Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The first turbo car I drove was a half ruptured Cordia, not impressed... but my mate's auto 2 litre 180SX with a phat exhaust was a bit more like it.

Then I had a fang in the 'line he got next... series 1.5 with GT2540, fmic, 4" exhaust, some sort of piggyback computer, etc, etc and 5 speed. Mmmmm, instant convert. Put my order in the next week. Now I can't wipe that silly grin off my face.

First turbo car I drove would have been carlo's R33. Much respect to proper turbo/engine matching and ECU driven boost control it felt just like a bigger engine. My engine's a bit different, RB20 instead of 25 and running a fair bit more boost, it comes on very hard and the car just leaps forwards. Needs a bigger turbo though, it doesn't go as hard up top :D

Lol, I had been driving turbo diesels for years, but my 33 was my first car with a bit of performance I drove... I got a ride with a bloke in his r33 with a t04 that started my obsession....... Gone was the V8 insperation that I so badly wanted.

Sumo

Yeh they are certainly a different car with an RB under the hood!!

still surprised with the traction of it!!

my first drive in turbo car was a mates Laser TX3 3 days later it was in shop as the head was gone. Electronic boost controller 1.2bar hmmmmm Boost!! don't mix well with TX3 engines.  

Should have cost 2k to fix it, instead we used a metal head gasket and lots of gasket goop. The car was then sold 4 days later. haha. I wonder why he won't let me drive his SR20 180sx??.  So after that i put a RB20DET into my silvia and haven't looked back, they style of a silvia with the heart of a skyline!!!

I was in the city one night after work. Id been chating to this hot grl that was in my work that day and found out she drove a white 180SX I joked with her and told her she should let me drive it. She did man I drove the balls out of that thing. Shit my self every time I changed gears. Bit of a power difference when I owned a 1976 TX Gemini 1.6L 4spd. And looking back at it she knew her shit shed put a fair bit of money into it. Pitty we didnt last id have a 180 to drive around all da time. I luv mummys grlz.

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...