Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

But you'd be changing the filter without changing the oil... would you really want to do that?

Yeah I know, that's the weird thing about it! I'm not sure. I just like the feeling of changing the filter AND the oil at the same time. Kind of like changing your jocks AND your socks...

More expensive than what? $65 is about half what I paid for Motul... Platinum seems to be around the same price, maybe slightly cheaper.

Just more expensive than a normal synthetic.

$65 is reasonable enough for me. Might order some soon.

Here goes the oil war...

It isn't more expensive than a 100% synthetic. But it is more expensive than a 'full' synthetic (which I think only has to be 70% synthetic).

Ahh ok, so that is the big difference between the Neo Gold and Platinum? Gold is a "full synthetic" while Platinum is a 100% synthetic?

No idea. Ask Craig or Cam. Craig loves the Platinum and Cam is an oil geek.

I can't find enough concrete information on the NEO oils, except for the info on the can, which I find weird...

I am running Nismo competition oil (which is made by Motul) just because I got it at a good price but was planning to run Motul anyway. I am getting the oil tested at regular intervals and plan to keep it in the car as long as the tests show its ok but will change the oil filter more frequently. I will be running an thermostatically controlled oil cooler and will monitor oil pressures and temperatures. But at the next change I will try the top Agip oil which is also a fully synthetic oil and do the same monitoring as it is half the price of the Motul. If it doesn't match tne Motul in every respect I will stick with the Motul.

new tie rod ends in, and aligned

just a small +54.2mm of toe after i changed the tie rod ends :-O

lucky beaurepairs is only like 3 kms away

Jayzus! That would surely have been worth a photo!:whistling:

Others have asked about it; what joints did you end up using, and have you added it to the C34 info?:thumbsup:

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...