Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

congrats Martin. Any pics or video?

Tomorrow probably Dunc, its a real weapon though now :D

Fast as a lot of - fast - ie Sport Sedans and Carrera Cup + Development cars around there :P

Have to thank you for your input as well!

(Dont listen to Munro if he tells you R33s are the rave, its a distraction I tell ya!)

Edited by Martin Donnon

awesome. details when you can please. interested in the TE37 clearances and your thoughts on the Michelins. I was looking at the Dunlop site today, they make a 330 slick! Also, if you have anu data on lateral g's i would love to hear about it.

Congrats Martin. Who was piloting the car at the time? Can you provide a list of the mods done on the Willall GTR? Are you still running the standard turbos as they came from Nissan or have you upgraded to the WR35MTT?

Also interested in the weight of the Willall GTR compared to a standard R35 GTR. How many kilos do all the diff coolers, transmission cooler & oil pan add? Has the Willall car gone on a diet other than the 18" wheels?

rrr22.jpg

This is the car on its wheels and tyres as run.

The only change from street trim were the wheels/tyres and removal of the passenger seat.

Other than that its exactly as street driven and on stock turbos too (till the GTR gets its xmas present!) :cool:

Edited by Martin Donnon

That is true 9krpm

Keir believes in the true Zen form of 'Obliterate your competition to conquer'.....hence he hid the keys from me :thumbsup:

The reality though is that I drew the short straw for EVOX development driver, and so hot was the track and 'off' from having the Diesel spewing trucks racing on it a few days beforehand that I couldnt get back near the 1:18.9 I ran at Time Attack. Kevin Weekes was also testing his Porsche out there and reckoned the track was about a second down for him (in the 13s)....all of which means I need to pick my act up next time I drive the 'big girl' R35, and the reality is I may not indeed catch the hare :)

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks Leif :)

We have some new setup going into the GTR now and with all the ducks in a row, lined up, and working correctly we are expecting to see a mid 1:12 out of the GTR before Santa makes his visit. Certainly is a very impressive car :laugh:

Yes, GTR in a short period of time has shown that is indeed an exceptional track tool which makes it perfect for those that want to go quick, the limits are still out there. One only has to look at the progress of GOTO Racing and Forged in the US to see the development in action ;)

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...