Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I do me best. :)

still I think lack of fuel stops and super hard tyres is a recipe for snores. strategy makes the sport exciting. in it's current form all the 'strategy' is done at the end of quali. after that it's just circulate for 60 laps and try not to run out of fuel or hit anything.

But the AMAZING MOVABLE REAR WING that is REMOTELY ENABLED for the driver's use by a process that is SO COMPLICATED NOBODY CAN UNDERSTAND will surely liven things up in a completely fair and impartial way and not at all like a sandy band-aid just clinging to both sides of the open wound that is formula 1's rules.

when nicky hayden is the best looking guy in a photo, you have a problem

vrooom.jpg

well, I think sanchez looks quite dashing in his new look. sort of half zoro half porn actor. "Just like zoro he enters through the back door and comes in a flash".

well, I think sanchez looks quite dashing in his new look. sort of half zoro half porn actor. "Just like zoro he enters through the back door and comes in a flash".

Nicky Hayden is standing next to the guy that is going to towel him down and make him wonder why he is riding MotoGP....kinda the same way Felipe is feeling.

from F1.com on wet testing of tyres under lights...

“This is a unique opportunity to witness a Formula One test car on track at night in the wet and on hot tarmac, in an entirely floodlit setting,” said Paul Hembery, Pirelli F1 team director. “We decided to do it this way because we want to challenge our rain tyres with the most difficult and demanding of all situations. And who knows, perhaps it could be a good idea for a future Grand Prix?”

Good idea for future Grands Prix?!?!

Massa will be shitting bricks.

Doyle: Get ready, time's up for Aussie GP

sweet son of rajab, could you imagine going to Noble-fucking-park to go watch a race?

I'd rather fly to Malaysia, singapore or Abu Dhabi every year than be surrounded by those people.

What waste of time and money this is going to be

Edited by ctjet

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...