- 919
Sorry for the errors all, I'm running on very little sleep. I MUST get some now, but I'll make all the appropriate changes tomorrow. đź‘Ť
Tuner Garages
- Thread starter Kent
- 2,497 comments
- 221,057 views
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
The cars are once again headed to Twin Ring Motegi's full road course to be completely wrung out. Spoiler tags will be employed during initial testing. dimplz's RUF is up first.
Vintage Tuner Cup Testing In Progress!
Vintage Tuner Cup Testing In Progress!
dimplz's 1986 Porsche 911 Turbo/RUF BTR
Stock Setting Impression:
The brakes are horrid. The car is blitzing fast in a straight line, and surprisingly fast through corners when driven properly. Off-throttle oversteer is there in copious amounts, but getting on the throttle resticks the rear end in any gear above second, and when in second a roll onto the throttle achieves the same. The handling is not the problem, it's the brakes. The car simply can't stop, and understeers like a pig on brakes. Best lap was a 2:05 and change with an off-track excursion. Of note, the car only makes 511hp with the listed modifications, not the stated 531hp. Most likely due to the non listing of a racing intercooler.
Tune Applied Impression:
Bah. Absolutely NOTHING was done for the brakes, at ALL. The bloody car is just crap to drive. Fast, but total crap. The improvement in times was from eliminating my earlier mistakes by braking very freaking early. There's more understeer under throttle, second gear still causes wheelspin (in fact, it's worse due to the new gearing)... Nothing improved. The car also is uncontrolled in quick transitions, as the rear suspension is now under-sprung. Bah. Car had potential, too.
Time: Blazing 2:02.964 with more there, possibly sub-2s.
Score: 55/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day.
Greycap's 1982 Audi Quattro:
Stock Setting Impression:
Not as understeery as I expected. Could use to loosen up on and off throttle, with the bigger problem being on-throttle behavior. The car has very pronounced understeer on throttle due to the AWD and the seemingly weak front diff (it likes to light the inside tire up). Otherwise, the car is stable and actually decent to drive, good under brakes, and not horridly slow.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: I don't know... There's less understeer at some times, more at others. Needs more front diff, as the inside tire lights up on long sweepers, causing understeer to sort of sneak up on you. Corners a bit quicker, but the softness is unsettling as it gets real unstable feeling on quick left-right transitions.
With downforce applied:It feels good. Still a bit understeery on throttle, but high-speed cornering is much better. I'd prefer it stiffer, but the cornering feel is what matters here. It's good, but it could be better. Improvement, yet not, yet is. I don't know...
Time: 2:09.117
Score: 78/100, C+.
VTiRoj's 1988 Toyota Supra Turbo A:
Stock Setting Impression:
The FNG has picked a nice car. The balance is about right as it stands, tending EVER so slightly towards understeer, making it a great would-be beginner car. Of course, it likes to rotate in second due to wheelspin, and it could probably use to loosen up a bit. I like the stiffness, but making it dead-neutral would make it perfect. Considering the low power:weight ratio, you'd think that the car would feel like Mafs' Celica 1600GT, but it doesn't. The car isn't waiting for more power.
Tune Applied Impression:
Our FNG did some things right and some wrong, it seems. The power-over in second is still there, and still fun, but it's harder to get, and therefore easier to get bitten. For some, the car will seemingly understeer more, but turn the wheel a little more... It'll turn. Thanks to the wide gearing, the car isn't really improved much here, but... It feels almost great. A little rear toe-out, possibly some more rear camber, a bit of readjustment to the shocks, and it would be dead-nuts. It's slow though. But we don't dock for slow.
Time: 2:10.110
Score: 80/100, B.
Leonidae's 1983 Toyota Corolla Levin GT-Apex/Sprinter Trueno GT-Apex:
Stock Setting Impression:
Too much power for this poor old car. It's light, it doesn't NEED this much bloody excessive power. Understeer is the day's order with a side of tofu-damaging power oversteer and snapback. It's just a horrid car to drive inside and out. BUT IT HAZ OMGPOWAR! It can go to the trash heap.
Tune Applied Impression:
First off, the gears are impossible. Had to set the final to 5.500 and autoset to 6 (trick) to get them. They're a bit long for here, too. Other than that, there's very little to complain about other than a little bit of lift-under. Not quite the car for me, as it can't quite handle the power it has. (Power-over in 2nd) Not bad. Not quick for it's power to weight, either.
Time: 2:10.946
Score: 84/100
GT40 MKII's 1988 Chevrolet Camaro IROC
Before anything else, note that the car is not specced to have a racing suspension. Testing was done with the racing suspension equipped, as suspension settings were given.
Stock Setting Impression:
IT'S A BEAST! 524hp and lots of torque come together to make a monster that can break the tail loose in any gear up to and including third. Sideways was the word of the day, because there was some mild understeer, but dealing with that understeer may have wound up quicker... Anyways, I drove the car sideways through a good few corners, and that showed that it's damped a bit wrong with snapback being quite present.
Tune Applied Impression:
Well, it's lower and stiffer, but that doesn't make it better. There's more understeer, and the only thing keeping it from being easier to unload the tail is the longer gearing. It's just no fun.
Time: 2:05.381 (Stock was 2:04.526)
Score: 40/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day. (Lower score due to him ADMITTING problems with understeer and touchiness, yet leaving the shocks, diff, and brake balance alone)
setsunakute's 1983 Honda Civic 1500 3 door
Stock Setting Impression:
The car is so slow, I may as well have taken any of the other entrants' cars tested, driven around to the front straight, stopped, ran and used the bathroom, came back, revved the car, launched it, and gotten across the finish line. No, I don't want to drive it more, no. It's an understeery little pig too. And the N3 tires don't help its max-v through corners any either. Put a bullet through the firewall and end the misery, that's what I say.
Tune Applied Impression:
I don't want to sound like an arse, but the car put me to sleep for one, and did not help anything about it. Not fun. Sure, it's a little less understeery, but the entire car just slides out instead of just the nose. It's not fast, and no fun.
Time: 2:39.109
Score: 35/100. Sorry, it's just got too poor of a parts selection and too poor of a tune to make up for it.
nd 4 holden spd's 1987 Buick GNX:
Stock Setting Impression:
Pig. Pig. Pig. Reasonably quick in a straight line, but a pig through the corners. So it's not much fun unless you're powersliding it, but that results in disaster as well as the car just keeps sliding.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Understeer is gone, there's only trace amounts of wheelspin and resultant power-over... It feels quite nice. Somewhat worried about what excess rear downforce will do to it.
With downforce: GREAT SCOTT! It does what you tell it to. And it doesn't complain much. So drive it.
'nuff said.
Time: 2:06.120
Score: 86/100. Feels plenty nice, but it could be faster for the power-to-weight and could use to have a little less wheelspin.
TOYOTA SHOWDOWN!
The cars will be run back to back in stock, then tuned form. Zero downforce on the stock form, and then the tunes will be tested with no downforce, then with.
Round 1: The Basis: Difference in parts selection consists of a rollcage in my car that is not present in Mafs'. Wings differ as do rims, his is red, mine is dark grey.
mafia_boy's 1986 Toyota Celica GT-FOUR Tom's Spec:
No changes to settings exceptcuring of AIDS disabling of driving aids.
Impression: It's not bad. Really. There's on-throttle understeer, but it's about the same as any FWD without the risk of wheelspin. Feels pretty decent, really. And it's all default at this point. 2:06.511 with DS2. (That's three seconds quicker than I was with the wheel!)
Rotary Junkie's 1986 Toyota Celica T20-4
Give me a couple hours for some sleep.
Stock Setting Impression:
The brakes are horrid. The car is blitzing fast in a straight line, and surprisingly fast through corners when driven properly. Off-throttle oversteer is there in copious amounts, but getting on the throttle resticks the rear end in any gear above second, and when in second a roll onto the throttle achieves the same. The handling is not the problem, it's the brakes. The car simply can't stop, and understeers like a pig on brakes. Best lap was a 2:05 and change with an off-track excursion. Of note, the car only makes 511hp with the listed modifications, not the stated 531hp. Most likely due to the non listing of a racing intercooler.
Tune Applied Impression:
Bah. Absolutely NOTHING was done for the brakes, at ALL. The bloody car is just crap to drive. Fast, but total crap. The improvement in times was from eliminating my earlier mistakes by braking very freaking early. There's more understeer under throttle, second gear still causes wheelspin (in fact, it's worse due to the new gearing)... Nothing improved. The car also is uncontrolled in quick transitions, as the rear suspension is now under-sprung. Bah. Car had potential, too.
Time: Blazing 2:02.964 with more there, possibly sub-2s.
Score: 55/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day.
Greycap's 1982 Audi Quattro:
Stock Setting Impression:
Not as understeery as I expected. Could use to loosen up on and off throttle, with the bigger problem being on-throttle behavior. The car has very pronounced understeer on throttle due to the AWD and the seemingly weak front diff (it likes to light the inside tire up). Otherwise, the car is stable and actually decent to drive, good under brakes, and not horridly slow.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: I don't know... There's less understeer at some times, more at others. Needs more front diff, as the inside tire lights up on long sweepers, causing understeer to sort of sneak up on you. Corners a bit quicker, but the softness is unsettling as it gets real unstable feeling on quick left-right transitions.
With downforce applied:It feels good. Still a bit understeery on throttle, but high-speed cornering is much better. I'd prefer it stiffer, but the cornering feel is what matters here. It's good, but it could be better. Improvement, yet not, yet is. I don't know...
Time: 2:09.117
Score: 78/100, C+.
VTiRoj's 1988 Toyota Supra Turbo A:
Stock Setting Impression:
The FNG has picked a nice car. The balance is about right as it stands, tending EVER so slightly towards understeer, making it a great would-be beginner car. Of course, it likes to rotate in second due to wheelspin, and it could probably use to loosen up a bit. I like the stiffness, but making it dead-neutral would make it perfect. Considering the low power:weight ratio, you'd think that the car would feel like Mafs' Celica 1600GT, but it doesn't. The car isn't waiting for more power.
Tune Applied Impression:
Our FNG did some things right and some wrong, it seems. The power-over in second is still there, and still fun, but it's harder to get, and therefore easier to get bitten. For some, the car will seemingly understeer more, but turn the wheel a little more... It'll turn. Thanks to the wide gearing, the car isn't really improved much here, but... It feels almost great. A little rear toe-out, possibly some more rear camber, a bit of readjustment to the shocks, and it would be dead-nuts. It's slow though. But we don't dock for slow.
Time: 2:10.110
Score: 80/100, B.
Leonidae's 1983 Toyota Corolla Levin GT-Apex/Sprinter Trueno GT-Apex:
Stock Setting Impression:
Too much power for this poor old car. It's light, it doesn't NEED this much bloody excessive power. Understeer is the day's order with a side of tofu-damaging power oversteer and snapback. It's just a horrid car to drive inside and out. BUT IT HAZ OMGPOWAR! It can go to the trash heap.
Tune Applied Impression:
First off, the gears are impossible. Had to set the final to 5.500 and autoset to 6 (trick) to get them. They're a bit long for here, too. Other than that, there's very little to complain about other than a little bit of lift-under. Not quite the car for me, as it can't quite handle the power it has. (Power-over in 2nd) Not bad. Not quick for it's power to weight, either.
Time: 2:10.946
Score: 84/100
GT40 MKII's 1988 Chevrolet Camaro IROC
Before anything else, note that the car is not specced to have a racing suspension. Testing was done with the racing suspension equipped, as suspension settings were given.
Stock Setting Impression:
IT'S A BEAST! 524hp and lots of torque come together to make a monster that can break the tail loose in any gear up to and including third. Sideways was the word of the day, because there was some mild understeer, but dealing with that understeer may have wound up quicker... Anyways, I drove the car sideways through a good few corners, and that showed that it's damped a bit wrong with snapback being quite present.
Tune Applied Impression:
Well, it's lower and stiffer, but that doesn't make it better. There's more understeer, and the only thing keeping it from being easier to unload the tail is the longer gearing. It's just no fun.
Time: 2:05.381 (Stock was 2:04.526)
Score: 40/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day. (Lower score due to him ADMITTING problems with understeer and touchiness, yet leaving the shocks, diff, and brake balance alone)
setsunakute's 1983 Honda Civic 1500 3 door
Stock Setting Impression:
The car is so slow, I may as well have taken any of the other entrants' cars tested, driven around to the front straight, stopped, ran and used the bathroom, came back, revved the car, launched it, and gotten across the finish line. No, I don't want to drive it more, no. It's an understeery little pig too. And the N3 tires don't help its max-v through corners any either. Put a bullet through the firewall and end the misery, that's what I say.
Tune Applied Impression:
I don't want to sound like an arse, but the car put me to sleep for one, and did not help anything about it. Not fun. Sure, it's a little less understeery, but the entire car just slides out instead of just the nose. It's not fast, and no fun.
Time: 2:39.109
Score: 35/100. Sorry, it's just got too poor of a parts selection and too poor of a tune to make up for it.
nd 4 holden spd's 1987 Buick GNX:
Stock Setting Impression:
Pig. Pig. Pig. Reasonably quick in a straight line, but a pig through the corners. So it's not much fun unless you're powersliding it, but that results in disaster as well as the car just keeps sliding.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Understeer is gone, there's only trace amounts of wheelspin and resultant power-over... It feels quite nice. Somewhat worried about what excess rear downforce will do to it.
With downforce: GREAT SCOTT! It does what you tell it to. And it doesn't complain much. So drive it.
'nuff said.
Time: 2:06.120
Score: 86/100. Feels plenty nice, but it could be faster for the power-to-weight and could use to have a little less wheelspin.
TOYOTA SHOWDOWN!
The cars will be run back to back in stock, then tuned form. Zero downforce on the stock form, and then the tunes will be tested with no downforce, then with.
Round 1: The Basis: Difference in parts selection consists of a rollcage in my car that is not present in Mafs'. Wings differ as do rims, his is red, mine is dark grey.
mafia_boy's 1986 Toyota Celica GT-FOUR Tom's Spec:
No changes to settings except
Impression: It's not bad. Really. There's on-throttle understeer, but it's about the same as any FWD without the risk of wheelspin. Feels pretty decent, really. And it's all default at this point. 2:06.511 with DS2. (That's three seconds quicker than I was with the wheel!)
Rotary Junkie's 1986 Toyota Celica T20-4
Give me a couple hours for some sleep.
- 919
Scores forthcoming for Phase 1 in an hour or so folks, once I get coffee in my system!
Sweet, sweet coffee...
Sweet, sweet coffee...
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
LMAO. And to clarify, my judgings are not to be taken into account for scoring, although I like to think of myself as unbiased.
- 919
And now, the long-awaited Phase 1 Results!
1963 and Earlier
4 judges
This was a close one! Only 3.25 points separated the podium finishers!
Greycap: 365 total points, average score 91.25
ND 4 Holden Spd: 356 total points, average score 89
Craftylandshark: 352 total points, average score 88
Leonidae: 333 total points, average score 83.25
nissan_tuner: 318 total points, average score 79.5
Congratulations Greycap, brilliant Alfa!
Other interesting data:
Highest Score from a single judge across the division:
1. Craftylandshark, 97
2. Greycap, 95 (x2)
3. Greycap, 91
Most First-place Picks among single judges:
1. (tie) Greycap, Craftylandshark (2 each)
Most Consistent Results:
ND 4 Holden Spd (4 point span across all four judges)
1964-1972
3 judges
A much clearer frontrunner in this one, with a fairly tight pack the rest of the way back!
Greycap: 263 total points, average score 87.67
mafia_boy: 241 total points, average score 80.34
Leonidae: 237 total points, average score 79
GT40MkII: 229 total points, average score 76.34
nissan_tuner: 226 total points, average score 75.34
ND 4 Holden Spd: 219 total points, average score 73
MustangGT90210: 202 total points, average score 67.34
Other interesting data:
Highest Score from a single judge across the division:
1. nissan_tuner (95)
2. Greycap (92)
3. mafia_boy (90)
Most First-Place Picks among single judges:
1. Greycap (2)
2. nissan_tuner (1)
Most Consistent Results:
(tie) Greycap and Leonidae, 10 point span across all judges
Good job all, a big thank-you to all our judges, and congratulations to Greycap for snagging both wins!
1963 and Earlier
4 judges
This was a close one! Only 3.25 points separated the podium finishers!
Greycap: 365 total points, average score 91.25
ND 4 Holden Spd: 356 total points, average score 89
Craftylandshark: 352 total points, average score 88
Leonidae: 333 total points, average score 83.25
nissan_tuner: 318 total points, average score 79.5
Congratulations Greycap, brilliant Alfa!
Other interesting data:
Highest Score from a single judge across the division:
1. Craftylandshark, 97
2. Greycap, 95 (x2)
3. Greycap, 91
Most First-place Picks among single judges:
1. (tie) Greycap, Craftylandshark (2 each)
Most Consistent Results:
ND 4 Holden Spd (4 point span across all four judges)
1964-1972
3 judges
A much clearer frontrunner in this one, with a fairly tight pack the rest of the way back!
Greycap: 263 total points, average score 87.67
mafia_boy: 241 total points, average score 80.34
Leonidae: 237 total points, average score 79
GT40MkII: 229 total points, average score 76.34
nissan_tuner: 226 total points, average score 75.34
ND 4 Holden Spd: 219 total points, average score 73
MustangGT90210: 202 total points, average score 67.34
Other interesting data:
Highest Score from a single judge across the division:
1. nissan_tuner (95)
2. Greycap (92)
3. mafia_boy (90)
Most First-Place Picks among single judges:
1. Greycap (2)
2. nissan_tuner (1)
Most Consistent Results:
(tie) Greycap and Leonidae, 10 point span across all judges
Good job all, a big thank-you to all our judges, and congratulations to Greycap for snagging both wins!
- 919
I'll be judging the '80s division in the next few days, so maybe you'll make a good start towards capturing another one... or perhaps even better!
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Looking in upon my own scores... Yep.
- 919
I seem to remember MustangGT90210 mentioning both a RUF for '80s and a Z/28 for Classic Club Racers... does anyone remember if he posted them or not? I didn't see them but I wanted to make sure I didn't miss them.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I don't think he posted them, no.
EDIT: VTi: Don't edit your post, though. Don't think I need to say this, but I will. It's against the rules to edit your entry.
~Kyle
EDIT: VTi: Don't edit your post, though. Don't think I need to say this, but I will. It's against the rules to edit your entry.
~Kyle
- 6,380
- United Kingdom
- RoJJieE
- mb6roj
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
DUELING TOYOTAS!
GT-FOUR versus GT-FOUR, and I hope like hell Mafs' isn't better than mine, it would be a humiliating defeat.
But first, I'll test the Holdenboy's GNX. It better be good to hold this off.
GT-FOUR versus GT-FOUR, and I hope like hell Mafs' isn't better than mine, it would be a humiliating defeat.
But first, I'll test the Holdenboy's GNX. It better be good to hold this off.
- 919
RJ, on your Celica, you use the VCD in your tune but it's not in your parts list - go ahead and edit that in if you want. Also, your parts list has no weight reduction, and you don't specify an overall weight so I can't tell if you've overlooked it on your parts list, or if you want it at full weight. Lemme know ASAP, I'm working on '80s judging for the next day or so.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Whoops! I guess that's what I get for using a parts list off a RWD with full weight and not double checking everything.
Full weight reduc, and VCD.
Full weight reduc, and VCD.
- 919
And an oil change? Mine is a 6.2mile/10km special, so I can't exactly match up the power. I get 361 hp with no oil change, you list 360hp, but I'm not sure whether you're using the no-mileage special or not.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
Well if RJ's impressions are good, my GNX could do well 
. I have to ask CLS, I'm a little shocked that I beat out your Elan, pleased, but shocked. I was sure you beat me out in the final legs of judging. Oh well, a second place I'm pretty happy with 
Oh, but my poor little Isuzu, required a different driving style and was prone to power-over. Poor little thing. Grey, just for taking both divisions I'm coming to take you down in these later ones
. I have to ask CLS, I'm a little shocked that I beat out your Elan, pleased, but shocked. I was sure you beat me out in the final legs of judging. Oh well, a second place I'm pretty happy with Oh, but my poor little Isuzu, required a different driving style and was prone to power-over. Poor little thing. Grey, just for taking both divisions I'm coming to take you down in these later ones
- 919
Well if RJ's impressions are good, my GNX could do well
Oh, but my poor little Isuzu, required a different driving style and was prone to power-over. Poor little thing. Grey, just for taking both divisions I'm coming to take you down in these later ones
Yeah, the Elan would have taken a decisive second had the last judge not considered predictability, consistency and balance (its strongest points) to be 'flaws'...
Good job to all though!
I'm gathering initial impressions of all the '80s entries right now - through half of them so far. If things go as I hope, I'll set hotlaps on my control track tomorrow and have results posted by tomorrow night or early Tuesday.
Oh, RJ, hate to keep being nitpicky, but in your review you said Mafia's Celica had completely stock brakes. According to his post, it uses Racing Brakes and a BBC setting of 6/11
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Yep, you're right, and I'm blind. D'oh. And I'm done anyways, as my DFP is officially dead.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
NEVER!
Maybe.
Maybe.
- 919
Only one car left to test - the IROC - since I need to go re-win it.
So far, I'm extremely impressed with the quality of several of the entries! So much so that I'm going to be debating among four cars for the top spot overnight I imagine. It's going to be EXTREMELY tough to pick an outright winner, so just understand now that if I rank you in the top 4 tomorrow, your car was exceptionally good.
The order of the finishers is going to come down to minutia - do I consider a large improvement over default in a car that's not too hard to tune better than small improvement in a car in which any improvement at all is difficult to acheive? How do I quantify the degree? Just how much less should I value improvement over stock compared to improvement over default? Are laptimes coming into play between some of the cars? AUGH!
So far, I'm extremely impressed with the quality of several of the entries! So much so that I'm going to be debating among four cars for the top spot overnight I imagine. It's going to be EXTREMELY tough to pick an outright winner, so just understand now that if I rank you in the top 4 tomorrow, your car was exceptionally good.
The order of the finishers is going to come down to minutia - do I consider a large improvement over default in a car that's not too hard to tune better than small improvement in a car in which any improvement at all is difficult to acheive? How do I quantify the degree? Just how much less should I value improvement over stock compared to improvement over default? Are laptimes coming into play between some of the cars? AUGH!
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I get the feeling that I might not be in the top four in that category.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
Only one car left to test - the IROC - since I need to go re-win it.
So far, I'm extremely impressed with the quality of several of the entries! So much so that I'm going to be debating among four cars for the top spot overnight I imagine. It's going to be EXTREMELY tough to pick an outright winner, so just understand now that if I rank you in the top 4 tomorrow, your car was exceptionally good.
The order of the finishers is going to come down to minutia - do I consider a large improvement over default in a car that's not too hard to tune better than small improvement in a car in which any improvement at all is difficult to acheive? How do I quantify the degree? Just how much less should I value improvement over stock compared to improvement over default? Are laptimes coming into play between some of the cars? AUGH!
How much coffee did you drink?
Sounds like lap times are a serious factor. Maybe.........
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I can't stand driving with the damn DS2. Feels wrong, and I can't feel what the cars are doing anymore.
- 919
RJ: I'm sure it'll take readjusting-to. As for where your Celica falls, you'll have to wait 'til tomorrow I promise I haven't forgotten the Maxi-Pad either. I wanted to get the testing for the '80s out of the way while I had some unexpected free time, but I should be able to get it in tomorrow.
ND4HS: Lots. Lots and lots.
GT40MkII: You don't have any BBC settings listed, but it's on your parts list. I'm releasing my results tomorrow, but if you did have settings for it, I'll go back and re-test your car with them.
I promise I haven't forgotten the Maxi-Pad either. I wanted to get the testing for the '80s out of the way while I had some unexpected free time, but I should be able to get it in tomorrow.ND4HS: Lots. Lots and lots.
GT40MkII: You don't have any BBC settings listed, but it's on your parts list. I'm releasing my results tomorrow, but if you did have settings for it, I'll go back and re-test your car with them.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I.. will FIX MY DFP IF IT KILLS ME
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Might be the difference between the Levin and Trueno, but I don't feel like testing.
