Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Because 380 is HUGE power, not just big power ;)

Its also a massive % increase for just a tune

Lol have you been in a boss model yet? My manager has one and they absolutely hammer.. Didn't actually believe ford brought out such a powerful car from factory in AUS

380rwkw without mods? :mellow:

what do they weigh?

About 1800, maybe a bit less which is expected I guess for a big car.. got about 300kgs on my old GTR :O.. still do a tune and your in 11s.

Other vids online to back this up as well / all info on forums etc

Standard boost just drops off so much

They go alright:

This ones got a catback and a tune, nothing else

I met a bloke the other day selling a Callaway Corvette..90k if anyones interested..still left hook though

11 sec in stock trim and 200mph+ top speed

much the same as this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8HyT4d7Kzc

Enjoy 380rwkw on pos stock tyres/suspension/brakes

When you bringing it to a meet Leigh?

Obviously upgrade the 245s, and will be doing brembos / suspension down the track as well

Whenever the next meet is !

Saving for a few months, what are they made of gold? Get a Blitz CS and stick with the standard plenum...

Lol studying full time+part time wages=not a lot of cashola.

Yeah I've read that that upgrading the plenum on a standard turbo isn't really worth it as I won't see any real gains but by doing it now with a FMIC it means I won't have to do it down the track and it'll support future mods better (ie. upgraded turbo). What I liked about the plazmaman plenum was that it retained the standard factory runners. Essentially I'm not after a car that's a dyno king rather a quick car with some good midrange torque.

interesting leigh!

the car was running 118's @ full weight, anyone know enough about boring/pointless/homo drag racing to derive a rwkw figure from that?

FWIW i ran consistent 119's with 325rwkw @ 1350kg

Going by that post, you do not need a plenum upgrade and are only wasting your money if you get one. And it doesn't sound like you have a big disposable income so why bother?

If you're not after a dyne king, rather a fast street car, turbos like a gt-rs are where you'd be looking, and you don't need an aftermarket plenum for that.

If you ever decide to get a turbo that does warrant a plenum upgrade, thats when you buy one...

interesting leigh!

the car was running 118's @ full weight, anyone know enough about boring/pointless/homo drag racing to derive a rwkw figure from that?

FWIW i ran consistent 119's with 325rwkw @ 1350kg

What about that fluke 190mph pass Ham? No need to be modest

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • 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...