Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yeah consistance wins DECA. This will always be the case. If your fast, but hit hats then you almost can't win against a slower, but consistant compedator.

If we would have had another say two events I might have been able to claw back the other 6 points to catch ryan. But with a single day event you need to drive clean to win.

Not that i'm complaining, i'm happy to see ryan win DECA. It would be boring if the one person always won.

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I'd Also like to acknowledge Che Boocock, Tom Giordano and Russell Cunningham. You all drove well to beat some faster cars and a fair few 4WD cars.

Also Tim did very well considering Mick broke his car and he had a one DNS. To still get 9th outright is great.

cheers for the results guys,

Happy with 9th overall condiering mick broke my car, and last run i drove an understeer king for the 1st time ( r32gtr)

that was an experiance.....

Grats to ryan , RWD represent. Really happy for you mate

cheers

Congrats Ryan!!!!

It's good to see the 4wd's kicked off the pedestal.

Top effort Che!!

I'm proof that power does not achieve better results. In fact the more power i have the worse i get; In the first year of DECA i came 4th overall, since then it has been spin-outs and burnouts :bunny:

Good work ryan!

Al, I think the first DECA I did was probably the best one because I just drove properly..instead of trying to get the arse end out whenever I can! Although It might be time to try and find a good balance between the two and get some good times down. Next time.

Good work ryan!

Al, I think the first DECA I did was probably the best one because I just drove properly..instead of trying to get the arse end out whenever I can! Although It might be time to try and find a good balance between the two and get some good times down. Next time.

And fun :)

Exactly!

I treat DECA as a fun/drift/thrash day.

It was my intention to do this DECA properly, i even left my new, $660, 400km old, tyres on the rear; but as soon as i went "WD" on the first run (because someone made me go first), i said fark it. Then just wanted to do what i do best!

Thanks guys.

Its cool to see out of the top 5, 4 were RWD. Two of them being Dean and Jamie's Porkas... those things were damn fast. Congrats to Jamie on the fasted back track time. would like to see what they could get around HH.

Standouts to Che and Tom for sure! Russ, considering you spun like 10 times im keen to see what you would have got if you kept it clean!

dang! 5th is a surprise :)

thanks for organising the results guys and well done to everyone that competed

Don't you mean 4th. Well done.

Dean Taylor Porsche 484

Che Boocock R33GTST 484

Thanks to the organisers and volunteers for running a great event. Its great to see so many rwds near the top of the results sheet, and I'm really surprised by my result.

Hopefully Dean and Jamie can bring the Porsches again in the future, it was good to see something a bit different out there, and they were very quick.

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...