Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have done it from start to finish.

Don't. Don't. Don't. Don't. Don't, Don't.

Just sell and buy a turbo car. Seems like a hassle? Its far, far less hassle than going the alternate direction.

+1000.

Stuff conversions.

All I did was auto-to-manual my GTT, which is pretty darn simple compared to +T'ing a GT, and it was a total headache. I'm happy with it now but it's not worth the trouble.

Also, since these cars are worth peanuts these days, unless you have the tools, skills, time and space to do it yourself you're going to spend a big chunk of the value of your car on parts & labour to get stuff done properly. I know I have.

Edited by V28VX37

In all seriousness I am considering putting my wreck into a 4WD GT-Four, because that would be awesome.

In theory you could run a high comp N/A with turbo with E85. I would, if I could go back in time I would consider a higher CR but I'd never recommend it.

I'd say conversions are really only viable if it doesn't exist in any other way, like Hamish said, a LS1 in a R34.

But a Turbo GTT does exist, a manual GTT does exist.

Time is money, especially if it's someone else's time.

Time is money, especially if it's someone else's time.

That's how I feed my kids though Greg. Shutttup. :P

If it's as simple as slapping a stock manifold and turbo in there, and nistuning it on e85 I can't see the issue, costs would be fairly low and results would be great, till the auto slips. Haha.

That's how I feed my kids though Greg. Shutttup. :P

If it's as simple as slapping a stock manifold and turbo in there, and nistuning it on e85 I can't see the issue, costs would be fairly low and results would be great, till the auto slips into a wall. Haha.

Fyp

That's how I feed my kids though Greg. Shutttup. :P

If it's as simple as slapping a stock manifold and turbo in there, and nistuning it on e85 I can't see the issue, costs would be fairly low and results would be great, till the auto slips. Haha.

It's all fun and games until you can't run Nistune on R34 N/A's and you get an e-manage and then can't get it working and/or legal or RWC so you put a standard GTT engine in and then the wiring doesn't work right so you give up on Nistune because nothing talks to the auto correctly so you end up saying forget it use an e-manage then the engine blows up and you wait a year for a rebuild and then everything else explodes and scotty fixes it after 6 years of crap and then you slightly bend it

just buy a gtt

It's all fun and games until you can't run Nistune on R34 N/A's and you get an e-manage and then can't get it working and/or legal or RWC so you put a standard GTT engine in and then the wiring doesn't work right so you give up on Nistune because nothing talks to the auto correctly so you end up saying forget it use an e-manage then the engine blows up and you wait a year for a rebuild and then everything else explodes and scotty fixes it after 6 years of crap and then you slightly bend it

Because Ray. :P

FYP.

If only you had gone to Rajab...

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

    • 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...