Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Update: they're now claiming that incorrect coolant has caused both buildup in the radiator , and they don't cover warranty for corrosion...?!

Last time I checked, corrosion caused the opposite effect to buildup. Coolants used have been as per their rocommendation since the beginning.

They claimed that straight water came out of the radiator when they received, which we politely explained was due to me having to refill it to limp the car 8km to my mech after the car was towed home from the last Stagea cruise.

It's getting pretty frustrating now, but I'm adamant that we have done nothing wrong. The real pain is not having the beast on the road during the coldest part of the year!

Will update when things progress...

Wrong Coolant eh? What a coincidence...

checked all fluids n gonna give it a revtune tonight to get it read to run the 1/4 mile tomorrow

Good luck with that. I hope you get a good time. Nay, I'm expecting you to get a good time (for a M35 anyways).

checked all fluids n gonna give it a revtune tonight to get it read to run the 1/4 mile tomorrow

I too wish you luck!

I'm going to take a punt. 13.2 at 114mph.

That's my guess.

Good luck buddy, still a few teething problems with mine, I'm not sure I want to hit 200kph on the new disks/pads, that and I had a couple of cooler clamps let go today. I will try to have it ready for the next one. :)

had 4 runs all of em shit haha. first run couldnt stall it up and get it on boost (same problem as every other run) and ran a 12.9 @106 which i was happy with first shot, every other run i missed a gear change or couldnt get it on boost so just went home. stalled it up on my street and it cam on straight away haha oh well

We did 2x Cooling mod (yes Scott, heaps of pics for ya) and 1x plenum spacer today... hub bolts, spacers and wheels tonight or tomorrow

Plenum + spacer

P1000175r.jpg

Cooling Mod

P1000185r.jpg

P1000186r.jpg

Also meshed in that little opening in the timing chain cover

P1000167r.jpg

Why? Well this is what we found between the heads (under the runners) in a V35

P1000172r.jpg

Seems it can make for a nice warm little home for mice :/

had 4 runs all of em shit haha. first run couldnt stall it up and get it on boost (same problem as every other run) and ran a 12.9 @106 which i was happy with first shot, every other run i missed a gear change or couldnt get it on boost so just went home. stalled it up on my street and it cam on straight away haha oh well

Mate, enough with the excuses, lol. There's no need - that's a great time regardless. Good job :cheers:

Today I pulled the passenger side valve cover off. Getting pretty quick at removing the plenum, associated plumbing & wiring (it's my 3rd time afterall :( )

This time there's no sign of oil leaking past the gasket so I must have got it right last time. Afaik that only leaves the banjo oil line on top of the turbo as the culprit. Looks like the turbo's gotta come out again, & that's gonna take a lot longer :/

Sniff...makes me sad.

Edited by Commsman

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...