Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Thats a pretty good wrap im happy my work is loved Steve o haha :thumbsup: my car is just my weekend fang mate i live near the hills so i go playing up there. I wanna start doing some motorsport driving as such soon though :thumbsup:

May have been haha!!

They rate it out there too, I think the term used was "pretty fkn shmick stainless work" from memory

Once it's tuned, what sort of driving stuff do you do? Trackdays? Hillclimbs? Motokhanas? Drift?

LOL Dont make that joke.. 9 out of 10 Nissan accidents start off with 'watch this bro'... This is a very 'watch this' time for old Micko lol

the other 1/10 starts with "ill just try it once more"

There is the end result gentleman im STOKED with the results out of the baby of the T3 family just came back from a quick fang and HOLY SHIT it now just frys 2nd and when you hit 3rd it just DOES NOT lay off i actually came back in with the adrenelin shakes haha :worship:

I did live to tell the results and lucky there werent any bro's to watch this hahaha :nyaanyaa:

Whether i become another skyline statistic remains to be seen yet lol

I dont plan to be a temporary citizen at this point in time :thanks:

Only 30hp shy of my T67 on a dyno dynamics dyno and by the looks a fair bit better down low :thumbsup:

Makes me wonder how one of these would go in external gate form >_<

PS. Take a better picture of the graph, I can't see shit down the bottom haha

Edited by SimonR32

Very stout result Mick. You've got to be pretty chuffed with that. My estimate was well shy of the mark, thought the manifold would have become a problem for flow around 320kW.

+1 for graph with a readable scale (rpm on X axis if possible)

+1 also for a look at the torque curve please.

Very stout result Mick. You've got to be pretty chuffed with that. My estimate was well shy of the mark, thought the manifold would have become a problem for flow around 320kW.

+1 for graph with a readable scale (rpm on X axis if possible)

+1 also for a look at the torque curve please.

+1 for torque :D im salivating at the thought of it. No really, i am.

This was done on E85 if i read correct? (saw it mentioned earlier in the thread..)

Very stout result Mick. You've got to be pretty chuffed with that. My estimate was well shy of the mark, thought the manifold would have become a problem for flow around 320kW.

+1 for graph with a readable scale (rpm on X axis if possible)

+1 also for a look at the torque curve please.

+2

+2

Thanks Lithium yeah exceeded my expectations mate and the power comes on sooo strong its an absolute hoot to drive :banana:

Awesome result, alright - gotta be happy with that! Looks like a wicked power delivery... must be awesome fun :)

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

    • 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...