Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

r32_bathurst24.jpg

Next...

that isn't a JGTC or GT class race car now is it? that is a group A race car. as was said earlier, all the JGTC and GT class GTR's are RWD, but that is because the rules specify that they must be RWD, and also a NA v8 from memory.

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

r32_bathurst24.jpg

Next...

I hate quoting pictures but do you have a high resolution version of this pic (eg background res).

Thanks

Also I know you guys wanted this thread to die but I picked up on a comment about the closer to 50:50 split they ran the faster their lap times. Is this a predominantly RWD that progresses to 50:50 upon loss of traction, or was it permanently 50:50? Cheers.

Also I know you guys wanted this thread to die but I picked up on a comment about the closer to 50:50 split they ran the faster their lap times. Is this a predominantly RWD that progresses to 50:50 upon loss of traction, or was it permanently 50:50? Cheers.

I think that was me. I didnt quite say 50:50 I said more front bias.

The way it works is roughly as follows.

The stock Attessa cuts front bias when it senses a reasonable road speed & reasonable lateral gee input. This is to "make it feel like a rear wheel drive car". Which is fine if that is what you want. By reducing the influence of the lateral gee input you end up with more front torque. Which if you have a reasonable chassis balance & some horsepowers gives you a quicker lap time.

It isnt a loss of traction thing to be pedantic. Also I have no idea how the fixed torque bias controllers work. Never used one.

For whomever wanted to PM me whatever I emptied the rubbish out of my inbox.

Anyway put the damn thread in a box & bury it. Please. Before RBNT has an aneurysm

that isn't a JGTC or GT class race car now is it? that is a group A race car. as was said earlier, all the JGTC and GT class GTR's are RWD, but that is because the rules specify that they must be RWD, and also a NA v8 from memory.

No it is not. Thankyou for stating the obvious.

I believed this thread was comparing an r32 gts-t to an r32 gt-r.... When someone makes a gts-t as capable as that car then I will be both surprised and accept the original premis of this thread.

I think that was me. I didnt quite say 50:50 I said more front bias.

The way it works is roughly as follows.

The stock Attessa cuts front bias when it senses a reasonable road speed & reasonable lateral gee input. This is to "make it feel like a rear wheel drive car". Which is fine if that is what you want. By reducing the influence of the lateral gee input you end up with more front torque. Which if you have a reasonable chassis balance & some horsepowers gives you a quicker lap time.

It isnt a loss of traction thing to be pedantic. Also I have no idea how the fixed torque bias controllers work. Never used one.

For whomever wanted to PM me whatever I emptied the rubbish out of my inbox.

Anyway put the damn thread in a box & bury it. Please. Before RBNT has an aneurysm

It still won't let me, says you can't receive any new PM's. >_<

No it is not. Thankyou for stating the obvious.

I believed this thread was comparing an r32 gts-t to an r32 gt-r.... When someone makes a gts-t as capable as that car then I will be both surprised and accept the original premis of this thread.

This is a fairly good way to summarize this thread. I am currently starting a very simple build up of a gts-t because I find them a more entertaining drive than the gt-r, I don't hold any delusions of it being faster at this stage. I welcome someone to make the fastest possible rwd R32. That said, Russel from Sau Vic has a nasty habit of beating all the GT-Rs in his gts-t at quite a number of events ;).

I had a go at you? When? Sorry but I do not remember. sad.gif

Sorry, I thought whey you said "I hate quoting pictures" that you were having a go at my thread reply with a picture only but you must have meant you don't like including a pic in your reply.

Anyway, here are some pics I have that are reasonable resolution...

post-26935-0-88637800-1308460154_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-67862800-1308460266_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-02316500-1308460416_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-22871800-1308460577_thumb.jpg

post-26935-0-53347200-1308460843_thumb.jpg

Sorry, I thought whey you said "I hate quoting pictures" that you were having a go at my thread reply with a picture only but you must have meant you don't like including a pic in your reply.

Yeah thats what I meant lol, sorry for the confusion, thanks heaps for the pics! :)

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

    • Yes, it will take a fair amount of solution but the sodium citrate + citric acid + detergent is cheap stuff. Use laundry detergent instead of dish soap if you want to reduce the bubbles, also you could just buy sodium citrate and add some citric acid to the mix until you get to a weakly acidic solution if you don't feel like dealing with all the bubbling generated by adding everything together. For a fuel tank you need quite a lot of distilled water but it's probably worth the effort.
    • Actually looks like a Nitrous setup now 😆
    • @robbo_rb180 I already have a NEO head on the shitbox 😎 Just needs beehive springs so I can rev it past the 8600 rpm limiter, then again pointless too, turbo is out of puff lol. Wen da gods let me win lotto eh?
    • Everyone I know with a90 supra at time attack aren't having issues with 3-5 fast laps so far and one is decent powered one too. Saw a k24 swapped 86 with a 8hp70 and big slicks and aero which had no drama's at QR and Manton Park. I've stuck a 25 row cooler in my setup with 8hp45/50 in the hopes of keeping the oil cool as I plan on some racing next year that 20-30min sessions. I've also geared my car so won't be using 7th and 8th gear too. @Dose Pipe Sutututu just needs to get that samsonas in already and have that tassie guy fit a head and rev it too 11ty thousand rpm. 
    • My embedded systems thoughts have me sitting with GTS on this. Variation between same phone hardware, should be small. However, the internal "intensity" or "volume" amount that say Google passes to the app, will be quite different, as the underlying hardware will be passing different levels for the same volume to the Google OS. Until the app creator has had each individual phone, and set benchmarks and calibrations for each, the amount of error can be quite huge.   It can even be observed by using different phones, recording the same noise, and then playing it back, they end up soon ding different. A big reason for it, is even the different types of mics used in phones have different responses, and different frequency ranges. Then you need to get into the DSP, and the variations in those, their sample rates which then effect their frequency range, and then the quality of the DSP, and what type of hardware conversion they do to for the ADC within the DSP. Oh, and let's not forget at the low level phones are designed to cutout loud sounds. It's one of the reasons they suck in really loud environments (eg concerts). The louder you yell, the more you'll get cutout too Note DSP is Digital Signal Processor ADC is the analogue to data converter. I don't have any real data on what the variation would truly be, however, chat GPT says in general, their output is typically between +/-2dB to +/-5dB of what you're really measuring. So realistically, anything from 4 to 10dB variation is possible even with the same devices.
×
×
  • Create New...