All you guys with G-tech performance meters:

When you held the meter vertically, did the meter show a g value close to 1? The reason I ask is I just bought one and the highest g reading it gives when held absolutely vertical is .93, a pretty significant error, wouldn't you say? The d*ck at the speed shop wouldn't let me exchange it for a different one, he said I'd have to send it to Tesla, Inc. for calibration.

 

i dont know much, but isnt the force of gravity 9.8 N so however the f-tech thing works must be reading that. (acceleration is 9.8 m/s*s)...??

 

Well, I prefer to use 32.2 ft/sec^2 or 386 in/sec^2, as God intended, and not some infernal units invented by diabolical Frenchmen.

Regardless, the G-tech output is in gees, so when you hold it vertical, it should be registering 1 gee, not .93 gees like I'm getting.

 

Good question I'll check mine out.

 

Yeah you can't really trust the numbers you get out of a Ghetto Tech Pro. Just use everything as a reference point because the things are consistant.

You would think that us arrogant @ss Americans could at least switch over to the superior and easier to use metric system which is what most of the normal world uses. After all, we are blindly forcing the rest of the world to speak english. I don't think it's that bad of a trade.

 

Oh boy - this is getting way off topic, but here goes. I've been a mechanical engineer for over 20 years. Yes, the metric system is easy to use when doing simple homework and test problems while in school. Once you get out into the real world, my experience has been it simply does not matter which system you use - metric is not any easier or intuitive than any other system. We don't build rockets or airplanes or most anything else using back of the envelope calculations where a base 10 system would be an advantage. And once you start dealing with dynamics, that unfortunately awkward 9.81 m/sec^2 isn't any simpler to deal with than 386 in/sec^2.

The rest of the world loves to bash the U.S. for sticking with the so-called English system (I guess you could call it the American system now), but they are the arrogant @sses, not us. There simply is no compelling reason to change.

 

Yes it should definitly read 1g when held vertical. If it doesnt your numbers are gonna be way off for obvious reasons. As for them not being accurate all i can say is your wrong. I took my GTech to the track with me and it was just 2 tenths off in the 1/4. for instance I ran like a 15.77 it registered a 15.79 or something I cant remember the exact times but when it comes to trap speed it was off by about 4 mph. So they are fairly accurate. You can expect your track numbers to be very close to your Gtechs. I dont trust the horsepower reading though. Need to do a dyno comparison.

 

My point is that our incentive to change over would be so we don't have dual systems to use. We wouldn't have to convert everything back and forth like we do now. You're right about one system being as easy to use as the other. Having spent 4 years in a machine shop and working on Nissans for much longer than that I prefer the metric system. I know you've seen more prints than I that are drawn in metric, only to have some ignorant person write SAE all over the place on it. I just think it would be easier on everyone if we all were on the same page. Besides, the metric system is based on logical measurements of the earth. The system we use is a bunch of random numbers chosen by people throughout history. And much or most of it isn't that people don't feel they have incentive to change but more likely that most people feel they have incentive to not change at all. Thats the arrogance I was speaking of. It's the same as most of Europe converting to the Euro and Great Britain lagging behind trying to avoid the change only because of pride.

 

Yeah, in order to get an accurate hp reading, you need to input an accurate vehicle (and driver) weight at the time the measurement is taken, as well as having accuracy in the G-Tech. I got mine for before and after comparisons when making mods, so mine works fine for that assuming that measurement repeatability is decent. I was already able to verify that replacing my knock sensor gave me over a .6 second difference in 0-60 time, so it was nice to be able to determine that.

 

You make some very valid points that I have some replies to, but I'll just drop the subject with that.