Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well considering the money i have spent on the car since i brought it, i cant do everything at once. I think its funny you've gone to the effort to make a point on how high the car sits when i havnt got to that part of the car yet.

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The black roof is something different , got My mirrors back today .

clean5.jpg

clean6.jpg

Heh I hate show pony ryms, I want a light weight rym.

I was thinking bout some B R Lee ryms I seen in a mag awhile back. Half the reason I did my car was to shed the weight.

Edited by Silent

haha dude Volks arent show ponies, they are light rims, they are forged 1 piece and im pretty sure weigh like 6 or 7 kilos. ill double check before i commit to that though :D

thats probably why they cost soo much :(

and about the guy calling it a 4WD i dont think he was havign a go, just pointin out the obvious :)

cars lookin goiod though ! will follow this build

Volk Rays TE-37's

or

Volk Rays CE28N's

dont go bling, bling is poo :D

race wheels r teh best !

I was refering to the comment about bling!

You hit the nail on the head with the buddy ryms , I love the rym but im going to hold out to see what else will come along.

Heres a pic of the color and the exhaust, I had to drop the exhaust cut the flange and rejoin it to the exhaust so the tip lined up nice and even.

color.jpg

Edited by Silent

Heres some pics of my cold air intake box for my hks pod filter. I have a see thru lid that seals the box and duckting that comes out underneath to air pickup in the front par .

box1.jpg

box2.jpg

box3.jpg

box4.jpg

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

haha P plates? Please tell me its your sons car so you don't put me to shame >_<

Top quality job anway

Have you considered moving the number away from the middle of the car? Gives it a bit more of a modified look IMO

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...