Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi . After going through two diferent speed reading devices (one on the way to Geelong and the other on the Hume) It looks like my speed is not showing the correct KPH..And the most annoying part is.. I am going slower than I thought!!!...at 110 on the speedo the detector said I was doing 103. I hoped it was wrong but the second time (through a different one) made me think its probably right.

I would like to know if anyone else has found this. I dont like it ..even thought it will help prevent speeding fines.I am guessing it is a result of the after market wheels rather than a speedo fault. My tyres are 45/235/17

If this is a result of a larger overall diameter then some acceleration will also be lost.

I know its a minor issue but I would just like to get some thoughts.

Cheers.

Scott

Hi . After going through two diferent speed reading devices (one on the way to Geelong and the other on the Hume) It looks like my speed is not showing the correct KPH..And the most annoying part is.. I am going slower than I thought!!!...at 110 on the speedo the detector said I was doing 103. I hoped it was wrong but the second time (through a different one) made me think its probably right.

I would like to know if anyone else has found this. I dont like it ..even thought it will help prevent speeding fines.I am guessing it is a result of the after market wheels rather than a speedo fault. My tyres are 45/235/17

If this is a result of a larger overall diameter then some acceleration will also be lost.

I know its a minor issue but I would just like to get some thoughts.

Cheers.

Scott

Standard new speedo is ~3-4% optimistic (shows higher speed than car is actually doing) with brand new tyres.

Bald tyres makes the speedo a further 4-5% optimistic.

So your 6% optimistic is pretty much right on the money.

Optimistic means lower gearing, hence faster accelerating, not that you would notice.

:laugh: cheers :)

If you muckabout with wheel sizes and profiles, then you must look at the actual diameter of your rear wheels. You also have to take into account your ex gear box revs plus your diff ratio. You also have to consider whether the torque converter is "locked up".

I had a chat with Alex about this before, and there were various ex box ratios with final drive ratios.

You have to look at all these facets before you can ascertain whether your speedo is accurate or not.

And in this day and age of "revenue gathering" you have to know whether your speed is approaching the "Golden Point" mark.

I also believe, and a lot of multi-experienced drivers, will also believe, that you instinctively know, via the seat of your pants, exactly how FAST you are going.

If you get "done" its your fault! (wtf officer I was only going #*^++ kph) >_<>_<

or you could buy a pivot speed meter and it will get rid of the fuel cutout at 180KPH and also is more accurate with a red digital readout. these little boxes work a treat as they also have a peak/hold function for trap speeds and 1/4 mile readouts too for strip runs if thats what you wanna look at.

from memory mine was around $125 plus install approx 3/4hr labour.

I went under the speed check on the Geelong/Melbourne road at 100 (speedo), got 96km/h on the radar, with a wheel/tyre combo that should be 1% bigger than standard I am pretty happy with that, I like to have a little margin between the limit and getting sent an invoice for not starring at my speedo all the time...

Like SK said, it's super-rare to get a speedo that is dead-perfect accurate.

I believe that ADR's allow for up to 10% variance, which would cover tyre wear, inflation (how many people REALLY check their tyre pressures as often as they should?), etc.

A GPS device or some sort of regularly-calibrated dyno thing are probably the best two ways to get an accurate reading to check your speedo against.

  • 3 weeks later...

Thats why i never believe people who say that got their car up to 220 on the speedo, cos more than likely it's around the 200 mark.

Also need to take into account tyre expansion as they heat up.

ive been booked 226 in a 90 zone.(R34 GTR)

had it up to 278 on the GPS then saw the nice man next to his white commondore and hit the brakes!!!! still 226 when he got me!!!!

very long 9 months walking!!!!!

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...