Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

not that i have tickets, its im not a tax accountant. some might say not good enough to be doing peoples tax's

note andrews high tax returns are a direct result of a incorrect entry on his tax file number declaration form, resulting in any incomptent fool able to give him a satisfactory result :P

Edited by Inline 6
not that i have tickets, its im not a tax accountant. some might say not good enough to be doing peoples tax's

note andrews high tax returns are a direct result of a incorrect entry on his tax file number declaration form, resulting in any incomptent fool able to give him a satisfactory result :D

And you say you're not good enough to do peoples tax :D

You're too modest Dan ;)

:P

not that i have tickets, its im not a tax accountant. some might say not good enough to be doing peoples tax's

note andrews high tax returns are a direct result of a incorrect entry on his tax file number declaration form, resulting in any incomptent fool able to give him a satisfactory result :P

So whats your number i need my tax done ;)

I'm happy the Skylines (and imports in general) were not shown in bad light. And I'm happy SAU:SA wasn't mentioned at all ... no news is good news.

As for SAU:SA's status in this. Neil Hastie contacted me earlier about this story. Although it is not mentioned in the papers, Neil (and SAPOL) is aware that a majority of car clubs (SAU:SA included) are predominantly car enthusiasts. My hat is off to Neil for protecting the real enthusiasts.

I can't and won't say much at this time. But I will be meeting with Neil again in the near future. Can we please be positive about this, and not give the media any more untruths and rubbish to go on about. Let the Commo and Falcon hoons bury themselves.

i read the article just before (was working all day yesterday) and im glad they didnt mention SAU:SA, so yes no news is good news for sure.

sadly enough the media makes up there own untruths and rubbish. - i mean i have been called a hoon a few times, and i ahve just turned around to the person and gone, excuse me wtf!!!!! so rude when someone you dont know turns around and says so thats your hoon car? and then later on starts telling me about how he has done over 200km/h in a 80 zone just out of tailem bend - yeah good on ya buddy, your my hero for sure.

never u mind hehe

ORLY ????

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • 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...