Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...

137-3715_IMG.jpg

autosalon GTR

17jan066.jpg

gtst with r34 wheels

183335.jpg

someone's te37s i think

309rhs_bonnet1.jpg

marks gtst series 2 R33

32r.jpg

autosalon - r32 gtr

4816r34_16.jpg

tokyo motor show (i think) - top secret R34 gtr

76Image1-med.jpg

nissan stagea with r34 GTR front end conversion

8491nur_b.jpg

swoop r34 gtr

9164picture059-med.jpg

evlr34

9164picture064-med.jpg

rh9 gtr - i think belongs to exvitermini

9164r3342-med.jpg

r33 gtr with r34 front end conversion

andrews-gtr.jpg

andrews r34 gtr

hks%20zero%20r%202.jpg

IMGP0111.jpghks special edition r32 GTR - limited 10 run of this car only

it was a stock r32 gtr with a stack of hks parts installed and tuned as a demo car to show off the hks range of parts, called the HKS Zero R

mas_115.jpg

jamezilla's r33 gtr

mas_29.jpg

adamax's r34 gtt

mas_78.jpg

winfield racing r32 gtr that won bathurst at autosalon

mas_99.jpg

andrews gtr

purple_scudding.jpg

r34 gtr in a factory chemilian colour

r32truck.jpg

r32 ute / truck, gtst with rear end cut off for drifting

zeror_image_01.jpg

hks zero R special edition

183335.jpg

   

someone's te37s i think

Nismo GT4's, still made by Rays (under commission from Nismo however) :drool:

About the HKS Zero R's;

There were 10 HKS Zero R's made in 1994, only 2 were bought however..The remaining 8 we're parked behind the HKS factory for the last 10 years, gathering moss and rust..sad story :)

They were utter beasts too! RB26 stroked to 2.8ltr's, running a large single turbo with all of HKS's top of the line parts (ECU, EBC, HKS gauges, list goes on..) and were producing 400ps stock (around 300kw@fly) but could support 700ps (520kw@fly)..Racing-style fuel tank sitting behind the front seats (ie. no rear passengers) with the fuel filler welded into place behind the driver's side door..Will get more when I find that issue of HPI (and my only issue at that..)

cut it out you.  

why would you put a r34 nose on a r33?  had me fooled.....

those zero r32 were in a old hpi.  i think.  what the story with them? im curious.  anyone know?

yea it was hpi or zoom i forget. it was at the back of some high performance garage and left there for years. what a waste

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...