williams ones are different, I.e the two top holes are offset differently which when combined with deeper wishbones gives the wider track with the same camber settings.

Lewis

15-07-2009, 00:05

Williams and clio 16valve hubs and strut carriers are the exactly the same.

Lewis

15-07-2009, 00:06

What would you do for front arches Woz? Or are you only intending on fitting the hubs and not the wishbones?

rich-hgtt

15-07-2009, 01:08

Williams and clio 16valve hubs and strut carriers are the exactly the same.

Aye, my memory is crap, it's the struts with the different offset holes. Funny how clios suffer awefully with buggered front wheel bearings. Guess it's hauling round those heavy F7 engines

Woznaldo

15-07-2009, 13:03

What would you do for front arches Woz? Or are you only intending on fitting the hubs and not the wishbones?

If I were to go down the 172/182 hub route, then i'd probably go the whole hog and do a 172/182 wide track conversion using the wishbones, driveshafts, and hubs from that car which should leave me with a nice fat stance.

I'm sure I read something on the Cliosport site about the wishbones moving the wheel back in the arch a bit?

As for arches i'd probably look at the MC Rallying Maxi Kit (same as my avatar).

I did a bit of measuring at a local scrappy and saw a 1999 Scenic nearby so decided to measure the track and the wishbones. This is what I got:

track - 1450mm (RX4 is wider again 1505mm)

wishbone pivot bush spacing on subframe - same as GTT (or looks very close) but, hard to measure.

subframe wishbone mount spacing - same as GTT (rough measure)

Has anyone looked at Scenic (Mk 1) for possible parts?

Andrew Cooke

15-07-2009, 13:18

If I were to go down the 172/182 hub route, then i'd probably go the whole hog and do a 172/182 wide track conversion using the wishbones, driveshafts, and hubs from that car which should leave me with a nice fat stance.

I'm sure I read something on the Cliosport site about the wishbones moving the wheel back in the arch a bit?

As for arches i'd probably look at the MC Rallying Maxi Kit (same as my avatar).

I did a bit of measuring at a local scrappy and saw a 1999 Scenic nearby so decided to measure the track and the wishbones. This is what I got:

track - 1450mm (RX4 is wider again 1505mm)

wishbone pivot bush spacing on subframe - same as GTT (or looks very close) but, hard to measure.

subframe wishbone mount spacing - same as GTT (rough measure)

Has anyone looked at Scenic (Mk 1) for possible parts?

wishbones move the wheels forwards, for more caster, just as the Williams bones do. Be careful which 172/182 hubs you use, 54mm bolt spacing like the GTT will be easiest to use. Don't forget you'll also need to extend the steering rack somehow. The 172 stuff is a lot wider than GTT, you'll need bigger front arches than the MC rallying maxi kit, in fact you'll need the Prima racing wide arch kit the same as I did...

Woznaldo

15-07-2009, 13:52

Thanks Andy. Bit more research required I think... :rolleyes:

Winston

15-07-2009, 14:32

I heard a few people saying that 16v hubs are chunkier than GTT hubs, so I nagged some from Rob/BYR and got him to push some new bearings in for me thinking I might get a cheap upgrade in strength.

Here's what I noticed: The bearings are larger in the 16v as we knew already but absoloutely no other difference what so ever. I compared dimensions and geometry of the whole thing, they are identical to my 1988 phase 1.5 original hubs.

Maybe there are different versions of 16v hub available ? Maybe its R19 hubs that are bigger, I don't know but the clio ones I fitted were no different at all.

Sorry... yes the 16v/GTT hubs are the same bar the bearing being larger.... I ment to say it has a chunker stub axel (just a touch more metal

19 16V, Clio 16V and Clio Williams hubs are all the same

There is also a small bearing Clio hub found on the lower models... like the 5 GTT ones but they use the chunky stub axel.... Quite a few find there way onto valvers

Winston

15-07-2009, 14:36

This link might be of interest / some help to some folk

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=432795

paul b

15-07-2009, 14:42

Renault have never been silly in wasting money or manufacturing a NEW part when one of a shelf would do...

Clio Williams,16v,19 16v etc have all used the good old renault 21 frts, bigger hub and bearing for ABS types too....

as pointed out above, bigger ones are available when you get to Laguna and diesel land..

hope this helps..:coffee:

Andrew Cooke

15-07-2009, 17:48

Sorry... yes the 16v/GTT hubs are the same bar the bearing being larger.... I ment to say it has a chunker stub axel (just a touch more metal

19 16V, Clio 16V and Clio Williams hubs are all the same

There is also a small bearing Clio hub found on the lower models... like the 5 GTT ones but they use the chunky stub axel.... Quite a few find there way onto valvers

The "chunkier stub axel" is why I swapped to 16V stuff on my GTT, I'd opened the GTT ones up like Terry's Chocolate oranges....

I'm fitting the Laguna stuff for the bigger splines, and generall all around stiffness (stiffness being next to godliness), they are twice the weight of the GTT ones though.

Woznaldo

15-07-2009, 23:05

This link might be of interest / some help to some folk

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=432795

Wow, a lot of info on there. Think I got the gist of most of it. The R26 Hubs look very interesting but, would obviously need to use R26 struts as the seem to be the same type of hub/strut fitment as 205 GTI.

So, from what I could make out for the 172 widetrack on a GTT, ONE of the ways it could be done is as follows:

-172 Ph1 wishbones
-172 Ph 1 driveshafts
-172 Ph1 hubs and bearings (hubs to strut mount machined down 4mm (2mm each side))
-172 discs and caliper set up
-GTT Struts (strut/hub mount holes opened up 1mm to accept 172 bolts)
-Adjustable top mounts to bring camber back in?

Pros - Stronger, wider track, bigger brakes (280mm)
Cons - Heavier unsprung weight

Does anyone know how much R26 hubs weigh? Are they more or less than GTT, Clio 16v or 172?

Andrew Cooke

15-07-2009, 23:28

you might need a bit more than adjustable top mounts; you're on your own there. You can probably use a R19/Williams antiroll bar with the 172 stuff.

Woznaldo

16-07-2009, 00:03

you might need a bit more than adjustable top mounts; you're on your own there. You can probably use a R19/Williams antiroll bar with the 172 stuff.

Sorry, I should have made that clear. Adjustable top mount in conjunction with elongated strut/hub mount top bolt hole. Even then......:confused:

I did read about the Williams antiroll bar was the one to use as the 172 has a kink in it somewhere? This could be a problem for me as neither the Willy or R19 16v (TXE is) were available in Oz?

Lewis

16-07-2009, 00:13

I've heard about people using the Mk1 megane 8v anti roll bar. Was that available?

Woznaldo

16-07-2009, 03:22

I've heard about people using the Mk1 megane 8v anti roll bar. Was that available?

Not sure but, I don't think so.... I'm pretty sure the 1999 Megane Scenic was sold here. Do you think I could use the antiroll bar from that?

f0xy

16-07-2009, 10:02

indeed the 172 anti-roll bar will not work due to it having a kink in it...

im running the exact list Woznaldo posted, along with:

AST adjustable solid top mounts
Williams ARB
Williams Steering Rack so there is enough length in the arms to reach the hubs

All fits spot on :)

Woznaldo

16-07-2009, 10:34

I've heard about people using the Mk1 megane 8v anti roll bar. Was that available?

Jord, welcome to RTOC!:D Didn't know you were on here. Been following your Clio project on Cliosport and have to say i'm a big fan:cool:.

Right, back on topic. Do you know if the mk 1 megane 8v antiroll bar can be used with my above set up?

Woz

f0xy

16-07-2009, 10:53

hehe, been on here for a short while :)

With regards to the megane item, I couldnt say.... As long as it is the same length and width/diameter as the williams/r19 item im sure it would be fine...

One slight issue I had was the williams item being a tiny bit too short it seems (think because the 172 stuff is wider than williams), but its not really a problem, few mm's at each end max!

Lewis

16-07-2009, 16:21

Jord, welcome to RTOC!:D Didn't know you were on here. Been following your Clio project on Cliosport and have to say i'm a big fan:cool:.

Right, back on topic. Do you know if the mk 1 megane 8v antiroll bar can be used with my above set up?

Woz

Have a read of this might be interesting, I'm only going by whats posted about the megane arb on this thread.

http://www.rtoc.org/boards/showthread.php?t=7746

Woznaldo

16-07-2009, 23:45

Thanks Lewis. According to that thread with the info from Cliosport:

Anti Roll Bar:

60 01 025 814 - Williams ARB (72.11)
Renault 19 16v ARB will also fit, as will some megane 1 ARB's (IIRC its the non-16v and non-coupe one you'll be after)

If the above is the case then, I know Oz had the non-coupe version over here:).

Scoff

17-07-2009, 00:47

winston, which bit of the stub axle is chunkier ? I didn't pay much attention to that bit, only the main lump of the hub, but I don't recall any real difference (not to say there wasn't any ofcourse :) )

Andrew Cooke

17-07-2009, 13:02