Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I didn't think anyone was compliancing 34 R's yet.

Some story about GTT and GTR having to be done as separate vehicles?

Come to think of it - didn't know anyone was doing 34 GTTs yet either...

nah nobody is doing the R34's yet NOBODAY and wont be for a couple of months. Its taking th GOV 6 months just to get to work shops to look over and acept there evidence. Lets say the first person to get them will be charging around $6,000 id say. And they will be able to get it to. So you find me a compliance company that can do it and we will buy 10 plates.

Also if you want go to the DOTARS website to look what cars are up. Only the R33's are eligble. And I dont think anybody is going to be doing the R32's but I did se a 4 door and a 2 door down at the docks today that were not 89's so maybe someone is doing the crash tesing on them. Damn I hope.

R34's are selling for 3million+ Yen (~$AU38K). No one is complying 34's at the moment. As soon as one gets RAWS approval I would wait a month or two - alot of people are going to get approval, just waiting on the 1st person to get through so they can use alot of their information to pass their own workshop.

They're SEVS eligible to come in and under the R34 series just about everything that meets the power ratio bullshxt can come in under one set of evidence (or so I've been lead to believe by the workshops I work with..) Two workshops here in Sydney who's doing the R33 said they were going to get the R34's done by March but the hardass engineer down in DoTaRS don't like what they saw...one workshop failed the intrusion bars last week.

$6k for complying R34's sounds a bit optimistic, one workshop have whinged about the evidence cars for R34 cost a lot more than the R33's which is true.

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...