Nice..........i've always wanted one myself

 

Yeah, I know. I'm just hoping when more turbo kits become available, the price will come down. $4K seems kind of expensive to me. I know a guy here, where I live, that is into turbos and has done some really slick installations. He is a NASA welder and does some nice fab work.

 

I wonder how yours compares to mine-the Escort G Timer GT2?

I plan on running my car on the track with my GT2 on for a direct comparison..

 

G-tech is is only so-so in the accuracy department. Doesn't take into effect some things, mainly that the HHR is as aerodynmaic as a brick. Works really well with some cars and not so well with others. YOur gonna need a lot more hp than 215 to break into the 14's.

 

Hey, I can dream can't I?

 

Go right on ahead.

 

You are waaay off on this. The G-tech TOTALLY takes into effect aerodynamics and gives a truly accurate reading. Don't believe me - watch THIS video.

DYNO's do not take into account the effects of poor aerodynamics. the G-Tech is giving you actual readings of your speed, rpms, distance travelled, and G-forces sustained, which translates into the actual performance of your car. And, unlike many other systems on the market, the G-techs use three separate axis' accellerometers to increase accuracy.

Even supposing you were right and the G-Tech is way off (which it's not), - it still would be a valuable tool for comparison runs against a baseline to check whether your mods are increasing speed/response or not. Watch the video and see how it compares to the track timer...

Regarding this:

"Your gonna need a lot more hp than 215 to break into the 14's."

Why not just go HERE and enter in the data for yourself. To break into high 14.s (14.97), that's what it comes out to.

Let's play nice for a change...

 

That calculator is way off. I entered some real figures from Car & Driver and in every instance the calculator and the actual results ended up about a full second off from each other. For example the Cadillac STS-V weighs 4371# and has 469 BHP so acording to the calculator they should have got 12.258 in the quarter, C & D got 13.2 in real life. I know Car & Drivers editors and testers aren't that bad in the quarter to be a whole second off from what they should be. It ended up that way on 5 different cars so I gave up. I wouldn't trust that calculator at all.

 

Cap'n...the calculator is off because you are entering the HP measured at the engine and it wants the HP at the wheels.

 

That would explain it I guess. You would think that it would use engine horsepower because it's easier to get the number. But I guess if it's using horsepower at the wheels it would be more accurate.