Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yellow GTRs are soft :P

I reckon its great to see them out there giving it some, Wakefield is a tricky track to get a quick time, it is certainly not all about power there...I take it the quick cars were running slicks?

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

just to clarify MR WRX has had over 100 runs at WSID and is driven everyday

the reason the gearbox failed was due to a dodgy billet rear input shaft

which wasnt made to the exact clearances that were needed

 

its a real 10 second street car and driving it along you would not pick

it its one of the most comfortable, smooth cars ive been in

and the way brian punishes it all day everyday i am shocked that it lasted this long

 

diablo is also very smooth and easily street driven he regularly drives it from canberra to sydney and has no problems with it

the reason it failed was because TRP made the mistake of using a copper head gasket when they were told not to

I happily stand corrected:D Bit of a bummer that they both failed, but using a copper headgasket on tough car does seem a bit odd. Look forward to seeing the results in AutoSalon Mag:D

to clear things up

the FTR ran 2 10.9 second passses on street tyres and low boost as it was running a standard geabox

it also ran the fastest lap tim of 1:08

it also did 540rwkW on pump fuel with a shot of NOS

its a VERY relaible car that had NO problems on the weeknbd

also OSMANS didnt win the braking- the blue S14 did without ABS and standard brakes with bendix pads....it beat the STi by 4metres

the GTR was also the only car to have full engineering certificates for the car. it did well i every category except fuel efficiency but what do you expect from the curent autosalon power recoird holder?

and before you ask yes i was there as i was competing

hence them both leaving and going to a different workshop

TRP is closing soon anyway

WTF?!?!?!?!?

also OSMANS didnt win the braking- the blue S14 did without ABS and standard brakes with bendix pads....it beat the STi by 4metres

Congratulations :(

Adrian

the GTR did run but i cant remember the time

MR WRX has done a 1:04 last time he was there not this time and yes it was the full track

LOL...i have to ask/:(

Who was their to witness/time this 1:04. Considering that quicker then any road car i know of and quicker then GTP WRXs with fully sorted suspension, professional driver, and good response/traction... i have to say someone is talking it up massively, a bit liek me when i say i can do 1:10s around Wakefield:)

As Duncan says, Wakefield is not a power circuit, and a 10sec WRX suggests the thing would be rolling between many of the corners looking for boost?!?!?!?! I have no problem believing it could maybe do a 1:08 or higher, but yeh...ill wait until i read the article...the more i think about it i think the timers may have been helping out a few of the cars with a second here and there:)

Australian Performance Cars - Qualifying

Qualifying Q6 30 Mins

Scheduled Start 10:45

Page# 1 Issue# 1

Start Sat May 14 10:45

Elapsed Time 30:00

________________________________________________________________________________

_______________

Pos Car Entrant Driver Vehicle Cap CL Laps Fastest...Lap

1 34 Delphi/King Springs Mark King Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395 11 11 1:04.2313*

2 4 Readymix Gary Young Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395 21 20 1:04.4006

3 21 Century 21 Real Estate Garry Holt Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395 18 4 1:04.5436

4 11 Rondo Building Services Barry Morcom Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395 23 21 1:04.8141

5 22 Jack Hillermans Smash Chris Alajajian Subaru WRX STi 3390 18 10 1:04.8182

________________________________________________________________________________

_______________

Pos Car  Entrant                        Driver                   Vehicle              Cap   CL   Laps   Fastest...Lap  

1    34  Delphi/King Springs            Mark King                Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395         11    11 1:04.2313*  

2     4  Readymix                       Gary Young               Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395         21    20 1:04.4006  

3    21  Century 21 Real Estate         Garry Holt               Mitsubishi Lancer Ev 3395         18     4 1:04.5436

Do they run slicks?

to clear things up

 

 the FTR ran 2 10.9 second passses on street tyres and low boost as it was running a standard geabox

 

 it also ran the fastest lap tim of 1:08

 

 it also did 540rwkW on pump fuel with a shot of NOS

 

 its a VERY relaible car that had NO problems on the weeknbd

 

also OSMANS didnt win the braking- the blue S14 did without ABS and standard brakes with bendix pads....it beat the STi by 4metres

 

the GTR was also the only car to have full engineering certificates for the car. it did well i every category except fuel efficiency but what do you expect from the curent autosalon power recoird holder?

 

 and before you ask yes i was there as i was competing

charles told me osmans won it.

as for the GTR funny thing was they kept changing the car before every test

it was loud as all *** when it was on the track and you could smell the C16 but when it was in front of the engineer funny how it only hit 88db.

brians car has mountains of torque because its a 2.5 and isnt a laggy bitch either due to the turbo not being massive like his other car (NOCOMP)

its a every well sorted car and he is a great driver and knows the circuit very well.

the 1:04 was not at the SCOTY day which i said in my earlier post.

the only S15 there was jerrys one

there were to S14s though

please dont tell me it was MR dori dori in the blue one

because he locked up and ended up almost doing a 180 cause he tried the hand brake

the only cars that needed a warm up were the autostyle cars LMAO

street cars that need to warm up thier tyres and brakes before going out LOL

****ing pathetic

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



  • 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...