Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

cool glad you like it! :cheers: I have all the door trim/rear 1/4 panel and the headrest branding dies done will do the branding in he next week or so....i should have the body back from the blaster then aswell so will update then....i will mow straight into the body and hopefully get it knocked on the head pretty quick

Edited by ylwgtr2

oh i also got all the bright work done....a true work of art done by western metal polishing in sunshine.They bumped the few small dings out of the bars and stainless trims,copper plated the bars/doorhandles then double chromed them and polished the moulds....they look like mercury....they did an amazing job....will post some pics up

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

ok so i saw a genuine GT the same as mine and managed to get a pic of the seat .....it seems they used a different font on the savanna on the seats as to the 1/4 panel badges......so now armed with this its back to the CAD to refine my original design....according to my homework this headrest was only used on this series car so i was very lucky to be able to take a look at this original one in detail

gallery_2711_155_135222.jpg

How easy/hard is it getting that old stuff for the Mazda's? There seems to be SO many being restored around the place (admittedly most are sporting rear tubs and drag racing gearboxes.....) that you'd assume someone is making parts again for them such as reproduction badges etc

genuine stuff is getting harder to get( and more expensive)Im constantly amazed to what pops up for sale though.....there is a bunch of repo stuff available....some really good....some not so good....for instance you can get repo door trims but they are not 100% correct....there is a lot of mazda guys that want to whinge at some of the repo stuff but personally i say well something is better than nothing....I been trying to get as much genuine stuff as i can (which i must admit....ive done quite well)other stuff that i cant get,im prepared to make.I could use the door trims,but im lucky enough to have the CNC machine centre so i can make the dies ect....with the stuff i deal with at work takes quite a bit of attention to detail and is time consuming so im used to plugging away at something till its of pretty good standard.I like to think of myself as a bit of an improvisor....Im also lucky enough to have a huge number of friends that are the same so between us we tend to come up with solutions......I think of things like this.....a group of guys once made it(many years ago i might add),so a group of guys can reverse engineer or remake it(especially in this day and age when we have easy access to precision robotic devices and good materials)

Edited by ylwgtr2
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

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

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...