Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Two different quotes and two different interpretations.

Now if you believe that using cut slicks would enable the GTR into the 7:30 then your dreaming.

We shall see when the first production GTR actually tries to tackle the ring, whether or not its as fast as the CGT.

It says around 7:30 in the dry with cut slicks and that 7:38 was on a partially wet track.

Who knows until it happens.

what makes you guys think that nissan is the only company that do their best within what they think is 'fair' to get a good time? what tyres did the porsche use... etc etc.. why is nissan the only time people seem keen to challenge. I would trust them over the german marques to set an 'honest' time.

I have spent plenty of time in Germany and Poland, the chances of getting a dry track depend on weather conditions which are good for a substantial part of the year.

A little bit harder around the ring though with its changes in elevation, or so ive heard. Its a bit like Bathurst.

I just watched the video. you can see what tyres they are using. regular street spec bridgestones. why would they use anything else? you can even hear them protesting in the video. I've never heard slicks make noises like that. not even semi-slicks sounds like that.

I've already seen this discussion on another forum...

You can see them put the tyres on in their video. They are Bridgetstone RE070 tyres. The same tyres they supply with the GTR from the dealer. Why would they use anything else?

tyre.jpg

tyre2.jpg

I've got no idea on what monarocountry is trying to get at here.

He's blabbing about the 'cut-slicks' on the ls1 forums aswell. Me thinks that someone is in denial that the GT-R is indeed an absolute legit weapon.

Pretty pathetic attempt to try take the light away on what truly is a remarkable piece of machinery.

Cheers,

Steve.

what makes you guys think that nissan is the only company that do their best within what they think is 'fair' to get a good time? what tyres did the porsche use... etc etc.. why is nissan the only time people seem keen to challenge. I would trust them over the german marques to set an 'honest' time.
The Nissan, the... we all know that no one who speaks German could be an evil man!

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...