Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GTS-t VSPEC

    20904

  • Nizmo

    13582

  • SHUTO-BOY

    6636

  • skyzerr33

    5353

hmmmm i dont think we really gave imports a better name with the way we were behaving on the Mitchell today ...... suprised there werent some cops waiting on my doorstep when i got home ....... damn easy to remember personalised plates i swear they'll get me in trubble one day!!

yea , that always is a problem.

Makes me think twice about putting the SKYLINE plates on the R.

Mind you when the cops say

* make and number of car for the complaint sir *

* It's a skyline with the plate Skyline officer *

Cheers

Ken

Originally posted by G0DF4Th3R

Ken - know of any R32s around? the 33 is getting a bit common :D

Not atm but check with JSpec who are brokers. They are saying that compliance for them is not far away.

Cheers

Ken

Ken its a stupid pointless us against them thread ..... i dont like Silvias i will never like Silvias ..... as soon as my dad even shown me a Silvia as maybe a possibilty as a first car i thought what an ugly piece of shit ..... sure they may have some potential under the bonnet but most imports with money spenton them have potential and i doubt it beat an R ..... my opinion which i keep out of threads such as that cos it'll only get me into trouble.

Liz dont stress - i shut my eyes but after you were safely in front i was like go liz go - cos i knew what you were up to :D

Originally posted by Sneeza

ken - I don't think he understood the sarcastic remark about you calling him "pissednissan" instead of his reeeaaal name.

True but I do get a bit cheesed when he posts my surname and can't even spell it right.

I might ask Troy to edit a bit cos I don't need my last name on a public forum who also know I own R's

Cheers

Ken

Originally posted by Sneeza

lauren - it was clear when I looked - then all off a sudden YOU WERE THERE!!! ahahaha

mmmm boost is a wonderful thing :D

haha those guys were funny ..... oh did ya see thosechicks near my car when we were waiting for the RAC guy ... i swear one girls handbag repeatedly touched my boot ..... Mel was looking at me and saw my claws coming out ..... and she starts mimicking my stare and going "meooooow" ..... i go "if the bitches handbag touches my car one more time .... if one more piece of her spittle as she talks to her friends lands on it ...... shes going to seriously regret it"

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • 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...