Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 843
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It is a learning curve again, Ben. The car behaves much differently now and getting it to do things like it used to will involve about a dozen more runs I reckon.

I've got another vid from this meeting which was the transbrake run. I thought I'd take it easy and let it go at 8psi as indicated on the eboost2 display. You can hear it coming up on the brake in the vid and when i let go of the button, you can hear the revs rise too quickly, the tyres spin and me getting off the throttle and back on it trying to get some traction. Then it hits the limiter hard on both gear changes as I'd changed the shiftlight to 8200rpm but not the rev limiter. Amateur! :thumbsup:

Lots of practice required.

Nice work - should be able to give it a good shake down this weekend :down:

So Jas says to me, he says, "We right for this weekend, mate?"

And I say, I says, "For sure, mate. What's the plan?"

And then he says, "We'll leave my place in a massive cloud of tyre smoke at 1:30pm and head to the church!"

So I says back to him, I says, "You mean your place, right near Dapto cop shop?"

And he says, "She'll be right, mate! No-one's ever there!"

So I says back to him, I says, "You mean Dapto cop shop where the whole of the Highway Patrol is based?"

And he says, well, he didn't say much else...

330hc0h.jpg

:P:D :D

  • 1 month later...
It is a learning curve again, Ben. The car behaves much differently now and getting it to do things like it used to will involve about a dozen more runs I reckon.

I've got another vid from this meeting which was the transbrake run. I thought I'd take it easy and let it go at 8psi as indicated on the eboost2 display. You can hear it coming up on the brake in the vid and when i let go of the button, you can hear the revs rise too quickly, the tyres spin and me getting off the throttle and back on it trying to get some traction. Then it hits the limiter hard on both gear changes as I'd changed the shiftlight to 8200rpm but not the rev limiter. Amateur! :P

Lots of practice required.

Here's the incar vid of the above run.

  • 2 months later...
hmm they look big, 1600's?

please show what you are doing fuel rail wise when the time comes

It will probably just be a lump of alloy bar to be honest but I'll post what i come up with in here. They're 1600's.

  • 6 months later...

Finally getting back around to tinkering with the red car and finishing the fuel system. Have booked a couple of buddies, a case of beer, some steak and a bbq for this weekend. Should have it up and running Saturday arvo.

Family stuff, Xmas, dollars and a new race car purchase stalled things somewhat.

Leigh from ETM made up a really nice surge tank setup for me and mounted the pumps etc. I'm bracing for the Speedflow bill (scary shit) but with Steve's Speed Shop and MSCN looking after me, it won't be as bad as it could have been.

2rmxna0.jpg

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...