Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Nick is going for a ride in Paul's car on Tuesday and will see the stroker engine is miles ahead in every way of the standard capacity engine

very lucky for Nick. However, stating that every other non-stroked 26 engine owners is shit is not cool bro.

And when your done you can post in this thread telling everyone how much better the stroker engine is compared to the piece of shit 2.6L

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/433110-to-3026-or-keep-the-26/page-6#entry7077790

you said this mate^^^

hence stating all 2,6 engines are shit.

Nick is going for a ride in Paul's car on Tuesday and will see the stroker engine is miles ahead in every way of the standard capacity engine

I like my engine lol couldn't afford the stroker :(

Pads are ordered. PAGID RS19's, fronts only. These things better put my head through the window!!! Not farken cheap!

TBH Paulie I can't see anything being cheap with regards to your brake setup and suspension

TBH Paulie I can't see anything being cheap with regards to your brake setup and suspension

Well, true. But $400 plus for a set of front pads. Taking the piss a bit!!!!

Well, true. But $400 plus for a set of front pads. Taking the piss a bit!!!!

I agree with you mate. But those pads are designed for endurance and sprint racing so I'm not surprised that they cost so much.

PAGID RS19 are high quality performance pads. They will certainly do the job on track.

Well, true. But $400 plus for a set of front pads. Taking the piss a bit!!!!

mate, as discussed - you'll also find they look after rotors nicely. Figure that into your cost calcs. If you put in a $200 pad that chews out rotors - what's the real cost then?

Also don't be surprised if they don't have quite the initial bite that you're used to. But, they'll be consistent right through the temp range. Trust me they are good.

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...