Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I've seen a couple of these dashes in person, all with the same very poor quality. Laine @bcozican will know....

 

This is not how a 3D printed part should look though. A properly 3D printed part will look good. These guys either have absolutely no idea what they are doing, or they are using a very poor quality printer. To me, I think they are using way too high a stepover in order to save time on each print. Which tells me their printer isn't up to the task of the production environment they are going for. Also the edges not being straight indicates the prints are warping, which again points to either a rushed print or cheap materials. There is serious refinement needed before these things are ready for production.

  • Like 1
6 hours ago, DaymoR32 said:

Thats because the images on the website arent photos but 3d renders spat out by solidworks/fusion 360, everything looks better on CAD.

I belive there is actually a way now of spitting out the sliced file (essentially gcode for the 3d printer) putting it back into the cad package and then being able to render it - showing how it would truly look once printed with all the layer lines etc..

 

Fusion 360 will show you a simulation of the machined/printed part in the CAM workspace just by default. I haven't used Solidworks, but I imagine it will be the same.

1 hour ago, Unzipped Composites said:

 

Fusion 360 will show you a simulation of the machined/printed part in the CAM workspace just by default. I haven't used Solidworks, but I imagine it will be the same.

Yeah I don’t use fusion myself, used solid works daily for the past 10 years. Understand you can do CAM for machining but don’t think the 3D printing part profiles are there yet (well not in solid works anyway).

i do agree with the part quality, they are probably printing around the 0.3mm layer height to get the clusters out in roughly 6-8 hours. Soon as you go down to 0.2 or 0.1 you are massively increasing production times. 
 

still at $200 odd for a cluster you should be able to justify the longer time. It’s not like they’ll be using heaps of filament, electricity won’t be much either. The cost is probably in the design time and possibly in the machines

 

18 minutes ago, DaymoR32 said:

Yeah I don’t use fusion myself, used solid works daily for the past 10 years. Understand you can do CAM for machining but don’t think the 3D printing part profiles are there yet (well not in solid works anyway).

i do agree with the part quality, they are probably printing around the 0.3mm layer height to get the clusters out in roughly 6-8 hours. Soon as you go down to 0.2 or 0.1 you are massively increasing production times. 
 

still at $200 odd for a cluster you should be able to justify the longer time. It’s not like they’ll be using heaps of filament, electricity won’t be much either. The cost is probably in the design time and possibly in the machines

 

My cluster was $407 =/

Does anyone know if the 3dracingsolutions stuff is any better? 

14 hours ago, Murray_Calavera said:

My cluster was $407 =/

Does anyone know if the 3dracingsolutions stuff is any better? 

Wow.. mine was 200 odd and i wasnt happy for the level I wanted for my car so on sold it

Horses for courses - not great and super clean but can see the appeal for people as an easier and reasonably decent solution for those that dontwant to pay for custom or have the know how to make it work otherwise

  • 2 weeks later...

Well here we go again. 

I sent the wrong dash back, new dash arrived today.... With the wrong LED light. They sent a blinker indicator instead of a battery light. 

And unless I'm completely retarded, I can't see how it would be secured as the nut is a long way from reaching any threads.

20200813_195043.jpg

20200813_195157.jpg

20200813_195405.jpg

I hope so. I haven't trial fitted it yet. 

I still haven't setup the ECU to receive the fuel level signal yet as my in tank fuel level float thing has fallen off again on my last track day. Can't wait to dig around in the fuel tank again and put it back in it's slot. 

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...

Nice :)

If you get a chance while your installing it, do you mind doing a little how-to on how to wire the battery light resistor? 

I don't know why I can't get my head around how to wire in the resistor where the battery light was. 

23 minutes ago, Murray_Calavera said:

If you get a chance while your installing it, do you mind doing a little how-to on how to wire the battery light resistor? 

I don't know why I can't get my head around how to wire in the resistor where the battery light was. 

But reading online, isn't there a red and white cable that is around 9V that you would just add the globe too?

 

I'm using a resistor, I'll link to the instructions below - 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0059/8332/files/Alternator_Excitor_LED_Module.pdf?2740344812066901986

I guess I'll just wire the "Blue - To Alternator Switch" to the charge light and see how I go. 

Photos from my car that runs an IQ3 Haltech dash. Was installed prior to me owning it.

there’s a white with red trace and a red wire that have been cut into and now power a globe. 814187CF-66B8-4B5F-A224-EB4108D6CC59.thumb.jpeg.1323b7093476ad3022cdd84037b27d5f.jpeg

6DB9E02B-2847-4DEB-A720-034B50170974.thumb.jpeg.397ade6aac20f4629459a6bc1fcf9b28.jpeg

When you flick the ignition onto accessories the globe lights up. Once you start the car the globe goes out.

 

  • Like 1

@Murray_Calavera

how did you get around the central locking control unit issue? Just realised I can’t lock my car unless the battery is disconnected as there is a central locking control unit in the cluster. When I go to lock the door the motor tries to keep the door unlocked. 
 

also for the Speedo they needed to wire the gearbox speed sensor to the factory inputs in the Haltech otherwise you won’t get any speed readouts. Turns out from factory the speed sensor goes to the dash first then the ecu....

Edited by Tobz

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...