Gtech Results of Pill vs. No Pill

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Oct 31, 2003 | 05:22 PM

#61

BigBoogieman

Thread Starter

Evolving Member

Joined: Jun 2003

Posts: 265

Likes: 0

From: SW PA

Quote:

Originally posted by gunzo
questions for the guys with alot of gtech experience

Same stretch of road .. same direction.. nil to very light winds..

I have 2 runs .. prior and post ..
everyone says the mph is the best indication of horsepower .. check out the graph.. comparing a run at 107mph and 110mph .. but the slower run shows better sustained G throughout the gears (Except 1st) the black one is the slower run ..

Does this mean the the black line has more 'power' ??

Sometimes the Gtech doesn't notice that you've started right away if you don't launch hard enough, and this will throw off the speed, HP and torque values for the whole run (they'll read low). Try loading those runs into my software and "synchronize" them to correct any potential error, and see if they still compare the same.

Nov 2, 2003 | 02:46 PM

#62

EVO Tendencies

Newbie

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 5

Likes: 0

From: KY

Quote:

Originally posted by BigBoogieman

The files the PASS software exports are just simple text files that show all the values for every 1/100th second in the run. All you have to do is graph them.

Got any cracking skills? I've been trying to get my software to download directly from the Gtech. I have the communications protocol figured out, and all the data except for RPM & HP. The values that I'm pretty sure are RPM and HP (cause they're the only ones I haven't figured out) look like random data. Cracking this data would be an excellent project, because it would save me all the hassle of dumping the Gtech into PASS then exporting it! Let me know if you're interested, and we can share notes.

An interesting thing about the data that comes out of the Gtech is that it seems to include the raw X, Y and Z accelerometer values, even though PASS doesn't seem to need them.

If you want to try my software, here's the thread:

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...threadid=44932

hey man the software looks great! cant wait to give it a try for myself. i will offer up whatever assistance i can provide, i am not as good as yourself, but i am willing to learn

as far as cracking, i have never really tried it but i will give it a shot. keep me updated on all of this!!

Nov 2, 2003 | 06:14 PM

#63

erioshi

Evolved Member

Joined: Mar 2003

Posts: 1,114

Likes: 0

Big; have you done any corelation of your G-Tech data by speed & RPM? I noticed that on a couple of the runs I had logged my 0-60 seemed kind of slow. Whan I checked the data more closely the G-Tech had me hitting 60 at two different RPMs. I haven't had time to map the Evo's actual gear + RPM to speed points, but I think having that data might be useful for correcting some of the G-Tech maps.

Any thoughts?

Nov 9, 2003 | 07:08 PM

#64

BigBoogieman

Thread Starter

Evolving Member

Joined: Jun 2003

Posts: 265

Likes: 0

From: SW PA

I did calculate speed based on RPM's at a few points, and it matched what the Gtech showed pretty much exactly. But there are occasions where the Gtech doesn't trigger right away when you launch, which makes the speed (and HP & torque, which it uses speed to calculate) read too low. Now I assume this is more of a problem for single-gear runs than for dragstrip runs, since you'll be launching pretty hard in dragstrip runs. But I don't know because I don't do dragstrip runs. If it had you hitting 60 at different RPM's, then it sounds like this may be the problem, and at least one of those runs is wrong.

You can calculate the speed you should be going at a given RPM like this:

Engine RPM / gear ratio / final drive ratio (4.529) = Wheel RPM
Wheel RPM * tire circumerence (79.566" for stock) = inches per minute
Inches per minute / 1056 = miles per hour

Gear ratios are 2.928, 1.950, 1.407, 1.031, 0.720

Nov 10, 2003 | 01:45 AM

#65

erioshi

Evolved Member

Joined: Mar 2003

Posts: 1,114

Likes: 0

Thanks for the correction data. I'll have to re-plot those runs after correcting the speeds to match the corresponding RPMs. The only time they seemed to be off was on a couple of acceleration plots.