Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ive own both a BMW and A merc give me a merc any day of the week M3's are nice toys and exactly that they are for people who need the tax benifits. they go well. but the finish and reliabiliy of the merc is King.

but guess what I'd rather a skyline as my car the missus can have the merc and she might in a couple of years the looks are so unique.

also the young guys in question realise that a skyline is with in their reach where as a M3 is harder to attain.

Meggala

No way Meggala,,,MERC'S are no better than BMW's,,,,I exchange stories with two leading Sydney Merc dealers at least 4 times a week,,,,We try to top each other,,,,What about an AMG monster missing it's compression rings off No7 Cylinder....Hand built hey,,,,,He must have been down the Pub at lunch time....The Audi guy's say nothing,,,,Wonder why.....

I'll have an 1997 Dakar Yellow M3 6 speed before any Merc.....

Neil.

Originally posted by meggala

I'll take an e500 no amg for me thanks.

they are nice.

meggala

Yea E500 would be real cool,,,,but a Nissan or a Horsley built RX7-SP would be better,,,,Funny,,,everybody thinks the Germans make the best cars,,,,Incorrect.....

Neil.

I nwever said they make the best cars I like mercs

my 450 sel drove home with no pump exhaust manifold and was only half full with transmission fluid. they are so over engineered.

the only time we needed a tow truck was when the missus ran out of petrol. and the racv guy thught itwas some thing else.

as for spare parts.

every thing was at least 1k a single exhaust manifold cast for a v8 was 3 k from merc. and 1500 from a wrecker I got one custom made for 700.

you need to be able to maintain them. but what a Pimpin mobile it was.

m

  • 2 weeks later...
Originally posted by Majanal

JimX,

Know the feeling.

haha like at the DTM Dyno Day? A fair few of the boys are letting go of their BMWs to buy GTRs. Just for the $/HP ratio.

http://www.bmwm5.com/vbulletin/showthread....&threadid=20557

check ^ thread for a s/c'd M5, of course no the first but it was a private car not a works/shop car...

stu appleby has a nice m5 in florida which has a few nice nowack bits on it too

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...