Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

he means over the filter to catch those little drops that make ur engin bay look dirty... how much are oil filter relocation kits? the 260s is soooo much harder!

has any one used those new DRIFT filters? apparently they have a bolt on the back of them so if its too tight get a socket onto it and ur set!

a filter should never need a socket to be taken off - if you need this addition then you are doing them up too tight!!

if, however, you do get a filter that has been over tightened all you need to do is stab a screwdriver through it to get some spinning leverage - a bit messy but beats cramped hands and lots of swearing haha

a filter should never need a socket to be taken off - if you need this addition then you are doing them up too tight!!

if, however, you do get a filter that has been over tightened all you need to do is stab a screwdriver through it to get some spinning leverage - a bit messy but beats cramped hands and lots of swearing haha

or grip it with sandpaper

well if you can get a drip tray under the oil filter you doing pretty good. directly under it is the front diff casing which gives you just enough room to get a rag under there which doesn't do anything really

well if you can get a drip tray under the oil filter you doing pretty good. directly under it is the front diff casing which gives you just enough room to get a rag under there which doesn't do anything really

Ok. Very different design to mine then.

What if you lowered the side of the car that the oil filter is on and keep the opposite side jacked up?

Gravity would, in theory, keep the oil from leaking out when you unscrew it.

It may leak a little bit, but nothing a rag couldn't soak up

Edited by iamhe77

Exactly, hence the bag and rag technique.

well if you can get a drip tray under the oil filter you doing pretty good. directly under it is the front diff casing which gives you just enough room to get a rag under there which doesn't do anything really

no matter how long you let it drain for their is still going to be some oil in the filter....

Just remove the plug cap and dipstick and let it drain for about 10. (your removing the filler cap and dipstick so that it drains properly and doesn't just create a vacum. While its draining place a rather absorbent rag under the filter (think it sits on the front diff??) Whip the filter off and get it upside down as quick as you can to avoid as much spillage as possible.

I have a mate that did a filter on my car for me and he managed to not spill a drop, alot of that was due to the speed he undid the filter.

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...