G-tech accuracy??

jerrys84 · 06-14-2002, 11:04 AM

how accurate are they??

anyone run one and compare the info to actual track times??

reason i ask, closest track is 2.5 hours away, and with my too many home improvement projects going on, don't think i'll be able to get to the track..

Dark_5.0 · 06-14-2002, 11:39 AM

On the ET it is pretty accurate +or- a tenth.

The mph is about 3mph high.

It got my ET pretty much dead on, I dont know if the mph is off on all cars but it reads mine about 3 mph high compared to the track.

Actual ET 13.7 @100mph
G-tech ET 13.66@103mph

I am in the same boat as you I just bought a house and it is putting a huge financial strain on me. Somehow I still found the cash for slicks.

Just remember to make sure the G-tech is level and find a straight level street.

Good luck
Later,

302 LX Eric · 06-14-2002, 01:40 PM

What Dark_5.0 said seems to be a good rule of thumb. Although, I trapped 111 mph on a G-Tech but usually trap 105-106 at the track. Weird.

E

explicitone · 06-18-2002, 02:53 PM

Ithinkthereason the g-tech reads higher on the mph is because the g-tech reads the mph the 1/4 mile point but at the track the trap speed is an aver. of the so many feet is more speed/time/dist. figur. more then an on the dot mph

Niceride1994 · 06-19-2002, 10:26 PM

My friends and I all pitched in on a g-tech and it was way off. Before the 1994 gt i had a dodge stealth es not turbo or anything and i ran 13.9. that is completly stock... LOL i thought wow this car is fast but it was really the g-tech being a peice of crap. We later found out that the disc was messed up in the tech and it was sent back because of warrenty. Now it is still a little off but not 2 seconds... but i heard good things from other people though so maybe i just had bad luck

slo95 · 06-24-2002, 07:59 PM

I am in the same boat - 2 hrs from a dyno or track!

been looking at tazzo.
check out tazzo.com like the g-tech but suppose to use better guts and the spec's exceed the gtech and vc2000race

06-14-2002, 11:04 AM	#1
jerrys84 Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: minnesota Posts: 129	G-tech accuracy?? how accurate are they?? anyone run one and compare the info to actual track times?? reason i ask, closest track is 2.5 hours away, and with my too many home improvement projects going on, don't think i'll be able to get to the track.. __________________ 91 LX 'work in progress' previous stangs; lightly modded 84GT 81 2.3 converted to 302 auto

06-14-2002, 11:39 AM	#2
Dark_5.0 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Staging lane Posts: 4,337	On the ET it is pretty accurate +or- a tenth. The mph is about 3mph high. It got my ET pretty much dead on, I dont know if the mph is off on all cars but it reads mine about 3 mph high compared to the track. Actual ET 13.7 @100mph G-tech ET 13.66@103mph I am in the same boat as you I just bought a house and it is putting a huge financial strain on me. Somehow I still found the cash for slicks. Just remember to make sure the G-tech is level and find a straight level street. Good luck Later, __________________ 92' LX-Big brakes, Lots and lots of suspension, GT40X heads, Ported cobra intake, stock cam, Vortech SC trim. 00' Lightning-Stock 88'CRX-13 second ego killer

06-14-2002, 01:40 PM	#3
302 LX Eric or '331 LX Eric' Join Date: Jan 1999 Location: Columbus, Ohio Posts: 2,142	What Dark_5.0 said seems to be a good rule of thumb. Although, I trapped 111 mph on a G-Tech but usually trap 105-106 at the track. Weird. E __________________ 1991 5.0 LX Coupe - 40,750 miles 331 cu. in. / Tremec 3550 / BFG Drag Radials 12.22 @ 114.31 mph - w/1.89 60'

06-18-2002, 02:53 PM	#4
explicitone Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: racine ,wi Posts: 691	Ithinkthereason the g-tech reads higher on the mph is because the g-tech reads the mph the 1/4 mile point but at the track the trap speed is an aver. of the so many feet is more speed/time/dist. figur. more then an on the dot mph __________________ RUN IT STAIGHT AND RUN IT HARD ________ Novi 2000 60' 1.46 1/4 10.67 mph 126.5 _________

06-19-2002, 10:26 PM	#5
Niceride1994 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Waukegan Posts: 12	My friends and I all pitched in on a g-tech and it was way off. Before the 1994 gt i had a dodge stealth es not turbo or anything and i ran 13.9. that is completly stock... LOL i thought wow this car is fast but it was really the g-tech being a peice of crap. We later found out that the disc was messed up in the tech and it was sent back because of warrenty. Now it is still a little off but not 2 seconds... but i heard good things from other people though so maybe i just had bad luck __________________ ~Mike~ 1989 5.0 Slow Notchback 306' ported and polished heads gt-40 intake upper and lower, aeromotive FPR, bbk cold air, 36 LBS injectors, MSD- ignition, T5 Tranny, Aluminum DS, 8.8 3.73 spool rear end, Nitrous Works 175 shot, Mickey Thompson 26x10x15 at 8 LBS. Ran a 11.23 @120.5mph 0-60ft in 1.47 Sold My 1994

06-24-2002, 07:59 PM	#6
slo95 Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 168	I am in the same boat - 2 hrs from a dyno or track! been looking at tazzo. check out tazzo.com like the g-tech but suppose to use better guts and the spec's exceed the gtech and vc2000race

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tech?	Maroon91LX	Blue Oval Lounge	2	03-04-2004 11:32 PM
Carb to EFI swap..looking for tech articles	mustangfreak	Windsor Power	3	12-06-2001 10:52 PM
Need Tech Article	fordmanck	Windsor Power	1	08-06-2001 11:13 AM