Jump to content
SAU Community

Redline Performance Cruise For The Salvos – Biggest Event Of 2005 13/03/05


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I should be there too . ill try get some tag alongs .

Gunna have to think about goin all da way , might cost over a tank in jooce :P

Should be good but . look out for me if i come say hi :rofl:

redline cruise turned into defect cruise.. i was lucky.. but yeah police played a big part in the day.. lots and lots of people got done..

Big turn out... crazy amount of cars.. i say at least 500-600 .. few decent lines there! URDRMN Widebody R33 GTR! FARRRRKK ! Few other gtrs and gtsts!

i carefully timed my trip up the coast to run in with this cruise, tagged on behind a few s15s...disappointed to see all the speed traps and whatever else.

Saw a few nice 32's cruising along.

Ended up turning off the freeway early and waiting for a bit coz I got caught up with these bogans in a rotary ute who were being complete idiots towards me, bit disappointed about that...but anyway.

went there ummzz dn get to meet any SAU memberss cruised to about wyong then turned off

a s14 was defected even bfor epping..

"thoguht there werent goin to be defects..

anyways how was it at the end?

Not too bad of cruise a few wanker's though . Going down the F3 there was heaps of speed traps ready to catch anyone out . Saw a few car's get defected/pulled over but half of them I suspect would have been doing something wrong in the first place. Didn't have the chance to go around and try and meet some other skyline owner's. though which was a shame .

they were defecting!?!? i thought that wasn't the intention! what would the media coverage be saying about that? were the police following you guys an picking people off, or would they just turn up at random intervals?!!?

its sad really... don't think many people will be notifying police of future cruises....




  • Latest Posts

    • 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.
    • 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...