Jump to content
SAU Community

Don't Take Your Mum's New Camry To The Track.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ohhhh!!!! So *THIS* is where I've been going wrong!!!

You're supposed to downshift AFTER corner entry and straighten up your line BEFORE the apex and then jerk the steering wheel back.

He just didn't do anything when it started to let go!! ahaha.

LOL - that's exactly what I was thinking when I watched it. He may as well have been sitting in the passenger seat once he lost it.

Also had to laugh as I have that exact same helmet, so it's a bit of a worry!

yeah this has been posted a few times since it happend. I think his main problem was he took two big bites at the corner, and down shifted mid corner for some reason. I actually feel sorry for the poor guy, i mean he was at a driver training day. he just made a mistake due to his inexperience and was unlucky enough that there was a pond on the inside of the track. i still don't know what track they were using as that's the issue i have. it doesn't look very safe at all. it looks more like a road with some witches hats randomly placed...

Bo hoo hoo i lost mummys car in the itty water.Lol.

He downshifted/ or poped the clutch mid cnr,but only after the car was allready in a slide,which was probably started from the wrong gear selection and not enuff brake in the first place. :P

Cant wait to meet up with you guys in a few weeks and put some names to faces.I just had the blue slip done so!!!

Let me tell you.It was allot of faRt asSing arrounD.

and was unlucky enough that there was a pond on the inside of the track.

That pond would have done less damage than a concrete wall trackside. He would have written off the car and compacted it into a cube had he blindsided a concrete wall instead of having that run-off area and a pond to slow him down :lol:

Dry off the car, use a borescope and make sure no water was ingested and his mum would never know the difference :P

That pond would have done less damage than a concrete wall trackside. He would have written off the car and compacted it into a cube had he blindsided a concrete wall instead of having that run-off area and a pond to slow him down  :lol:

Dry off the car, use a borescope and make sure no water was ingested and his mum would never know the difference :P

yes that's for sure! My friend would agree. he lost control of his GT3 cup car at turn 1 EC and i'm sure would have preferred a qucik bath as opposed to the concrete wall he hit. but my point was that place didn't really look like a race track at all. there were close trees lining the outside of the first corner. it just didn't look right.

It's Darlington Park, QLD... and yeah, it's a Corolla.

Corolla%202.jpg

I feel sorry for the guy, he's taken it to the track to try and learn more, and obviously has made a mistake and then panicked.

It's very easy for easy to see exactly what he did wrong from the comfort of our computer chairs (or couches if you've got wireless :P), but in the moment, i'm sure some of us when learning to drive could have made the same mistakes, especially if we panicked.

Cheers,

Tommo.

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

    • 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...