Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hahah what a small penis and a dimwit for even putting money into that car... im going to feed his brain to a elephant because its the size of a peanut.... and then pee in his fuel tank for a extra 20kw or power so he can beat my car...

1. Stock skyline GTR do 13 flat

2. my skyline did 13.6 on stock turbo

3. He was video taping the non turbo version Skyline

4. his mum breast fed him for too long

he is a knob...him and the Cordia

R32 gts-t > 160kw 1280kg = 125kw per tonne (rwd)

Cordia (POS) > 90kw 1060kg = 85kw per tonne (fwd)

Yeah, cordia is deffinately quicker... :P Shame the shit for brains that owns that Cordia will have no idea what the information above means.... cuz cordia is like da fastestest car evva full not lie, zomg i provved it n all...

O that poor boy...they are everywhere though....Wasting money into piece of shit cars....i see their kind everyday.

I reckon if a couple of hot chicks pulled up in a skyline or silvia beside him, and he was to rev it up and take off like a knob, they would laugh at him...those knobs can only pick up high school girls cuz they know nothing about cars.

Gotta get a big turbo, to make big power, and have big sub woofer....how about a bigger car.

lol, you guys are taking it too seriously. Hes probably taking the piss too like mr. joe shabadoo said.

Ill admit its funny as though

I wish I could say he is taking the piss yawn... but he's not. This guys has come on sau on more than one occassion trying to tell everyone about his cordia and he wants anyone to come drag him. I can't believe he is still on about it. It quite pathetic really.

R32 gts-t > 160kw 1280kg = 125kw per tonne (rwd)

Cordia (POS) > 90kw 1060kg = 85kw per tonne (fwd)

Yeah, cordia is deffinately quicker... :thumbsup: Shame the shit for brains that owns that Cordia will have no idea what the information above means.... cuz cordia is like da fastestest car evva full not lie, zomg i provved it n all...

hmmm..

89 r32 GTST = 1290kg

92 r32 GTST = 1320kg

84 AB cordia = 960kg and 110kw.

that is on 7psi and no intercoolah uleh!

this doesn't change the fact that they are a shit heap and the guy really has problems.

I want to choke the guy as much as the next person, but his shit box does make a point.

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...