Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Really enjoyed viewing this thread and poking around other projects. I will have a 32 GTR one day (next race car build if the wifer lets me).

But at the moment I have to settle for bulding it's nemesis.........

P9190316.jpg

IMG_2216.jpg

When done I would like to find someone with a racer spec gunmetal 32 to take some professional pics with.

Specs are a little long but here are the main ones.

Engine to 500hp (at Dyno waiting at the moment). E85, T4, solid lifter, ported, dry sumped, pectel, MW cdi.

Hollinger H6S, twin plate AP 7 1/4.

8.8" Mustang plated irs diff in modified rear cradle with camber/caster adjustment and adjustable bladed arb.

Adjustable front tca and top mounts.

6 pot 355mm brakes front, 4 pot 330mm brakes rear - adjustable pedal box.

Motec dash, pdm.

As much carbon as I can get my hands on.

17" and 18" centrelock wheels.

P9220323.jpg

IMG00145-20100813-1131.jpg

P9220317.jpg

IMG_2247.jpg

IMG_2245.jpg

P9190314.jpg

P6240112.jpg

P6240116.jpg

P6240106.jpg

P6240129.jpg

That's awesome Lincoln!

Where are you based mate?

Thanks am in Melbourne.

Do the modern day turbos on the seirra reduce the lag much?

Still have a old school turbo for strength and reliability - have a maram 247 shaft and wheel. Have upped the compression and i'm guessing more suitable adavance with the e85 but will still be lucky to see full boost (30psi) before 3500rpm. Good things done these days with twinscroll and may go there after as the standard cossie exhaust manifold was designed for it.

You a Targa nut? Man I love Tassie.

Thanks all.

P9190310.jpg

P9190307.jpg

IMG_2244.jpg

IMG00151-20100813-1456.jpg

IMG00098-20100723-1433.jpg

15052010_005.jpg

15052010_011.jpg

15052010_008.jpg

Man I love the detail in this, all the little things that people like me always want to do, such as the carbon bonnet pin surrounds and mirror mounts etc, but never happens, your car has it all, so neat.

and dont sneeze at 30psi by 3500rpm most of us wish could get that in skylines.

Hell my stock turbo soarer wouldnt get that lol.

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

    • 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...