Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hello there,

I came across this video clip showing a blown turbo and where the exhaust turbine ends up.

Later the turbo gets rebuild ..

I found this quite interesting so here we go: (windows media player required)

R34 Blown Turbo

Edited by Torques
dunno why but alarm bells are reinging due to this whole post/link ..even tho it looks like a video link

Hmm?

What do you mean?

It is a link to a video file! :banana:

I set this up myself ... no virus or anything funny...

Trust me on this ... I'm one of the good guys (registered in 2006) ;)

Cheers,

Andrew

Edited by Torques

hahaha call me paranoid but I still find this whole thread strange and sus .. the video link gives me a prompt and trying to right click the file and download isnt allowed, some sort of scripting used to give a fake error..Dodg-eeeee.

hahaha call me paranoid but I still find this whole thread strange and sus .. the video link gives me a prompt and trying to right click the file and download isnt allowed, some sort of scripting used to give a fake error..Dodg-eeeee.

Mate,

You a very much in error :mad:

There is no scripting whatsoever ..

And you can right click anywhere you want.

I could not link to a media streaming server in this board directly, so I had to link to a HTML-Page (my page just containing one link (PLAY ME)) that in turn links to the video file.

The video file is streamed via a windows media server (my own) to make it convenient for you people to watch it.

There is no, and I repeat no dodgy script or anything.

And there is no fake error ... and no file to download!

It's streaming!

Have you ever right clicked on anything in YouTube???

Get educated on the issue :D

Geez, you are paranoid for sure :happy:

Edited by Torques
hahah yeah I am sorry .. yeah i watched the vid, interesting :happy: it must be cause its a streaming vid (cant dl it directly) that's causing the fuss on this comp..

No damage taken ...

And I agree with you that there are lots of dodgy things out there and sometimes it's hard to tell.

I'm glad you could watch the video alright and your computer took no harm :mad:

Many cheers from London.

Andrew

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...