Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 717
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm sure Abo bob will post the results for all catagories,

but Boosted Zed squeezed out 427 rwkw from his VG30DETT,

go the cardigan wearing, tea sippers . :/

Sorry Mona, got there after 1.00, had to work.

You had a little scare, 500+ ?

See you @ WSID

Just had a look at Stan's dyno graph - from the SATANIC. Very surprising to see that UAS backed off the run before it even ended... meant that peak power wasn't even reached??? The dyno graph just went vertically downwards at the end, power curve hadn't even started to dip yet.

Anyone else see this on their graphs or was it just Stan's?

If I recall his A/F ratios were running a little to lean to push it too much farther.. was a good run.. could have held on a little longer, got a video of it here.. I think the main issue with power was his boost dropping off 1psi..

anyways.. good day.. stuck round for a bit.. than left.. stupid whining gearbox.. shits me to tears now sounds like i'm running a dogbox or something..

you the guy with the white shirt and camera? LOL!!! any vids of my car?!?! :/

Did anyone happen to get a vid of my run?? If someone did i would like to get it. 177.1 with a stock computer wasnt bad, and the induction scream nearly gave me a hard on!!

Who had the RB20 GTS-t with STD turbo Stock ECU and heaps of powa....smoky or what??

you the guy with the white shirt and camera? LOL!!! any vids of my car?!?

sorry to dissapoint.. but wasn't me mona.. I was hiding away.. nah had a singlet on.. not sure who else was there with a camera..

top secret anyone..

post-19556-1142069921.jpg

nice turn out of cars..

post-19556-1142069961.jpgpost-19556-1142070138.jpg

Edited by Links

yer morgs made 365rwkws with 19psi. Top secret car was a little disapointing made 440rwkws i think but had a t88-38k and 25psi i think thought it would pull more then that.

And where was duncun with BBQ :/

:sorcerer: Brad

Yeah great day in my opinion... nice area, plenty of parking (even if it was a bit tight) and overall very well organized! Well done to Adam :D

Personally I was a bit disappointed at my own result, not so much the number of rwkw's generated but the fact that I was running 1psi off from the tuning 2 weeks ago @ HITMAN. Also, I'm still wondering why they backed off the throttle at that specific rpm - definitely wasn't rev-cut. On a good note, I got a torque graph out of it :D very torquey setup :/

However, just like last time - I've come home with new ambitions (oh my god here we go again)... we've re-routed the boost lines and we're now currently holding 13psi flat :) Dunno if it'll be stable, need to get it dynoed again soon or maybe I'll just wait for the Haltech.

Great chatting with old mates, new mates and most of all seeing the turnout to this event!

Mik made 371kw. Boost is typically 1.45 bar.

Thanks to Adam for organising and John for running. Also, thanks to Ben for finally listening to me and strapping it down... :/

Did STD turbo GTR make more than last years mark of 284 rwkw?

yeah he got 265rwkw with nos, between 4000 and 4200 rpm he went from 120rwkw to 235 rwkw!!!! Near vert curve. Crazy.

It only took that long as I asked Ben from UAS to ramp it slowly to 4400rpm then bury it :/ Not a great idea ramping from low rpm with nitrous on a dyno under load. Rods don't like it. lol

I was happy with the 190kW no gas - I hope anyone who watched the curve or saw the power vs. manifold pressure graph took note of the values. If there are any old pricks with something to say purely for the sake of saying something still talking i'd be surprised.

Thanks to Adam, Turbosmart and UAS for a great day.

Adrian

It only took that long as I asked Ben from UAS to ramp it slowly to 4400rpm then bury it :/ Not a great idea ramping from low rpm with nitrous on a dyno under load. Rods don't like it. lol

I was happy with the 190kW no gas - I hope anyone who watched the curve or saw the power vs. manifold pressure graph took note of the values. If there are any old pricks with something to say purely for the sake of saying something still talking i'd be surprised.

Thanks to Adam, Turbosmart and UAS for a great day.

Adrian

Im an old prick...but have noting but congrats to all the winners!!!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...