Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well after a weekend working on my car, adding some extra mods. I decided to take it to the strip to see what she can get.

Specs:

1995 S1.5 R33 GTST

17inch 255 rears / 235 fronts (put rears at 25psi)

Lowered

Bov

Just Jap FMIC

Batmbl twin 3 inch dump and highflow cat

3inch cat bak

Pod filter

that ebay boost controller

set at 10-11psi

Best run of 13.857sec @ 105.26mph with a 2.494sec 60foot

The only thing i need to do is practice the launch and should get a low 13 maybe high 12??

Will post up a video next week sometime.

Edited by drewr33

Drewr33... What have you got at the rear treads? i have about the same mods only engine mangement aswell... never actually taken to the strip.. Just timed mine with mates out in the country side (oh yeah and this was in NT so we were not breaking any road rules hehehehe).

Rear tyres are Khumo Supra's 255 17's

Model number 712 I think

But as I was saying I only got a 2.49 sec 60foot time which i was getting better then that in my fwd corolla

Edited by drewr33

u do realise that u can take off on teh last orange

because ur reaction time from sensing the green light to actually planting ur foot is around 0.1 seconds - u can actually take off on the last orange cause the time between the last orange and the green is..dading..0.1-0.12 seconds (depending on the circuit)

and so taking of on the last orange actually is taking off on teh green due to reaction times etc etc etc - that will help a bit with ur 60ft time

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...