Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

its there to either

1. Waste your time

2. Take more cash

3. Waste your time and take more cash,

its actually there because people found a way around the other rules so they put a new one in place. that said if you are looking for a car why would you not want a stock one to start from. at least you would not end up with a hand grenade like some kids did with the 15 yr R32 GTR..

so instead of popping off , think about it laterally for a sec. if you want something different then you pay a price to have it. fairly simple concept.

The no modifications rule is just a simple blanket ban, not taking into account that cars that age generally will have modifications done to them.

And a blanket ban just goes to show how lazy the people making up these rules are.

The no modifications rule is just a simple blanket ban, not taking into account that cars that age generally will have modifications done to them.

And a blanket ban just goes to show how lazy the people making up these rules are.

It is nothing like a blanket ban, it isnt targeting JDM cars they are dragged into it, so the "blanket ban" comment is it a personal thought or something you have been officially informed about.

World coming to the end and unvalidated comments mean nothing till it is proven.

It is nothing like a blanket ban, it isnt targeting JDM cars they are dragged into it, so the "blanket ban" comment is it a personal thought or something you have been officially informed about.

World coming to the end and unvalidated comments mean nothing till it is proven.

Isnt that what a blanket ban is? Everything older than 1989, no modifications after 1989, and you have to prove the date of those modifications.

It doesn't even elaborate on what "no modifications" mean, since that could mean anything, like someone has mentioned before, wheels. So its a whole undefined area that just makes it harder for people to get in cars they want.

Click the link on the first page, and read it.

lol I think you'll find he did already :P

The point is that currently, the changes are not targeting us, but the wording is ambiguous enough that, if you strike the wrong DoTaRS member on the wrong day, anything non-standard could be enough to get it knocked back.

well i hate to be the bearer of bad news guys but bitching about it in a sub section of a net forum isn't going to give us our answers...

perhaps it's time we started lobbying our government for change?

seems to work in thailand...

...too soon?

...sounds to me like Canberra's pollies' revenge against summernats :blink:

yup! stop the cars coming in and it will quieten the streets down a bit - NOT!

still does not stop me grabbing 88 and older cars from NZ.

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • 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.
    • 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...