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

Originally posted by Nobel Soul

zanda, well i did take it all with a pinch of salt, so i did my research and here is what i found...

240kW at 5250rpm and 450Nm from 2000-4500rpm

6psi turbo pressure

so, its got a small turbo, producing reasonable power - but a long throw and a poor RPM ceiling as a result. But, to it's credit it makes full boost at low revs because of it's high engine capacity.

that is what its set to as the standard, and the compression ratio is 8.7:1.  Being a 4 L engine it has alot more potential. I just wonder what ford got out of it before it reached danger zone.

I disagree with this statement - and not because it's a ford, although I do think that's why it's happenned.

When commodore moved to a turbocharged engine for the VL - they did so through a negotiative bargaining agreement with nissan - because Nissan were familiar with the engineering behind turbocharged engines.

they made a n/a 6, a turbocharged smallish six, and a V8 holden for the clan who are committed to their big block pushrods.

however, ford recognised that in order to sell cars to the modern australian market, any performance vehicle larger than a 200sx has to have big cubes. this is both what will make the car a sales success and a performance failure.

big stroke = big buckling forces = bent rods.

capa  http://www.capa.com.au/xr6.htm has already released kits that boost it to 350kw and they are working on a 380kw which they think they can achieve no sweat. [/b]

so it doesnt make much more power than a semi-stock GTR? which will do high 12s?

I just dont think people realise how much faster a car has to be to do tens.....so they make up some horseshit about 10 seconds.... I can't see it happening.

I also heard from a ford guy that the trubo can be set as high as 32psi, but i still got to verify that.

[/b]

I beleive that the ford turbo is a ceramic wheel - so I doubt 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...