Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

evil weevil - is this the pic that you wanted?? :rolleyes:

post-26053-1201245067_thumb.jpg

the car might make 15 - 20

maybe 14....

but the top 10 no way

that car??.....top 5 for sure man......fulli hektiknez just overwhelms all other competitors.

that car??.....top 5 for sure man......fulli hektiknez just overwhelms all other competitors.

ahahah nah man, i meant the gtr......

but sure, for the hektik bros out there teh vl might even hit the top 3

Well into the top 10, being 4wd and basically purpose built it will flog em on the track....also the straight they use isn't huge so terminal speed shouldnt come into it. Its a stretch but it may well top the table... as stated purpose built 4wd it will be right at home.

lol

We'll see....... >_< at the peeps talking about "keeping it in it's usable power band" ect.. you'd think it's a big single turbo r32 we were discussing.. Intead of a 3.8 v6 twin tubo with an almost linear power delivery, the cars not a pig on the track regardless of track size as it's testing has already shown. Could be something to do with the design brief to build a car with "supercar stats" instead of a GT production racer. The r35 is a few generations more advanced than all previous gtr's and is also in a different class.

Lol you must old calling me son...Lad >_<

Nah I doubt it... it was a throw line away as if to say I wouldn't be suprised where it came.

The a10 does have it on power to weight and although it's distibution of weight is near perfect....but it's still a 460kw RWD which makes it a bit of a handful on tightish tracks without a huge straight. The stig will be able to wring the life out of the GTR without much care, the car won't dissappear in a cloud of smoke. It'll be interesting to see.

Edited by madbung

The response of the new R35 GTR on a very tight 'driver training' track was insane, looked absolutely balanced. I think you can forget it's going to have any problems.I talked to the guy pedaling it and he said it felt incredible and had balance unlike any car he had ever driven, including much smaller worked over evo's, the car is just planted to the road.

I'm thinking between the Z06 and the Ascari.

If anything, the GTR MAY come close to matching the time of the LP640; but i still find it difficult to see how it will beat the time of anything faster than that. Those cars might be RWD, but they weren't exactly struggling for traction when driven by the Stig (if i remember correctly).

being such a small track i dont think that outright power and top speed r going to come into it, i dont think it will make the top 10 maybe top 15 but there are some awesome cars on that list like ther koeniggseg (or whatever) which r tiny and seriously fly.

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

    • 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...