Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have one on my 33. I think they would be reasonably accurate if it were possible to calabrate the speedo part accurately as you can only really do it off the cars speedo which isn't too flash. Know anyone with a laser gun?

All the times I have posted with it seem fairly correct though. Want to take it Willowbank to get an accurate comparison, that will tell the story.

It is hard to find 1/4 mile of staight, flat road to get a good reading.

Well, I range between 6.00 and 6.7 for the 0-100km/h depending on wheel spin and I have only done one 1/4 time and it was 14.02. For the mods I have (3in exhaust, pod filter with cold air box, BOV, good suspension and tyres)) that seems fairly reasonable.

I did get one 5.3 for a 0-100 down a hill!!!

The results are certainly not ridiculous. I will have to wait for willobank to see how close.

Reaction times aren't included at the strip anyway. You could sit in stage for 15 minutes and still run a 10sec pass. Reaction times become a factor simpily to beat the other guy over the line. Especially becomes critical in handicap events. Times are taken from when you leave the staging area. With the type 1 timer it taken from when the wheels start rolling, same thing.

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...