Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

let it wear in then try again, you need to slip the clutch to keep the revs up like an auto with a big stall converter does.

I'll give it a crack again sometime... can't be good for her though :miner:

Edited by gwilkinson34
wtf for :D

op - just go buy some MT drag radials, than you wheel spin probs will be gone

Ive heard of lots of dudes using second for launching, more traction etc. Alot of guys actually see quicker 1/4 mile times and 0-100 times launching in second, technique my friend. :miner:

Ive heard of lots of dudes using second for launching, more traction etc. Alot of guys actually see quicker 1/4 mile times and 0-100 times launching in second, technique my friend. :miner:

I think thats only for big power setups, certainly not for a stock turbo!

So, how well do Modded GTR's go here?*

*

1) Sorry for off topic

2) Sorry for not posting in already existing thread

3) I realise turbo choice, launch ability, tyres, and suspension would have MASSIVE effects on this

:P

thanks for the replies guys, new wheels and wider tyres are definately the next step.

Do people think that I will have any tune troubles from where I am (R&R particually) if I was to do the cheap eath boost mod to get 7-8psi all the time?

I was going to do this for the time being until I can put the cash together for a EBC and proper tune

Just want a little more in the mean time :P

if you are interested in 0 to 100 times and only that, you need as much help as you can

ditch the piggy back and stock ecu and get a stand alone, tune it aggressively and run 12psi

but youll need a few other mods for that too, heavy duty clutch, fuel pump, fmic

thats definately the plan longer term, I have already started saving as I want to do it all in one hit so all the supporting mods are there and in place. I was just thinking in the short term.

I think Ill stick with the new sticky tyres and the free boost mod and see what I get out of it, hopefully the computer dosnt crack the sads.

This is the best advice in the thread.

Sell the car.

Buy another R33 that is worth maybe 3-4k more.

You will be getting at least $10-15k worth of mods for that extra $4k, reason is you never get any return on your investment with cars. I did exactly this, bought an R32 gts-t for $11.5k and I got a full rebuilt rb25det, $2k highflow turbo, exhaust, ecu, injectors, suspension, aftermarket ecu, fuel pump, bushes, new clutch etc. Even got the receipts for all the above adding up to over $20k.

Sure sometimes it can be fun building your own car up, personally I think its a stupid waste of money, buy someone else's project and with the ridiculous amount of money you have saved personalise it.

Edited by Rolls

yeah thats true, but I bought this one because it is so clean and tidy. it really is one of the best r33s I have ever seen. even a police offiecer said "Ive pulled over alot of r33s and this si the cleanest one Ive seen" :(

thats the only reason I would stick with it

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...