Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

HUSTLR: this is going to be a legal nightmare.... cops already hassle mod cars.... and now they can issue notices at their own discretion removign 2 points in the spot in effect from people whos exhausts are "deemed" to loud....... imagine the abuse of power here...... points and fine... and potentially a lot of exhausts that ARE legal getting picked on.

Do yourself a favour and get an engineers report. if anyone wants engineers recommendations feel free to pm me and i will give you details.

Xrsist - simply a case of knowing how to deal with cops who harrass you. Obviously an engineers report is not a be all end all solution, if you get pulled into a big defect station and they have testing equipment on site then ur up the creek.

my 200sx measured a healthy 108.5db :lol: - I was fined $250 and defected at a station, got it cleared, put it all back on and obtained a engineers report which declares your car complies to specific ADR's.

The main benifit of an engineers report is in a normaly case of cops pulling you over, when they check your rego it comes up with a "this is a registered modified vehicle" statement which 99% of the time makes them think twice about hassling you.

Bear in mind the majority of cops defect based on what they *think* not what they *know* to be illegal - the fact you have gone to the trouble of engineering your car keeps them at bay....

This is from experience......... i will be getting an engineers report shortly to prevent issues with my local constabulary who already know me on a first name basis :mad:

Originally posted by BY BY

This is from experience......... i will be getting an engineers report shortly to prevent issues with my local constabulary who already know me on a first name basis :P  

Yea, i've noticed you know alot about these things.

I wouldn't want the cops to pull me over and :mad: me!

bah cops suck.

mines 103db right now, if i put another muffler on, theyre going to defect me for "exhaust too low", but if i dont im too loud.

DAMMIT :mad:

stupid s15 floorpan havin no room crap.

Only way is to get of my beautiful n1 muff :P

noooooooooooooo.

why dont cops go give 2 point defects to ppl that do up excels and stuff, give them pink defect stickers for driving gay modified vehicles :P

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...