Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yeah I had certainly expected it would be about par with the gallardo. similar weight, power, brakes etc. better gerbox, but the gallardo's have a few years worth of development under the belt so far. bit hard to judge off just the first days running.

  • Replies 369
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Having an off is no indication of the cars ability, especially in a Targa.

Although I understand that many people would be dissapointed that it hasn't "performed" so to speak at this event if they don't end up continuing.

I was just going to say this.

I think its a bit premature to write off the ability of the R35 as a competent tarmac rally car simply because of one minor incident.

There was a lot of hype surrounding this particular car, and sure, we all wanted to see it kick some ass but lets be realistic, this is the first such event it has competed in, and im sure we will see plenty of decent results in the future once some further development has occured, particularly around the suspension setup.

Well it didn't exactly set the field alight yesterday either. I remember when the Gallardo made the debut with Stokell (and Appleby) it was kicking ass despite the tyre issue - until the little wall incident. But it left you feeling the potential. Right now I'm just not feeling that for the R35.

Well it didn't exactly set the field alight yesterday either. I remember when the Gallardo made the debut with Stokell (and Appleby) it was kicking ass despite the tyre issue - until the little wall incident. But it left you feeling the potential. Right now I'm just not feeling that for the R35.

Fair call Snowy :D

I was going to say I can understand Alford not wanting to push it considering the value of the car, but that pales when compared with Stokell's effort in the Gallardo upon its debut!

Heres hoping that we see some more impressive performances from the R35 soon

My other thoughts were based upon the R35's move from M2 (where the old GTR's are) to M1 which means there's less that they have to play with. But I hope you are right and perhaps someone like Steve Jones in W.A. can re-encourage those of us that are feeling a little underwhelmed currently.

BTW - just to make it clear I'm not having a go at anyone or anything. I'm soley talking about the potential of the car as a genuine tarmac rally challenger because to be honest I had genuine long term dreams of owning one for this purpose. I want to pop my Targa cherry next year in the Rookie rally (but in something slow and sensible - not an R35 GTR) but with a long term goal of heading towards one as experience was gained.

i'll probably be poping my cherry next year in the r35.

but yeah will be a big learing curve, so i dont expect to set the world on fire either! hehe and i dont like some one talking to me while i'm driving!!! :D

9 - 979 Wooster, Ben - Kulhanek, Tim QLD Tas 2001 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec II N1

21 - 895 Manion, Brendan - Manion, Benjamin Tas Tas 1995 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1

33 - 808 Leemhuis, Peter - Handley, Kelly ACT NSW 1993 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 - WOOOHOOO!

latest results - set to change

any news if they are rejoining?

Okay update on the R35 GTR, its is out of the event. They have withdrawn

I spoke to Tony tonight and he is disappointed that they are out, but they see massive potential in the car.

I will be doing a full update on their Targa story on GTRBlog.com in the coming weeks

9 - 979 Wooster, Ben - Kulhanek, Tim QLD Tas 2001 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec II N1

21 - 895 Manion, Brendan - Manion, Benjamin Tas Tas 1995 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1

33 - 808 Leemhuis, Peter - Handley, Kelly ACT NSW 1993 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 - WOOOHOOO!

latest results - set to change

another one to watch is car 711 of luck and johnstone. comming 19th in classic outright they are piloting an r32 gtst. its there 4th targa in this car and its taken a few years of R&D to get it right but this rear its pretty well on song.

Kel and Pete finished up 46th in modern and 6th in their class for the day. :banana:

35 GTR is definately out.

Go Kel. 2 down 2 to go. Time to up the boost and for Kel to start punching his left shoulder when he gets out of control.

If you read this Kel have fun baby,,,

Zilla and Zed are watching your every move. GO Mum Zed yells!!!!!!

Neil.

i'm a newb when it comes to these things, but given the Jap's mentality when it comes to suspension, i would have though the Mines option job would be the last thing you'd want given the sort of 'unperfect' roads you'd be finding down in Tas?

RIghto full results for the SAU guys from yesterday.

14 979 Wooster, Ben Kulhanek, Tim QLD Tas 2001 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec II N1 CM23 7 1 06:46

22 942 Beable, Jeff Beable, Nerida VIC VIC 2000 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 CM23 14 3 08:08

25 984 Johnston, Greg Stoneman, Mike Tas Tas 2007 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo 9 CM22 16 13 08:21

32 895 Manion, Brendan Manion, Benjamin Tas Tas 1995 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 BM23 3 3 08:52

46 808 Leemhuis, Peter Handley, Kelly ACT NSW 1993 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 BM23 7 6 10:15

58 803 Thatcher, Stephen Plenderlith, Stella NSW NSW 1993 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 BM23 10 8 11:53

64 814 Bowker, Steven Stephenson, Paul VIC VIC 1990 Nissan Skyline GT-R V-Spec N1 BM23 14 9 13:24

Only one of our guys are out so far so keep cheering everyone!

Re the R35, Lambos, Tony etc, keep in mind when Stockell was running the Lambo a. he didnt own it and b. he crashed it. You aren't going to win if you are stuck in a tree. The R35 is on road tyres and you can't underestimate how much of an issue that is in the dry. Lets see how it goes next year once it has decent tyres and the more appropriate suspension.

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
    • Well this shows me the fuel pump relay is inside the base of the drivers A Pillar, and goes into the main power wire, and it connects to the ignition. The alarm is.... in the base of the drivers A Pillar. The issue is that I'm not getting 12v to the pump at ignition which tells me that relay isn't being triggered. AVS told me the immobiliser should be open until the ignition is active. So once ignition is active, the immobiliser relay should be telling that fuel pump relay to close which completes the circuit. But I'm not getting voltage at the relay in the rear triggered by the ECU, which leaves me back at the same assumption that that relay was never connected into the immobiliser. This is what I'm trying to verify, that my assumption is the most likely scenario and I'll go back to the alarm tech yet again that he needs to fix his work.      Here is the alarms wiring diagram, so my assumption is IM3A, IM3B, or both, aren't connected or improper. But this is all sealed up, with black wiring, and loomed  
×
×
  • Create New...