Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yo, i was doing a 180 degree handbrake to spin my car (just bord muckin around) n then my car completely shut off.. i had to put it in drive and then i had to take the key and restart the engine to get it working again, why does that happen o_O

lol probably fuel surge... maybe ur handbrakey was too much for the amount of fuel u had in the tank and the pump ran dry which would cause the engine to obviously stop

my old car use to do that as well and also when doing donuts :P

when i was at driver dynamics defensive driving. We were given a chance to spin our car 180degree's on wet vinyl.

My car shut off also, clutch was all the way in too.

Ive heard from others that this happens to them too.

I dont think its fuel pump mounting/life related, its something else.

when i was at driver dynamics defensive driving. We were given a chance to spin our car 180degree's on wet vinyl.

My car shut off also, clutch was all the way in too.

Ive heard from others that this happens to them too.

I dont think its fuel pump mounting/life related, its something else.

Mine did it too, turned out it was the fuel pump :D

Hence i said that. Would do it even with 1/2 tank as it wasnt sitting right

Do jap cars have rollover protection which shuts off the fuel pump? I've heard of this in some cars... It could very well be the car think its rolling due to the massive change in g forces?

^^^^^

Yo, i was doing a 180 degree handbrake to spin my car (just bord muckin around) n then my car completely shut off.. i had to put it in drive and then i had to take the key and restart the engine to get it working again, why does that happen o_O

It's a fat-o-matic

i used to get this alot when i started drifting.. use the handbrake to get it to 90* then dump the clutch and gun it and hopefully it will hook up and spin you the rest of the way, if not, it will send you straight off the road.

i think the cars just go from lots of fuel, to no fuel.. think about it... your cruising at maybe 3-4000 rpm in 3rd, you knock it in to second in the revs rise, then you hit the handbrake and put the clutch in, which unless you keep the revs up, will drop it straight back down to idle very quickly... how many time in normal driving would you drive at 5-6000 rpm in second, and then all of a sudden do a foot shuffle and let the revs drop back to idle... our cars stall soo easily even slowly pulling up to the lights... let alone swinging it around 180*

cheers

Linton

never managed that one...

but definately dont think its to do with the above post... if that were the case it would also happen on a slow gear change.

not to mention clutching in after a burnout...

Are you guys being serious? automatic, which is like doing a handbrakey in a manual but not putting the clutch in.... you are stopping the driveline from spinning, which slows (stops) the engine from turning over, hence the stalling.... to those in a manual with same issue but you are pushing the cluch in, ignore this post.

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...