Rolls

sounds like the solenoid is jammed open, can you confirm it moves by opening it up? Possibly cracked vacuum hose? Wire earthed out and jamming the solenoid open? Try manually wiring the solenoid to 12v so it is always closed and see what happens.

stories like that always make me sad, so much time and effort only to have it asplode. =(

This guy explains it much better than me so I'll quote him But even without that it is quite easy to see how both can be calculated, if you know how much something weighs and how fast it is spinning and how long it took to spin that fast, it is a fairly simple equation to work out work divided by the time and hence power.

but fuses wont protect against that, however you should fuse all of your units externally, its only $5 for a holder some crimps and a fuse

lower the diff ratio and shift higher and they would make more tractive torque and hence go faster, but I imagine there are much more complex reasons why they shift early, it certainly isn't because it is faster, see my example for evidence of why. I'm not really fussed which way people calculate it but it can go either way, you can calculate torque and work out horsepower and vice versa, they are both mathematical constructs and either is correct. Also on dynos you don't have to measure torque and work out horsepower, you can do the opposite quite easily and some actually do physically measure both and compare the difference, I can explain how if you'd like.

Fuses will only stop excess current draw from a short, voltage too high will actually lower the current being drawn so it wont blow them, they need active voltage protection for something like that and that almost always consists of a component that will get fried in the process so you still have to get a soldering iron out to fix it. Did you open them up and see what was cooked? they should have a voltage regulator that can accept 10-24v but its possible they had a max of 15 and it killed it, how high was your voltage? If it was high enough to kill the controller you'd think it would blow all your bulbs and nuke the battery.

Just read my bloody example lol, it clearly shows how by revving further (to peak power) and using lower gearing produces more tractive torque and yet you go exactly the same speed so it is a fair comparison.

lol well at least I agree with you but you can decrease the gearing due to more hp and hence make more tractive torque by using revs past peak torque, hence the area under the curve is greater. You obviously has not read my example I showed multiple times in here.

the tractive torque curve, which is based on shifting at peak hp, not peak torque.

pretty much what you said The whole point of peak hp means it wont drop off more, you will always want to shift after peak power even if in the next gear you are above peak torque. Maybe with your gearing yes, but if you geared your vehicle to have max hp at that 100kph mark you would be faster, the only reason you would have been faster is due to less than optimal gearing, it is not because shifting at peak torque is faster. Ok lets look at an example (that I wrote before) and show that even if you shift and it lands you above peak torque you will still be making more tractive effort at the wheels. Now if we have gear ratios of say 3.75:1 for first and 3.6:1 for second (same ratio gap) lets say we shift at peak torque of 7500rpm, we are making 3.75 * 210nm =787nm at the wheels, now when we shift into 2nd we drop to 7200rpm, now we are making 210nm * 3.6:1 = 756nm of tractive torque. Now if we geared for maximum hp keeping the speeds the same we use 4.125:1 and 3.96:1 for second (very very close ratios) Now if we shifted at peak hp after the torque has rolled off slightly at 8250rpm we have 4.125*200nm = 825nm and when we shift into second at 7920rpm we have 3.96*200 = 792nm. Notice how in the second example we shift after peak power, end up past peak torque but still make more tractive effort at the wheels? This is because by shifting above peak torque we can take advantage of lower gearing and do the same speed.

Old thread but I thought I'd put some extra advice in here for anyone searching, I used an eboost street to control my VCT, it has an RPM in wire and you can set it up to turn an aux relay on between 1500 and 5000rpm very easily. Works a treat and the car makes an extra 15kw in the midrange with it enabled, you also need far less throttle driving around town to make the same power.

Sounds like for the cost of doing a solid lifter conversion and messing around with cam gears you are better off just spending $800 on cams designed to be used with hydraulic lifters with the right angles? Surely this would be easier and no more expensive in the long run.

Obviously no one disagrees with them? We gave different examples of how a car will accelerate fastest to a speed if geared for peak power and not peak torque due to being able to use a lower gear, hence more torque multiplication, peak acceleration will still be at the peak torque figure, but total time taken to get to the speed will be less due to being able to use a lower gear ratio as you are revving to peak power. Do you get what we are describing and why?

Oh come on we have clearly done butt loads of reading like anyone else still in this discussion, no need to be patronising. We agree with what you said that peak acceleration occurs at peak torque, but you still want to shift after peak power and gear to shift at peak power as it will be faster, see my examples why. yes but if you want to get to a certain speed as fast as possible (everyone does who is racing) you will get there faster by gearing to rev past peak power, not peak torque, this is where we are misunderstanding each other.

Good quote from that article

Yes you are right but you will be going SLOWER as in actual speed of the vehicle during this range, you are trading off speed for tractive effort at the wheels, if you geared the car to do the same speed but shifted at peak hp it would get there faster, but peak actual acceleration would be at peak torque still. So yes your peak actual acceleration is at peak torque, but to get to a certain speed as fast as possible you will get there quickest by gearing to rev to peak power.

Agreed. Going by that graph lets say we want to be doing 60kph which has been magically worked out to be a wheel speed of 2000rpm, we want as much tractive torque at the wheels at this speed. If we gear for peak torque at 7500rpm that requires a reduction of 3.75 so 3.75 * 210nm = 787nm of tractive torque at the wheels, if we gear for peak power which is at 8250rpm we require a reduction of 4.125 so 4.125* 200nm = 825nm of tractive torque at the wheels, hence the car accelerates faster if we gear for peak power, not peak torque. However in both scenarios the car will still accelerate at its peak at 7500rpm (peak torque) but in the second example we wont be quite at the speed we want to be at, so we are trading off speed for extra tractive torque at the wheels. Now if we have gear ratios of say 3.75:1 for first and 3.6:1 for second (same ratio gap) lets say we shift at peak torque of 7500rpm, we are making 3.75 * 210nm =787nm at the wheels, now when we shift into 2nd we drop to 7200rpm, now we are making 210nm * 3.6:1 = 756nm of tractive torque. Now if we geared for maximum hp keeping the speeds the same we use 4.125:1 and 3.96:1 for second (very very close ratios) Now if we shifted at peak hp after the torque has rolled off slightly at 8250rpm we have 4.125*200nm = 825nm and when we shift into second we have 3.96*200 = 792nm. Now both cars are going the same speed as we have geared them to match speeds, one is just shifting at peak torque one is shifting at peak hp, the one geared to shift for peak hp goes faster, now you could go why dont we gear the other vehicle the same so it makes more torque, the problem here is it would be going at a slower speed as the trade off. So by gearing for peak hp and shifting as late as possible we can maximise torque at the wheels, basically the longer you can stay in the lower gear the better, even if you shift well after peak power you are still making more tractive effort in first than second, hence why everyone shifts after peak power when racing and not before it. edit: Good link.

I went the Eboost street and RB20 ecu + nistune, they great advantage of using the eboost street as it can control an auxillary relay to turn on in a window of revs, this way you can control the VCT which the RB20 ecu cannot. This is assuming you want something better than an SAFC, advantage is you can use a stock looking ECU and pass all inspections but get the added advantage of an aftermarket ECU without losing the VCT. What I would recommend anyway as the R33 computer cannot be remapped easily.

Kind of like my explosion = torque, number of explosions * torque = power explanation, sort of helps I mentioned this, but if you gear for a specific speed it will make more tractive torque if you are at the rpm of peak hp, not the rpm of peak torque, however when you are on the way to the speed you want to be at, you will reach peak tractive torque at the ground, however you won't quite be at the speed you want to be.

When they are very similar you need to get technical if you want to come to an accurate conclusion though. People designing $100k bmws certainly don't just wing it!

Fair enough, I guess I gave you less credit than I should have, that and I misunderstood what you said by gearing being equal. I'm still going to stand by that hp is the most important, because if you have a huge amount of it at high revs, you can make use of high mechanical advantage giving more tractive torque at the wheels, and as you said this is what you feel and the more hp, the more you get pushed back. I guess I gave the torque figures less credit than needed, but I still feel hp gives a bigger picture of how the car will drive. Either way I spent too long thinking about this, but I now have a much better idea of how it all works.

Yes and no, there are two ways to look at it. Lets say we want to do 60kph like in my examples, you will have the greatest RATE OF ACCELERATION AT 60kph at peak hp in that case, your peak actual acceleration (the most you ever accelerated) would be at peak torque yes BUT that would be at 50kph, not the 60kph you wanted to do, however if you used a CVT so both cars had the perfect gear ratio at all times, they would both accelerate the fastest at peak hp always. So yes I am talking about mechanical advantage, but the fact that a car has more hp means it can use more mechanical advantage to do the same speed, it makes more sense for the speed to be the same. You wouldnt compare a diesel car with a 4.4 diff to a skyline with a 4.4 diff, the diesel would make it to about 80kph and run out of gears, and the skyline would keep going. You would gear them to do the same speed (so the comparison is fair) and in real life this is almost always the case, cars are geared to do the same speeds so I think as we are discussing this in regards to real world cars it is the best way to show that peak hp is more important than peak torque with a realistic example. For example your two cars with no gears how the one with peak torque earlier pushes earlier and overcomes the weight earlier yes, but the one with it later would push the weight to a much faster speed, obviously a faster speed means more energy which is what more hp translates to.

Yep I the way I spoke and my job helped me a bit, they asked what I did and said I was an electronic engineer and they go 'you are lucky you are educated' and then dodged all their questions trying to get me to admit to speeding (as they didnt time me) and just did lots of nodding and saying I was basically a dickhead. Ill suck up the fines as I had it coming driving like that, just lucky it wasn't worse. It was a falcon with two guys in tshirt and jeans as well, so no way to spot the car. I really doubt there is anything they could defect me for, went through regency for rb25 swap and had a road test, brake dyno, emissions test and had all new bushes blah blah and got the cert only a few months ago, only difference was it had brand new federal rsr semi-semi slicks on it now so it looked pretty mint. He spent almost 15 minutes going over it with a torch, even checked my bloody windscreen wipers and water jets worked, was almost as full on as regency lol.

I get what you are saying Elite Racing and it is correct but I say that isn't a fair comparison as they are doing different speeds, lets say we have the two cars in your example, lets say we want to be doing 2000rpm at the wheels which is 60kph (I have no idea how fast it actually is), due to the fact that car 2 has 400nm at 6000rpm (far more horsepower) it means we need to gear reduce it 3x so it actually makes 1200nm at the wheels at 2000rpm wheel speed while car A only makes 400nm. Now you might go this is cheating youve put lower gearing on car B, but lower gearing is required to make them do the same speed, if you put the lower gearing on car A as well yes it would make the same torque but you would be limited to a max speed of 666rpm vs 2000rpm which means they cant technically be compared, at the same speed with appropriate gearing the higher hp (makes torque at higher rpm) will go faster every time. The fact it has more horsepower translates to it having more tractive torque at the wheels. Another example is lets say the two cars have CVTs that will allow it to be held at the perfect RPM all the time. Now it becomes more obvious because every single speed you pick the second car will ALWAYS make more tractive effort at the wheels than car A, this maximum tractive effort for the speed [/b ]chossen is at peak horse power, not peak torque, however the actual maximum actual tractive effort will occur at peak torque, but that will mean you are going slower than your chosen speed. Example of how car B will make more tractive effort at peak horsepower than peak torque. Lets say we pick the example of car B and 60kph (2000rpm wheel speed) once again. If we choose peak torque @ 6000rpm that means it needs 3x gear reduction and it makes 1200nm at 2k wheel speed, lets say we pick peak horsepower at 8000rpm with only 320nm, now we need a 4x gear reduction to make 2k wheel speed, that means 1280nm at the wheels if we gear for maximum hp and not max torque, hence at any chosen speed if the car is geared for max hp it will go faster than at max torque. Now why is this important? Because all cars on the street are geared appropriately to take advantage of their horsepower, if all cars had identical gearboxes and they never changed then yes you would only want to look at torque figures and compare a car entirely on this, but this isn't the case. If you put a CVT in every car so they could always be at the correct rpm they would go fastest if they sat at peak HP not peak torque. I can draw a graph in excel to demonstrate the difference if required, this is why HP is important and tells the story more so than torque, ASSUMING the cars have been correctly geared (which is the case 99% of the time). actually I am going to draw the example in excel to show that cars always accelerate the fastest (at that speed) at peak hp, and that two cars with the same torque but one with more hp, the higher hp car will always accelerate faster, bbl in an hour. Note when i was saying assuming gearing was equal in previous posts I meant equal speeds not identical actual gear ratios, this is where I think we both differed and why I was arguing your points, I apologise. They sit there so they don't blow up by sitting at redline for a whole minute. What you said is correct they will accelerate at their fastest (for the entire time) at peak torque, but they will accelerate the fastest at a specific speed at peak hp. Reason is peak hp is always above peak torque and hence can use greater gear reduction.

Yeah the reason why even lower torque motors is faster is that if you want to do say 60kph and one motor makes 300nm @ 1200rpm and one makes 175nm @ 2400rpm the one making 175nm needs to be geared down twice as much to do the same speed, hence that 175nm turns into 350nm at the wheels. So the higher the rpm the torque is made at the more you can gear reduce it to make even more wheel torque than a motor that makes less. Or you could just go it makes more power and realise that this takes into account that it must make the torque at a higher rpm, much simpler really. So what elite racing was saying was technically correct, but the motor making less torque at higher rpm HAS to be geared differently to do the same speed, otherwise you can't compare them as one is going faster than the other, and by gearing it differently it makes more torque at the wheels even though the engine torque is less.