Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Import GTR's (33/34), no.

Not sure about R32's though, but I don't reckon they'd be competetive anyway. (awaits flaming lol)

Dean and I spent considerable time throwing the idea of an R36 (or whatever) GTR for 2009, depending on what sort of a package it turns out to be. Our hope is that it doesn't turn out to be a 997 Turbo, ie.. too smart for it's own good. Could/should be an interesting car for showroom if Nissan decides to sell them here.

Showroom just appeals to me because you'd expect a super reliable vehicle, and if your balls are weighty enough, you can beat da porsche GT2's!... as we did with a bug-eye in '05 :huh:

Tony Alford bought one of them too smart for their own good things, sits in his garage useless (it's like a bad case of "Computer Says No").. Waiting on the new GTR now!

  • Replies 380
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Can someone please explain this "too smart for their own good" thing to me???

I heard rumours that the 997 Turbos weren't popular, but couldn't find out the reason why.....

As I understand it, the cars are not intended for modification (racing) Therefore all the guys who run standard Porches normally are having all sorts of problems when they make their standard modifications.

I believe there is a fibre optic cable that does a lap of the car and reports to the ECU. Anything untoward is reported as an error - ie tyre run out /speed v gps speed and front tyre runout v rear... This is just the tip of the iceberg. Quinny told me they are a better car stock than the 996 was stock, but the frigging for racing R & D is going to take a lot of time(money) to get them right.

Matt Close finished just behind Quinny in his sorted 2001 Model

FI the Aston Martin is suffering the same electronic handicap... throw into that the Lamb too

While I am here - well done to Ben and his pupil. A strong cosistant finish is what Targa is all about... We will be sure to revert to that strategy when we go back to a classic car... ATM it's the "fast as you can for as long as we can..." - this year mechanicals let us own, but come April 15 2008, hope we have it right.

TT 984

Yes, thats pretty much how I understand it also. No one wants to bag the Porsche in public for obvious reasons, but Porsche Germany has said directly that there will be no "fix" for the Turbo's brain, and if you plan on racing or modifying a car, best go and buy a GT3 RS CS, which is of coarse, what Jimmy did.

Although in the Turbo's defence, Quinny was saying that as time went on, he was becoming more comfortable with the 997's ways (active stability altering the "feel" of the car mostly), although he still thought his sorted 996 was still around a second a kay quicker.

Oh lads, did I mention I was lucky enough to have dinner with Jim in Burnie? What an honour to share a table with my life-long idol!!! :-D

And IF that was for me TT, thanks alot mate! ;)

Edited by Marlin

It was the old engine from white's car, all stock. The note comes from the different exhaust and tune. Weeks did a deal to use their old engine because they made a letterbox out of the original engine block the thursday before scrutineering. Apparently the V10 snaps its titanium conrods when it's revved to 10 grand. :P

And a big umahhh about the camera car! :(

It was the old engine from white's car, all stock. The note comes from the different exhaust and tune. Weeks did a deal to use their old engine because they made a letterbox out of the original engine block the thursday before scrutineering. Apparently the V10 snaps its titanium conrods when it's revved to 10 grand. :P

And a big umahhh about the camera car! :(

Yes, my missus was very dissappointed the original #832 parked funny, but they went to Bunnings and got a fibreglass repair kit to fix lip and job done... Owner is on here somewhere so I wont take the P155 till I see his pics.

TT

I thought that was the old #832. At the prolouge he was pushing more and more each lap, my cousin has accouple of pics of him very sideways out of the RSL hairpin.

So is there a spare camera car driver position for next Targa :blink:

Not the first Camera Car to stick it off though, there was Charles in the ex-Nismo GTi-R on South Riana, Leo in the 33 GTR on Sideling and although not a the Camera Car, Zero ripping its wheel off at T98 is worthy of a mention, particually when it was an MG supplied MG-F and the wheel was torn off out right outside the MG/Rover Corp' Villa!

Ross was getting into it here and there though :P

post-5400-1178116312.jpg

...for those who don't know, the GTiR ended up in the dirty pond on South Riana that the XA GT and 33 GTR ended up in this year and thanks to stone cold tyres Leo's georgous 33 ended up 10 or so metres down a bank on Sideling... so Ross' cleary wasn't trying!

Edited by t01-100
I thought that was the old #832. At the prolouge he was pushing more and more each lap, my cousin has accouple of pics of him very sideways out of the RSL hairpin.

So is there a spare camera car driver position for next Targa :P

No my friend, the camera car drivers position is stitched up!!

I'll be doing it until I'm old and crusty!

Thanks for the replys guys.....still a bit confused though. Nothing I have read about the 997 Turbos on road or race track have ever mentioned anything about non-overrideable ESP systems though?!?!?! Hopefully will read this months Wheels and that may shed some light on it......

Very un-Porsche like as well to have a "safety net" on their cars. Poor form I say.

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



  • 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...