Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

1 bar? :sick: Pretty poor when road cars can safely run higher boost :rant:. Not that we'll ever see 5-bar 1300 bhp engines again, more's the pity

don't know why so many people get hung up on boost. champ cars made over 800hp with less than 3psi. just need some revs. 1.6L V6 pulling big revs on 1 bar boost could make enormous amounts of power with current electronic systems. they'll certainly be running restrictors to cap power.

Boost is only a measure of restriction...

And 500KW at 5,000RPM and 1000KW at 10,000 is the same amount of go fasts... ... ... :P

Torque people... It's all about torque... :P

Ok, I will take the second engine and you take the first, and we shall race....

Torque people... It's all about torque...

Garbage. This is the most persistent misconception in the history of performance vehicles.

Power and gearing is what determines acceleration and top speed, NOT the torque figure. You can make up for a lack of torque with shorter overall gearing, but you can never make up for a lack of power the same way.

If torque mattered more than power for foot-down stonk, you'd look at torque-to-weight ratios to compare performance potential, but it's power-to-weight that matters.

It's funny then how my 260kw 1800kg R35 GTR was able to beat my 380kw 1600kgs R34 GT-R in a straight line drag race.

So power-weight isn't everything.

Anyhoo - HRT has been sold to the Japs. Kings of the turbo 6's. Let's see what happens to them now.

Garbage. This is the most persistent misconception in the history of performance vehicles.

Power and gearing is what determines acceleration and top speed, NOT the torque figure. You can make up for a lack of torque with shorter overall gearing, but you can never make up for a lack of power the same way.

If torque mattered more than power for foot-down stonk, you'd look at torque-to-weight ratios to compare performance potential, but it's power-to-weight that matters.

power and torque, forever linked.

BUT Cmon Hoss, dem 2.6 litres just dun hav enuf of the tork to be fast not like me 454 V8.

It's funny then how my 260kw 1800kg R35 GTR was able to beat my 380kw 1600kgs R34 GT-R in a straight line drag race.

So power-weight isn't everything.

Anyhoo - HRT has been sold to the Japs. Kings of the turbo 6's. Let's see what happens to them now.

nissan??

rb16??

You never know.

Remember what RBR was before they were Redbull... and how successful they were.

Well any similarity between anything called HRT and a proper race team is entirely coincidental.

For that matter any similarity between a race team owned by an investment bank and a successful race team is entirely coincidental. Look at how "Renault" are going backwards for instance.

Renault pioneered the turbo charged formula one motor.

Nissan on the other hand have never even built an F1 motor of any sort.

So what would Nissan possibly be able to help them with?

this is true. one can only dream.. i was just happy to see infinity on the rb6 this year..

So ... does anyone rate Ricciardo a long term chance?

In the short term at least I think he's going to give Liuzzi a real touch up. And Buemi and Alguersuari will be thumb-wrestling for the remaining seat at STR next year

Personally I'd love to see him make the next step (ie out of a shitter and into a top 10 car). But unfortunately it is probably as big a step as getting a start in the first place. Far too much luck involved...always has been.

BTW Liuzzi is no hack, and I'm not convinced Karthekeyan was either. Put anyone in a shitter and they will have a hard time too

yep, and Luizzi has heaps of F1 experience. You can bet he'll be motivated to beat the hotshot rookie too. Ricciardo is good, but don't expect too much for the first few races is my tip. I'd say racing the HRT will be a very different kettle of fish to testing the Red Bull.

Ricciardo has to be looking good as a long term prospect. He's still slated for Torro Rosso next year, which is the same path RBR put Vettel through. He's got the opportunity and certainly seems to have the speed & ability.

Edited by hrd-hr30

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...