I must know the truth...

Okay, so the queerbaits at maxima.org are really ragging on me for using the G-tech to use as a basis for my 1/4 mile times...and they are ragging on me so hard, that I'm starting to doubt this device...is it really a bogus device? Did I really flush $100 down the toilet? I mean
I know the trap speed is 2-3 mph optimistic, but is it even worse than I thought? ahhhhhhhhh!!!!!

I'm not really sure but I've heard if you don't have it perfectly perpendicular then it can throw the readings off, but doesn’t Car and Driver use it for some of their times?

I'm not really sure but I've heard if you don't have it perfectly perpendicular then it can throw the readings off, but doesn’t Car and Driver use it for some of their times?
I am not sure...and in the owners manual, it said they use accelerometers...if you placed it not completely straight ahead, wouldn't it mean that these times would be slower than if you are at a track, considering the G-tech is measuring some of your acceleration force sideways instead of straight ahead? I don't know...shit.

Go to the track, that's the way to find out. I think I read that car and driver uses some $10000 tool connected to a laptop to measure stuff.

Wow, if the above post makes no logical sense...I am sorry...I had 2 40 ouncers of MGD, and I'm not quite myself...

Yeah...problem is, the nearest track is 4 hours away from me...that would be quite a road trip.

Yeah...problem is, the nearest track is 4 hours away from me...that would be quite a road trip.
Sure would be worth it...

Hey, i just went on g tech site. And in response to the orientation of this device slowing or speeding your times, there site says that the x, y and z axis allows for any orientation that you want and it will still read the correct times and measurements.

It's not gonna be track-accurate of course, but what the hell, it gives you a basis at least.

I want the Gtech Pro soon, and I know it won't be perfect, but it does tell you a lot of stuff that the track can't right?

I don't know...it gives 0-60 mph times, 1/4 mile time and speed, lateral acceleration, horsepower, etc...the horsepower test is difficult though, you have to plug in the exact curb weight of your car at the moment you test it...plus it takes aerodynamic drag into account...so I dunno how accurate it is in that respect.

I would not put any value in the G-Techs reading.
It may be a useful tool for comparing two cars/drivers, but I would not value the actual numbers.

Even if it was really accurate, racing on the street is nothing like racing at the track.

The G-Tech Pro is a fairly accurate device. The weight you enter for your car adversely affects the results of any of the tests. The closer you get to your actual weight the more accurate it will be. It has gyros in it to give you these measurements. They aren't as accurate as the equipment used at a track, but I would say that if you have your weight spot on then you will be within one or two tenths on your acceleration times. As for accuracy on horsepower and torque, I don't see how it can be any less accurate than a dyno, both are just using math to calculate your power, but at least with the dyno you can see your powerband.

Wow...mixed opinons...I'm surprised...one of these days when I move, I'll definitely mosey on over to a real strip...anyone know the closest one to the ventura/oxnard/camarillo area? I'm planning on attending CSUCI this spring.

Queerbates they may be, but they're basically right. Its not the way to get your quarter times.

but I would say that if you have your weight spot on then you will be within one or two tenths on your acceleration times.
Track preparation alone should give you significantly better acceleration that you would have on the street. Not to mention dealing with whether or not the road is level.

As for accuracy on horsepower and torque, I don't see how it can be any less accurate than a dyno, both are just using math to calculate your power
Really? I would be interested hearing the explaination on that.

Last time I checked, dynos:
"Basically, an inertia-type chassis dyno consists of two great big heavy drums hooked up to a computer. An inertia dyno uses the power of the engine to accelerate the drums to speed. The computer measures the time it takes to get up to speed, and the horsepower is determined from these numbers (for a more detailed description of this process, see the info below)."

How do you figure the G-Tech Pro uses the same Math?

Track preparation alone should give you significantly better acceleration that you would have on the street.
What do you mean by "track preperation"?

I used to own a gtech pro, and it was sometimes off by +/- a tenth of a second. This is attributed to the fact that the old gtech's only have 2 axis accelerometers. So if the gtech wasn't mounted perfectly straight and/or moved during the run, times would be a bit off.

I recently purchased the newer gtech pro comp (upgraded to 4.0 RR) and the times are now dead on (3 axis). The new ones don't need to be mounted in any particular direction to be accurate. Hell, you can mount them upside down, just as long as initially calibrate it to let the gtech know that its in position.

Its overall extremely accurate. But you still can't compare your street times to your track times. For obvious reasons that jekylandhyde has mentioned.

as in the surface on the race track is preped by always being cleaned with hardly any dust to cause you to lose traction on higher powered cars.

also at the starting line, there are seasons worth of rubber marks left over from all the take offs, also the track surface is preped with some kind of traction add all around as well.

these factors alone will help you get faster times ( if your car is making enough power to spin the tires on the street from a roll atleast )

Drag strips have prepared surfaces, just like any other sport. They are designed to be flat and level. They materials used aide launching. There is a spray they use (at least at bigger events) they make the track tacky (stickier) to give you better grip.

The street will never compare. Streets are generally made of cheaper materials. The roads tend to be "crowned" which is far from flat. Not to mention that your chances of finding a truly flat road is very small.

I do not even trust the numbers from all tracks, much less a G-Tech. I have seen plenty of bogus numbers come from less than up-to-snuff tracks.

street racer, take it from a fellow maxima.org-er. those guys are a bunch of dicks over there. don't sweat 'em. best thing to do would be to take the g-tech meter to a track and run with it in the car, then see how it compares to your track slips.

street racer, take it from a fellow maxima.org-er. those guys are a bunch of dicks over there. don't sweat 'em. best thing to do would be to take the g-tech meter to a track and run with it in the car, then see how it compares to your track slips.
That's a good idea...hey what is your screen handle over there? Mine is 5thgen2nr...you should go to the 1/4 and 1/8th mile racing forum, look under "automatic drivers post your times" and seriously see how much shit I got about it, it's unbelievable.

Track preparation alone should give you significantly better acceleration that you would have on the street. Not to mention dealing with whether or not the road is level.

Oh, no question, I would have to agree. However, what I think the G-Tech is great for is tuning. Here in Utah they have test and tune night at Rocky Mountain Raceway. The problem is that you will be lucky to get more than one or two runs down the strip. Hardly enough to get much meaningful information. With the G-Tech you can see what is working and what is not. I also think it is a cheap way to get a fairly close estimate of how much power you're running, how fast your accelerating, and how much lateral acceleration you're getting. However, there is no replacement for the dyno for tuning.


Really? I would be interested hearing the explaination on that.

Last time I checked, dynos:
"Basically, an inertia-type chassis dyno consists of two great big heavy drums hooked up to a computer. An inertia dyno uses the power of the engine to accelerate the drums to speed. The computer measures the time it takes to get up to speed, and the horsepower is determined from these numbers (for a more detailed description of this process, see the info below)."

How do you figure the G-Tech Pro uses the same Math?

Well it is similar in the fact that it uses your the weight you enter to calculate how much power you have by measuring how fast you move over a certain distance. This can be skewed by inputting the incorrect weight or by testing on an uneven surface such as up an incline or down an incline.

The dyno is probably a little more accurate, but I wouldn't suspect by much. Anyhow, if you put your car in different dynometers you would get varying results. Sport Compact Car did a test a while back and different dynos gave some very different number for the same vehicle.

Most tracks use VHT. I have stepped on a couple spots where they spilled it and it is pretty sticky. I would be interested in how accurate the shift light feature is.

Shift light is very accurate. Its actually multistaged. 1000rpm before shiftpoint, one light comes on. 500rpm before shiftpoint, a second light comes on. At shiftpoint a third light comes on, and all lights start blinking rapidly.

That's a good idea...hey what is your screen handle over there? Mine is 5thgen2nr...you should go to the 1/4 and 1/8th mile racing forum, look under "automatic drivers post your times" and seriously see how much shit I got about it, it's unbelievable.
my Screen name's the same over there. i'm more active in these forums though. less flaming going on all the time, as i'm sure you know.
why, what were your times on the pro-meter?

Ok, so since this thread is about the g-tech pro i figured i would do a little more investigation. So i went on street_racer_00's cardomain page, and i read the list of cars that he has "murdered". No with his 1/4 mile time being 15.23 (g-tech pro measurment) and on his "murdered" cars list having a 98 mustang gt in it, that runs a 14.7 1/4 mile. So theoritically speaking his car would have to run a faster 1/4 mile time then his 15.23 1/4 mile time his g-tech is reading. I even gave him the benefit of the doubt by adding 160 pounds to the mustang and running it through a drag calculator, And it came up with 14.707919321935108. So if all this information is correct my previous post supporting the g-tech is incorrect. Here is the information for the drag calculator


1/4 Mile ET from Horsepower
Enter Vehicle Weight with Driver:3622
Enter Vehicle HorsePower (@ Flywheel):225

Estimated Quarter-Mile ET:14.707919321935108

COPYRIGHT © 1998-2003

Stan Weiss -- World Wide Enterprises

I just ran the calculator again with the stock weight of the 98 mustang gt (3,462 lbs) and it ran a 14.48807808990428 in the calculator, sorry for the extra post, didnt fell like editing the last post.

I didn't say I murdered it, I said I killed it...which just means I beat it, nothing more...and if I remember that race correctly, we went from a roll on the highway, not a dead stop...plus it was a convertible, which added weight...plus who knows what else, he could have had concrete bricks in his trunk for all I know, the fact of the matter is that I beat the dude...sometimes races don't always go by the numbers.

Are you kidding me? At Speedworld Raceway here in AZ, I have yet to see a stock/near stock SN95 Mustang break a 15 in person.

And this is on a prepped track. I have run a best of 15.0 with my GTech with my old SE-R under bad conditions (80-degree weather w/ humidity in the 80's, on an "unprepped" street), and I was never beaten by any SN95 GT's on the street (never ran a Cobra, but I'm sure I would have been murdered).

my Screen name's the same over there. i'm more active in these forums though. less flaming going on all the time, as i'm sure you know.
why, what were your times on the pro-meter?
look at my sig...keep in mind, that the trap speeds for G-techs have been known to be 2-3 mph optimistic...but still, I don't think 15.2 for a auto maxima with a few mods is THAT pie in the sky.

[QUOTE=carrrnuttt]
And this is on a prepped track. I have run a best of 15.0 with my GTech with my old SE-R [QUOTE]

What do you mean OLD SE-R? what happened to it? Did I miss something?

look at my sig...keep in mind, that the trap speeds for G-techs have been known to be 2-3 mph optimistic...but still, I don't think 15.2 for a auto maxima with a few mods is THAT pie in the sky.

The reason G-tech's trap higher than at the track is because they measure your speed at the exact end of the run. At the track your speed is measured around the last 32ft of the strip.

What do you mean OLD SE-R? what happened to it? Did I miss something?

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=324966&highlight=se-r

:(

AGH!!! OLDSMOBILE? lol