Nashua_Night_Hawk

The Accelometers that I know of are:

1) Gtech Pro: http://www.gtechpro.com/
2) Vericom PC2000/PC3000: http://www.vericom.org/
3) AC-22/AP-22 from racing technologies: http://www.cb-racing.com/ and http://www.race-technology.com/WebPage/FlashIntro.html

Which one is the best performing, best value, and any users who are willing to share their reviews.

Mike

I own the gtech pro. I've used it at the track and it's always w/i a couple of hundredths of my track ET. Very accurte in my book but only if used correctly.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Any AP-22 Users?

Okay, Any one has Gtech pro in Greater Boston Area that I can borrow for couple test runs ?

BSK181

buy it cheapo

j/k

i like it as well

only 149 us dollars

Nashua_Night_Hawk

But Really the AP-22 is far superior than Gtech. With download data, correction factors, etc.... The worst is that it's not backlight LCD.

Time to search Ebay!

EricL

If you want the "killer" unit -- this would be the one.

http://www.gtechpro.com/competition.html

^
|
+- This is the puppy I'm buying when it comes out (it will get a personal mess-it-up-test) My pet peeve has been in regards to the lack of yaw and pitch compensation. Any unit that does not have a 2 or 4 accelerometer layout to correct for pitch and yaw errors will be off -- period. (Bummer is that this unit is vaporware [for now])

(The AC-22 is close, but...)


The GTECH is accurate if the car has zero squat (no front to rear pitching) and/or yaw.

Don't be surprised to find people with the stiffest springs with the least amount of up or down force (from acceleration and/or aerodynamic forces) to get the most accurate readings from the GTECH (regular version).

The new unit (whenever it comes) will finally be fully corrected and will compensate for the errors in the current unit.

The other issue that people mention is the way too high 1/4 mile speed that the GTECH shows with certain cars. The problem has to due with the aerodynamic lift on the car at higher speeds at the end of the track. (A 1/4 mile run will compute the average speed over the last 60-feet. GTECH would have you believe that the difference is only 1 MPH at the end-of-track due to the “average speed taken” vs. the GTECH’s “true end of run speed.” (The car is moving so fast at the end of the 1/4 mile that any time variances will be very small, but the change in the accelerometer’s tilt -- due to aerodynamic forces at 90-100 MPH -- can be large; this can cause the velocity calc’d to be way too high.

If you are looking for a "tool" you can get one pretty cheap and when used correctly (same suspension setup and same flat street) can give you a good idea of what you're doing with engine mods.

It can also be abused if not setup correctly and should only be used to compare results taken in the same car on the same (or very) similar street.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Hey EricL,

How do you know about Gtech Competition? it is not linked to their home page. An insider leaked this, or what ?

EricL

Scalbert (AKA Steve) found it and posted it here a while back.

Every time I go looking for that page again, it is easier to just look up Keyword ="Tesla" and User Name = "scalbert” in the CL search page

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...ighlight=Tesla

vuduvida

Just to back up what EricL said... Here's a pic of a CL-S right at 100-105 MPH. You can see the front end lifting causing the rear to squat. It's a slight incline but probably enough to affect the results of the G-Tech (which is what these guys were using before this pic was taken).

BTW, the Camaro was trailing all the way until the CL-S hit about 95 MPH. It should've lead the whole way but the driver didn't know how to launch back then. Also, this was done on a long, straight road that had absolutely zero traffic.