Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hahaha, yeah i cant wait till the engine is done, money is the real issue though, its gonna cost me heaps, so its gonna be a slow project. but will be well worth it. Im aiming to have it done early next year.

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

yeah it does, ive got it flanged so i can put a replacement pipe in. That makes a real difference, once the car hits 3grand it just moves, with the cat on it kicks in from about 4500rpm, im gettin a custom track exhaust, from extractors will split in to 2 11/2 inch pipes and exit at the side :D will make a hell of a difference i reckon

yes an NA car does need a certain amount of backpressure but this is already happening through ur headers and the rest of the exaust system, gutting the cat deristricts the exaust a fair bit and is definately a noticable power increase, those extractors where 285 bucks plaus 150 for fitting, the most worth while mod i have done yet.

by keeping the exhaust at 2 1/2 it keeps the back pressure at a good level, gutting the cat is illegal of course and it does screw things up abit u have to gut it and put a stealth pipe in it, visible as a cat, but its a pipe inside a box. my old zorst was 2 1/2 all through

i've got an auto r33 - but its the 5 speed auto version with a really short 1st which helps acceleration - i get around 7.5-7.8s for 0-100 - i've god k&n pod filter with divider in the engine bay, that's it (running 98 RON petrol all the time and service every 5,000 with anti-friction oil - i reckon it helps!)

i beat a wrx with a bov one night - that was pretty funny i think the guy was a sh!t driver tho, and i can keep up with my mate's ca18 silvia (rebuilt and boosted to 12psi)

8.2 sec is a bit slo for a '33 - even an auto - do u torque brake?

i think its slow too!

i wana go against an r33 with the same mods or less and see how i go..

do i torque brake?

i duno wat that means

but if u mean start of with ure foot on ya damn brake and on the gas and take it of brake

then yea thats wat i did to get that time.

try doing a 0-100 with the stock wheels, since i put my 17's on it has lost a little accelaration (diameter is slightyly bigger) i got 225/50/r17 on mine, if urs are 45 or lower then it really shouldnt make a difference, but tyres and width can also make a difference. u lose out on speed but handling gains heaps:)

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...