First 0-100 run on G-Tech

Theremin · Post by **Theremin** » Thu May 06, 2004 5:46 pm

Wheel spin is only an issue if you are measuring over a distance (1/4 mile time) not when measuring over time (0-100kmh).

I think with the right amount of oil on the ground I could get my front wheels spinning at 100 km/h much faster than I could by doing a normal 0-100km/h run

G1 · Post by G1 » Thu May 06, 2004 5:51 pm

so what figures did you get from your rsm for your 4 speed?

Post by **smorison** » Thu May 06, 2004 7:14 pm

ruchi wrote:LOL!

OK, you're right a RSM will give you a more accurate reading, in fact the reading they provide should be more accurate than what your speedo and rev dials show and hence there can be a difference.

Wheel spin is only an issue if you are measuring over a distance (1/4 mile time) not when measuring over time (0-100kmh). However dyno's will also provide an incorrect reading if the wheels are slipping too.

I'd have a lot more faith in a RSM reading than a G-Tech one.

depends on which speed sensor you use... if you sit your car on a dyno and rotate the wheels through acceleration the speedo goes UP! if you sit there and spin your wheels your speedo doesn't, or not as much as there are two different speed sensors moving at different rates.

this is where a G sensor is required to measure acceleration...

on what you can measure with a dyno, i don't look at a dyno as a device simply to measure power, its actually a tuning device. by measuring different aspects of the car you can improve performance. What it comes down to is what you see a dyno as... and i think some people have an overly simplistic view of them

mrx · Post by **mrx** » Thu May 06, 2004 7:15 pm

Ok.... That seems to have sparked more conversation than I expected.

ruchi, there is no "bubble to burst". I was at no stage considering these figures to be anything serious! It is not like I spent much on the unit or anything, it was merely intended to be a bit of fun. As you quite rightly pointed out, it could only be useful if it is used on another car whose performance is accurately known. But as I said, it is more for a laugh than anything.

The only thing to do would be to run it down a strip. Perhaps a "meet" could be organised for one night at Eastern Creek

?

Would love to go to Willowbank, but I doubt I will have the time. Bit too far from Newcastle at short notice.

Oh, and ruchi, I always find it amazing the amount of detail you go into in your posts. Most people are happy with an opinion, a couple of lines, but you always research yours thoroughly first.

I am not having a go at you! It is always interesting (and sometimes controversial) to see what you have to say.

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Thu May 06, 2004 8:50 pm

I couldn't agree with you more Steve, the best use of this equipment is for the tuning of your car not to compare against other cars or other forms of equipment.

The key however is consistency. As long as the measuring device and the other variables, such as environment, are consistent, then they can be used to set a benchmark from which future tests can be compared. You may even want to do a couple to average them out.

Then after you modify your car you can use the same setup and re-test with the most important thing being the change from the original benchmark values. You can use the same concept to tune the car for the results you are desiring.

mrx wrote:Oh, and ruchi, I always find it amazing the amount of detail you go into in your posts. Most people are happy with an opinion, a couple of lines, but you always research yours thoroughly first.

I am not having a go at you! It is always interesting (and sometimes controversial) to see what you have to say.

No offence taken... You should've been around a couple of months ago

Some appreciate my detail, some don't

But either way I am a very detailed person who researches the underlying principles to see how and why these things work. I much prefer facts to opinion, which ruffles some people's feathers, but I try to be diplomatic and also admit when I am wrong (which does happen).

Forums aren't the easiest place to communicate as they don't convey your body language and vocal tones and some things can come across the wrong way

twistea · Post by **twistea** » Fri May 07, 2004 10:54 am

getting back to mrx's original post... well done.

they sound like good times. i too have used a g-tech for a guide as to how my fto performs. i managed a 6.83s 0-100kph and a 14.99s 0-400m. when i posted those times they stirred up a bit of controversy too. so what. i know the context in how those times were achieved. and as long you know the full context of how you got those times then you should be happy too.

well anyway, like i said, well done, i just thought you needed more a positve vibe in this thread. but thats only my humble opinion, for what its worth.

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Fri May 07, 2004 11:14 am

twistea · Post by **twistea** » Fri May 07, 2004 11:32 am

ruchi wrote:

G1 · Post by G1 » Fri May 07, 2004 12:15 pm

i agree that we do need to be a bit more positive, and try to offer suggestions and solutions rather than just the straight facts and hardline opinions. at the same time i value everyone's opinions as it creates interesting discussions and a chance to learn and view new perspectives

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Fri May 07, 2004 12:57 pm

I believe that most of us are here to share, to learn and to help one another. The overall concept and most people here are quite open and positive about doing this.

The biggest issues seem to appear when people make claims that are above the ordinary, primarily for the sake of bragging and not for helping others to achieve the same. Those who ask about how to improve their performance get a wealth of knowledge and support from those who have done it before. Similarly those who have got improvements, most of them are willing to share in how they did it and teach others. But those who post just to brag and in particular those who use methods or equipment that is questionable will cop flack.

One solution to this could be to create a "Performance Brag" thread where people could post their run times or dyno charts and everyone could have a good wank as to how great they are.

This would make it a bit like the "Gibberish Corner" where the less valuable information is kept seperate from the more valuable and more helpful info.

In summary, if you're going to brag or use questionable methods of measurements you're going to hit trouble, if you are here to help, share and learn then you will find lots of people willing to be your friends and willing to help you where they can.

G1 · Post by G1 » Fri May 07, 2004 1:10 pm

well i think all of our perceptions are different. i didnt take it as a brag actually. and so what if it is, it obviously rubs you the wrong way, but im fine with it, as it adds personality to these forums rather than just cardboard tasting straight facts

if it was a prper brag then mrx should have said "my 0-100 times are damn quick! - this g-tech sure is accurate with it measurements, i think i deserve some recognition for having a fto that can run under 7s to 100kph! i dare anyone to post some better times!"

if you read his post again, he gave a fairly objective statement and made no rash claim about the accuracy of g-tech or whether he thought the times were something to be applauded - he even mentioned that a dyno test will be run and he wanted to use this as a means to check that his car is running in order - now people can perceive it differetly i guess... thats how i perceived it

your overload of information and over analyzing rubs some people the wrong way, but im fine with it... or rather have learned to accept it coz thats just ruchi

Teania · Post by **Teania** » Fri May 07, 2004 2:26 pm

I also did not take it as a brag, I just thought mrx was happy with his car and was sharing it...... we all love our cars - why else did we buy them...

Well done mrx - if you are happy with the results you got, then I'm happy for you

I use any results I get on mine as information for future mods - it's been interesting to see the gains/losses various additions have (or have not) done.....

SO.....If we could please keep this topic on post and in the spirit which I believe it was intended.

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:24 pm

Perhaps brag is the wrong word then. What do you call it when someone posts up figures or dyno graphs, not to explain something to others or to ask questions from others, but purely to show off their figures because they are proud of them?

What's the point in doing that, it provides little information and really doesn't help anyone?

What would be interesting and helpful is to see the dyno or drag comparision and if the figures are still so low to know how it was achieved (modifications, driving, etc.). Alternatively if there was a topic for everyone to post their figures and graphs in to it would generate conversation and information as to the various differences in mods, driver and timing gear.

G1 · Post by G1 » Fri May 07, 2004 5:27 pm

fair enough, but i can suggest that you lighten up a bit since nobody took his post as seriously as you did, i know how much you love these forums so let's just move on since we all get each others point

- this forum will never be perfect and to the standards you desire it to be ruchi

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Fri May 07, 2004 8:16 pm

G1 wrote:this forum will never be perfect and to the standards you desire it to be ruchi

LOL!

I reckon you're right there and I think I'll give up on that pursuit.

On the positive side some interesting info has come out about various methods of measuring performance and times.

Again, I'll raise this point, but for the last time, with many people now posting figures and dyno graphs how about a creating a section for this Steve? That way they can be grouped together and people can see what figures people are getting from different mods etc. This would probably work better than people randomly posting this info around the forum as has happened in the past.

Contrary to Supplanter's signature, I'll lower my standards and shut up now!

Post by **smorison** » Fri May 07, 2004 9:07 pm

why not just post them in the gallery? you can put commentary as to the mods ....

Boris · Post by **Boris** » Sun May 09, 2004 8:48 pm

Ruchi, please don't shut up yet, just answer this question for me, or any one else..

Syndicate from Canberra have like a 1/4 mile comp.
Because Canberra doesn't have a drag strip (soon

) what they do they just use the same g-tech in all the cars for the runs.

What they do is when ever someone wants to run their car, the main guy is the passenger and he puts his G-Tech in the car and records the time.

Now, I know g-techs are inaccurate, but is it still 100% consistent between different cars? Are the times below valid do you think?

References:

http://www.syndicatemotorsports.org/for ... php?t=2803

G1 · Post by G1 » Mon May 10, 2004 9:38 am

oh just wait til they hear what ruchi has to say about their 1/4 mile comp

better yet, just point them to this topic for a laugh

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Mon May 10, 2004 11:21 am

This would be a much better comparison as they are all using the exact same measuring equipment and are all subject to the same (or as close as) environmental conditions - i.e. they are all doing it on the same day and on the same track.

While that will minimise the environmental fluctuations the next issues to overcome is the calibration and internal inaccuracies.

As the G-Tech unit works on measuring the change in g-force over time, it needs to be fixed as solidly as possible to the car, mounted perpendicual (90 degrees) to the ground and needs to be calibrated to as close as possible to 1g. Even the slightest deviation will cause calculation errors and mean that two cars doing the same speed will actually receive different results.

As long as they do the above as best as possible, then I would suggest doing multiple runs and averaging it out, as this will help to further minimise any inconsistencies. Likewise if they use the competition model over the pro unit the inconsistencies should be further reduced.

The times produced would still be different to those of other measuring equipment but what should be reasonably accurate is the comparison between each vehicle and it's driver.

So while the info will be good for ranking the cars against each other it means nothing when compared to other cars measured with different timing gear on a different track with different conditions, make sense?

GPXXX · Post by **GPXXX** » Mon May 10, 2004 12:04 pm

a couple of valid points have been raised here, but c'mon folks can we just for once lay off the technical mumbo jumbo debate and instead just show some form of courtesy, support & encouragement for our new member(s)?

if you feel compelled to discuss the technical side of things into greater detail, please post a new discussion topic in the relevant section yourself, and exercise a bit of restraint (out of courtesy) from hijacking other ppl's thread (and turning it into a busy asian fruit market in the process LoL...)

twistea/MRX, i think you both oughtta be congratulated for achieving those times... with a bit more launch practice, better tyres and performance mods (depending on how far you wanna go), it'll be very exciting to see those times drop... If you need any tips or advice, just ask! ...having said that you don't have to put up with the mindless technical ramblings that goes on around here - you will get that from time to time but for what it's worth keep up the good work champs!

I'll just end my 2c here and run back into my hole...