G Tec Performance Meter (would admin....)

[MickeyO]

and not just admin, but anyone really

say if i did a 1/4 mile run in my g tec meter, and videod its results, would that be to you all satisfactory?? or would you just pass it off as inaccurate?

a table of its real life differences is here.

http://www.dalhems.com/electronics/bilder%20electronics/accdiagr.jpg

So as you can see, 1/4 there is only a 1/10 sec real life accuracy +/-

the road i use is completly flat and straight..... i wanna go a do a run, but cant be bothered driving 15 miles to the road, if the results wouldnt be "credable"

discuss.....

 

[TheCake]

What you trying to prove? lol. Youve neglected to tell us in your post...

 

[MickeyO]

not not trying to prove out, just like to say look at my fastest times, then compare it to that of other members cups and stuff,

rather than go on a proper 1/4 track like york etc

 

[ChrisO182]

I think aslong as its set-up correctly and used on a flat road then i dont see why they wouldnt be so accurate.
How much does the meter cost?
And remember that launching wont be as good on the normal roads compared to that at SantaPod as they arnt very sticky.

 

[MickeyO]

yeah i just went out then actualy......

wheel spun like buggery cuz of the damp (ish) road.... didnt look wet, but you know, that night time kinda effect..

anyway,,,, got 14.97 @ 106 mph.

dont think thats bad at all to say it span like....

it reads out the 0 - 60 time as your doing the quarter mile, and that was like 6.9. And i KNOW that when that roads dry i got 6.2secs 0 -60

I shall give it a go tomorrow or the next time its bone dry

 

[MickeyO]

oh yeah and to answer your other question, they are on ebay for £45 including delivery.

very worth while investement for the amount of stuff it can do / the gains modding wise to ourselves, you can see what engine mods have had what effect on your bhp / 0 - 60 times etc etc

 

[Mike@Rentech]

Dont trust it, at the airfield meet me and the supercharged Saxo VTS had a 1/4 mile sprint.

Timed at 13.5 secs, dont see how it can be accurate as the proper stuff.

 

[MickeyO]

sorry mike, i dont get you...... you and the saxo got 13.5 for a quarter mile using a g tec??

 

[Chris n nic]

maybe the time is about right m8...but the terminal speed is miiiiles off.

Chris

 

[MickeyO]

Quote: Originally posted by Chris nnic on 15 March 2005


maybe the time is about right m8...but the terminal speed is miiiiles off.

Chris

how come???

i did a few runs and on one i got 15.34 1/4 mile @ 100.6 mph? does that still sound well off?

 

[Martin]

106 mph terminal PMSL! Only about 12 mph out then!!!

 

[MickeyO]

right ok so that is well out then? but is as i said 15.34 @ 100.6 out?

 

[Martin]

Heres a REAL timing slip..

http://cgi.nickywitts.plus.com/uploads/yorkslip.jpg

 

[MickeyO]

hahah i cant read it lol to bad of a picture

 

[Martin]

Well Ok...but in answer to your question your G-tec is about as accurate as timing with a stopwatch! lol

 

[telford_mike]

real slips only - this is about racing - get to Santa Pod on Sunday

anyway,,,, got 14.97 @ 106 mph.

thats crazy. If you could get a 106mph terminal youd be running 13"s.

 

[MickeyO]

lol lol lol no worries.......

i still stand by it to a certain extent..... all the wheel spinning and stuff can mess results up i bet... due to the way it works (measuring g force)

i shall get myself on a proper 1/4 place soon, when my r sport chip arrives

 

[Mike@Rentech]

Quote: Originally posted by Mick_172_cup on 15 March 2005

sorry mike, i dont get you...... you and the saxo got 13.5 for a quarter mile using a g tec??

yep, we ran side by side, nothing in it.

 

[Lagerlout]

Times are OK.... 15 secs is about average for a 172.... but 106 mph!! Thats some midrange you must have if your 0-60 was 6.9!!!!!

 

[SimonV6]

std 172 cup is around 15 (@94mph), as you say, also 100mph comes up in around 17 secs.

so to get to 106 you would need around 18-19 seconds, not 14.97...... so terminal speed looks to be way off....??



Simon.

 

[telford_mike]

anyway who cares, these boxes of tricks are good for a laugh, but trying to use them for 1/4 mile times is a bit like quoting your Playstation lap time for the Nurburgring.......

 

[MickeyO]

simonv6 right right i see what you mean now......

mine aint a standard cup remember though?> k&n induction, powerflow exhaust, and FULL custom de cat.... 164 bhp @ wheels

Anyway.......

 

[SimonV6]

oh ok.....didnt realise you had 164 at wheels, that must be over 200 at fly?

that would give you better 0-100 for sure, but then wouldnt your 1/4 mile be faster???

Simon.

 

[Tom]

lol @ 164bhp @ the wheels with those mods

 

[civic_legend]

I got a 15.1 at 89 mph at Santa Pod the weekend just gone in a Clio cup to give you some reference, but it WAS standard. Trashed a 350z in the process

I can reliably do 14.2 sec 1/4s in my Coupe with terminals in the region of 98/99 mph - however the Gtech told me I did it in 14.9 secs.... err no. It did however tell me I did 0-60 in 5.9 secs, which was nice

 

[ChrisO182]

out of cureosity (CANT SPELL) how consistent are your times with the G-Meter thing?

 

[jonnyboy]

I dont know why people find it so hard to believe but g tech meters ARE accurate. I took mine to york last year and got the EXACT same reading on the meter as I got on my printout. As far as Im concerned as long as you do your run on a level road it accurate. Fact.

 

[ChrisR]

Its simple physics how they work, and as long as the accelerometer is accurate enough in the device, well thats the only bit that measures anything.

All the other factors that go into the equation you know.

for s = ut + 1/2at^2 you know:

s = distance
u = 0 (initial velocity)
a = measured by device
t = also measured by device but thats just a stop clock, when s hits the desired value it stops

and for 0-60 times

v = u + 1/2at^2

v = 60mph (well whatever this would be in metres per sec)
u = 0
a = measured by device
t = ?

Rearrange the equation and bingo.

However if the calculations for a are crpa theres no hope

 

[Griff]

Quote: Originally posted by Mick_172_cup on 15 March 2005
say if i did a 1/4 mile run in my g tec meter, and videod its results, would that be to you all satisfactory?? or would you just pass it off as inaccurate?


Its not like people havent seen a Cup before so Id save yourself the hassle. No-one cares...

 

[MickeyO]

Quote: Originally posted by .Griff. on 16 March 2005

Quote: Originally posted by Mick_172_cup on 15 March 2005


say if i did a 1/4 mile run in my g tec meter, and videod its results, would that be to you all satisfactory?? or would you just pass it off as inaccurate?

Its not like people havent seen a Cup before so Id save yourself the hassle. No-one cares...

thats not he point, the point is that if i got a quality 1/4 mile time, i would want to be put on that legue table thing...... thats all i was thinking.

By the way. simon v6.... if you look above my 1/4 time wasent ace because it span.....again for reasons i state above.

and the person that said 164 LOL with those mods.....

why the hell not??? de cat meant to add a decent % of power..... BUT i did get that horse power reading off the g tec meter....

and also thanks to the person that confirmed they are accurite.....

 

[SimonV6]

All I/we are saying Mick is that the terminal speed is well off, NO WAY you got to 106mph with the times you gave?....



As for your mods, if you have 164bhp at wheels thats around 205bhp is your flywheel score (205bhp minus 20% trans losses = 164bhp), which for the mods you have seems a little optimistic?

You should read other 200bhp clio engine mod stories on here, and find that it seems you need a damn site more than an exhaust and filter? for the 37bhp gain (22% bhp gain) you have?

or point me to where I can get a 22% power gain for exhaust and filter??? please

Simon.

 

[MickeyO]

Quote: Originally posted by SimonV6 on 16 March 2005


All I/we are saying Mick is that the terminal speed is well off, NO WAY you got to 106mph with the times you gave?....



As for your mods, if you have 164bhp at wheels thats around 205bhp is your flywheel score (205bhp minus 20% trans losses = 164bhp), which for the mods you have seems a little optimistic?

You should read other 200bhp clio engine mod stories on here, and find that it seems you need a damn site more than an exhaust and filter? for the 37bhp gain (22% bhp gain) you have?

or point me to where I can get a 22% power gain for exhaust and filter??? please

Simon.








when you say exhaust i guess that includes the de cat????

Well, all i am saying, and i have a picture on my phone, is i did exactly as the g tec meter says,

weight of fully loaded car in lbs - (180 x number of passengers missing from full load)

so in other words, i put the weight off the chart on the drivers door x it by 2.2 for pounds, then took (180x4) off that.

and it said 164 bhp......

i thought de cat added about 10% power? thats 17bhp aint it? (again i know thats at flywheel but....)

again just to say....that 164 i got from the g tec meter.

 

[patty]

Quote: Originally posted by Mick_172_cup on 17 March 2005

Quote: Originally posted by SimonV6 on 16 March 2005


All I/we are saying Mick is that the terminal speed is well off, NO WAY you got to 106mph with the times you gave?....



As for your mods, if you have 164bhp at wheels thats around 205bhp is your flywheel score (205bhp minus 20% trans losses = 164bhp), which for the mods you have seems a little optimistic?

You should read other 200bhp clio engine mod stories on here, and find that it seems you need a damn site more than an exhaust and filter? for the 37bhp gain (22% bhp gain) you have?

or point me to where I can get a 22% power gain for exhaust and filter??? please

Simon.








when you say exhaust i guess that includes the de cat????

Well, all i am saying, and i have a picture on my phone, is i did exactly as the g tec meter says,

weight of fully loaded car in lbs - (180 x number of passengers missing from full load)

so in other words, i put the weight off the chart on the drivers door x it by 2.2 for pounds, then took (180x4) off that.

and it said 164 bhp......

i thought de cat added about 10% power? thats 17bhp aint it? (again i know thats at flywheel but....)

again just to say....that 164 i got from the g tec meter.

dont think ud get that much tbh from just a decat

 

[Lagerlout]

You need to weigh your car on a weighbridge to get it truly accurate. And if youve got 164BHP @ the wheels with those mods, Ill bare my arse in Woolworths window. On a Saturday.

It might be possible to get 17 bhp @ the fly with those mods, but not without some kind of re-map.

 

[entjm]

hmm i wouldnt trust the G-tech for BHP figures, too many variables! (weight etc)

on a totally flat road (hard to find), and if you have the g-tech perfectly level inside the car then im pretty sure the physics of the g-tech are right.

(not gonna happen when the car sits back under acceleration and dives under decelleration e.g. gear change)

but in the real world you wont get the conditions right so g-tech figures are not good for absolute timing and arguing on internet forums!!!

however on the same bit of road, before and after mods, or between a few mates one afternoon i think it comes pretty close..... anyway if it could be 0.1sec out on a 1/4 mile does it really matter? its just an indication, i bet 75% of the time wheelspin at launch will make more difference to the 1/4 than an inaccurate g-tech!

 

[Tom]

Its a cheap gyro, you can buy them from maplins for 36p.

Quite how a calculator and a cheap gyro are supposed to produce decent figures are beyond me.

Get a vbox and a dyno.