Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

imho the back end of both the cars isnt the greatest, although the front end of the legnum is :banana:, although generally speaking i rekon gallants are feral

Aren't the front end of the Galant and Legnum exactly the same?? :)

Edited by Iron Chef

how did i know Mitchy would be all over this thread lol, the legnum bandwagon leader :P i like em myself, front is awesome, rear of stagea is wayyyy better lookin though. The leggy is ALOT smaller than a stagea, the leggy reminds me of a wrx wagon size, not really a full size wagon, closer to a hatchback size almost.

Going from what ive seen with mitsubishi engines (evo, gto, etc) they are the most underrated strength engines in any imports. i know the gto guys with the 6g72 reckon a safe limit for stock engine is 650awhp lol. The legnum is a similiar engine setup by the looks of it so i could see it making some decent power without dramas (obviously not that much but as good as rb25 if not better).

Coolie wrote a song For the twin turbo Legacy GT...

"as I walk through the valley of Valley of Death

I take a look at my boost gauge and realize there's nothin there

coz I've been cursing and swearing so long, that

even my mama thinks that my second turbo is gone

but I ain't never crossed an owner that didn't experience it

me be seeing laaaaaag you know that's not unheard of

you better watch how you're talking, and where you're walking

Cause the second turbo's about to kick in y0

I really hate to wait but i gotta though

As the revs rise I see the exhaust smoke

I'm the kinda GT the little rexies wanna be like

Foot to the floor in the night, saying prayers for response

been spending most their lives, living in the GT's VOD"

Legnums are faster stock and with mild mods than stageas. They are lighter and handle better. They are also extremely common in NZ and go for 5-15k.

Heck a manual Caldina GTT will dick most to all stageas.

Edited by GorGasm
  • 2 weeks later...

i'd have to agree with chuckie... the stagea is far better for reliability. I thrashed my car at times, taken her down the drags too and not once did I do my gear box, unlike Mitchy who had only had the legnum a short while and managed to kill it...

So I wouldn't touch the leggy's... stick with nissan.

Edited by StageaGirl

i guess its just personal preference...if ur just gonna drive it as a daily i guess any option wouldn't matter..but in stock form legnums would be better...i'm more of a mitsubishi person when coming to wagon/sedan 4wds anyway..

in saying that don't bring any liberty gt's/b4's into the equation...hate subaru lolz...even though they do make good cars..damn i'm biased

In terms of daily use, how do these stack up to Stageas and Caldina GTT? And in terms of your general service? Recently in HPI magazine, they stated that changing minor things for legnum, spark plugs was a really prob, as you had to remove alot of the cross over plumbing. One more thing, are these legnums more thirsty than the other 2 compititors, Caldina and Stagea? I know Mits has a thing for making thirsty cars, like EVO series.

Both the Stagea and Legnum are very thirsty. The caldina is lighter and more fuel efficient.

Caldina has a ratshit interior

Stageas are reasonably easy to service. Id imagine a caldina isnt too bad either. Legnum can be tedious with things like sparkies and cambelts. Same goes with any transverse V6

Speed wise would be something like Fastest = Legnum > Caldina > Stagea turbo 4wd.

i'd have to agree with chuckie... the stagea is far better for reliability. I thrashed my car at times, taken her down the drags too and not once did I do my gear box, unlike Mitchy who had only had the legnum a short while and managed to kill it...

So I wouldn't touch the leggy's... stick with nissan.

quiet you. :P

the second box has lasted alot longer than the first one!

  • 6 years later...

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



  • 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...