Norfolk & Idea
Mugello
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 2,122
MisterCorn said:Norfolk & Idea said:MisterCorn said:Unless you are using the absolute top of the range kit with inertial sensors and GNSS you won't get accurate results. The cheap ones are invariably optimistic as they all miss the start. If you use a GPS only system add 0.3-0.4 seconds as a starting point. Some time from 0.5km/h, others at higher speeds and extrapolate backwards. Neither method works well.
MC
That's not my experience of timing. I'm not saying you're talking bollox, it just flies in the face of what I've experienced.
I used a stand alone Aim GPS and recorded 0-60 at 3.16. When I attended a Vmax event MB timing clocked me at 3.02. I'd imagine MB timing was the more accurate method. Whatever that is :dont know:
What was the MB timing using? I went to a well known German manufacturer and ran our INS+GNSS system against their 'official' system. It routinely measured 0.3-0.4s longer. It was always at the start. He asked for an explanation. I told him either mine was right, or it knew what he was about to do....
Pretty much nobody gives accurate figures. It isn't in their interest. Not used for any safety figures or homologation, just for magazine and bragging rights. We even added a start trigger mode to replicate what other people do so that manufacturers are happier. They use our kit for brake testing where it does matter. They want to use the same kit for both. Rolling start figures will always be more consistent as there are no jerk rates to take in to account, GPS only handles that much better.
MC
Interesting stuff. Don't know what system MB timing were using. Is your start point triggered by breaking a beam? To me that's the only valid 'start' reference. How an accurate 60mph is captured in a given time, I'm not sure.
Anyhow- for pub purposes, I'm taking the 3.02 :grin: