Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

thanks heaps chris :] yea pretty happy with the day, the time of 58.05 on natsoft is incorrect as my GPS and video both agree with each other. old fella mustv been too quick pushing the button.

also on lap 3 of the 2nd vid split times indicate i was on course for a 58.18 for until i made the mistake, bugger.

Edited by scooby36

Ive always known Lakeside to be a high a speed circuit but thats the first time ive seen the speedo on a vid too, thanks Callum!

and just saw natsoft too - fastest lap of the meet - top work!

Do you not watch my vids Chris? lol :P

..... above on a very worn set of O3G's. Note the coner speed difference especially on the turn onto the straight Cal!

Edited by Marlin

thanks heaps ben, good to see ya yesterday.

watching mine afterwards i am relying too much on safe understeer and its probably costing me time and killing my front tyres. i will adjust the balance for next time.

looks like the aero helps my mid corner speed a fair bit compared to yours.. weights being about the same 1190 no driver? and i have a lot of tyre too, 235/255

It's a fantastic little track Chris, you need to find the time to get up here mate :)

I'm 1240 no driver from memory when I last corner weighted it.

Mine's screaming for a front splitter, it improved with undertray, splitter hopefully a step better. If I can get the front to tie up a bit better I can wind some wing back in on the rear.

Love it ^^ , looks like it wants to lift the tyres off the ground under hard brakes!

and man toffy the amount of lock you need to wind in to turn that thing, im getting tired just watching !

explain the gearbox.. simple 3 speed yea? looks fuggin fun but hard work!

yeah three speed (think of starting in 2nd and that's about it) , i need to adjust it a lil better so i don't have to do a z to go from first to second :blush:

Toffy from 8:00 onward is madness. Cars all over the place.

yeah that whole race was like that, it got worse in memory , the top 8 cars ar within 5 hundredths of a second of each other in memory (although it doesn't seem it in the vid ). it all comes down to qualify/start line take off pretty much

Edited by toffy

They are nice vids. I cant help but think that the footage you are getting is better then what I am getting out of my Radcam...will have to try some of the settings on my thing.

Also, do you know where the timing beacon was located on the weekend, by my vids I was doing 1:07-1:08s on the short track, but I suspect I was backing off after the finish line and I suspect the beacon was on the back straight now that they have me 6 seconds slower?

The timing was screwed up on the short track. Winton timing gave me a 1.10.x, racechrono gave me a 1.08.x and video gave me a 1.08.x

The long track timing was working correctly though.

As you say the beacon may have been somewhere else for the short track....?

I use the Go Pro HD's in centre metered mode all the time. This means that it takes light readings from the centre of the video and not from inside the car.

I'm cutting the vision of mine at the moment, but this is in my brothers car (white 33 gtst).

Got a couple pieces of lightning in the video, crazy stuff.

Watch out Stagea it's coming for you!

lightning2.jpg

Yeh, its doing everything pretty well. I just need more seat time and need to get the general balance back to how it used to be which is to make it a bit pointier so i can drive it a little more on the throttle mid corner and get some better drive out of corners.

What is done to the front end of your car? It seems to need more steering angle then mine...but that could be tyres?

Good vids guys :thumbsup:

Great to see the silver beast in action Troy. As for Richos steering angles...maybe its a 33 thing as mine seems to require a fair bit (will have to check my winton footage to compare) so much so that it feels uncomfortable to keep my hands on the steering wheel in the same positions

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...