Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

another vid from my 180SX at Lakeside today. I was trying a wing and splitter. Certainly made a difference, but I didn't really like it. It caused a bit of understeer and didn't improve my lap times, but didn't get heaps of clear laps in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFwnX80YBiw

reduced the angle of the wing. But blew another tyre this session - front right blew out as I turned into Hungry. Resulting off damaged the new front bar, front right gaurd and pushed the splitter into the castor rod bracket which also bent. Its not too bad, but I have some work to do before the Australian Supersprint this weekend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjeCn1-CCCE

Edited by hrd-hr30

it was a little, but he did signal me through eventually. Nowhere near as frustrating as the repeated Kumho delaminations though. Not only was this the second blowout in as many events, but it was only the 4th track day since I bought them brand new in March. And it turns out the front left was also delaminated and could have let go at any moment... I got off lightly considering what could have happened if one let go on the high speed sections.

So I had to fork out for new rubber for this weekend's Australian SuperSprint Championships at Morgan Park. Great weekend at a very cool track, with a bunch of fellow SAUer's. Here's some in-car from my nugget S13 - she's looking a bit beaten up after going a few rounds with the Kumhos last week.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hoXVj1AOnU

More to come...

it was good fun out there. And very interesting to see your own lines from a chase car... I want to do flame-outs like yours :D looks much better than belching smoke lol

outright winner's in-car: http://vimeo.com/16829448

Supercharged Honda powered Elise. Its a different world of performance!

Edited by hrd-hr30
problems were with Kumho S700 slicks, but I hear the V70a suffer the same issues.

In R18 or R17? I remember Dunc (?) saying something about the R18's having that problem in

his door to door racing category, in another thread.

Top work Ash, good to see you handing it to the 4WD's. Love the diving under brakes :D

Thanks Paul.

Its hard to run with the 4wd's on the short track, they put the power down better exiting the tight turns

How are you going? I haven't seen you on the track for a while

Ash

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

    • 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...