what ems do you prefer
07-30-2008 | 05:20 PM
#141
Originally Posted by George@GTM
Once your VPro is properly installed and tuned, with all the compensations in place, there is no need for you to retune again.
-George
-George
So your saying with a FCON that alt, temp changes don't need to be re tuned? As in my case now I am moving from Myrtle Beach, SC to Charleston, WV. Over 600 ft elevation change and big temp changes in the winter as well. I wouldn't have to have it re tuned if I was running a FCON? It will adjust itself? Is it the same with the Haltec?
Last edited by Blwn_By_Twins; 07-30-2008 at 05:28 PM.
07-30-2008 | 06:04 PM
#142
Originally Posted by gsxrjohn
Sorry to go back so far, but I just started reading this thread.
So your saying with a FCON that alt, temp changes don't need to be re tuned? As in my case now I am moving from Myrtle Beach, SC to Charleston, WV. Over 600 ft elevation change and big temp changes in the winter as well. I wouldn't have to have it re tuned if I was running a FCON? It will adjust itself? Is it the same with the Haltec?
So your saying with a FCON that alt, temp changes don't need to be re tuned? As in my case now I am moving from Myrtle Beach, SC to Charleston, WV. Over 600 ft elevation change and big temp changes in the winter as well. I wouldn't have to have it re tuned if I was running a FCON? It will adjust itself? Is it the same with the Haltec?
07-30-2008 | 06:48 PM
#143
Originally Posted by rcdash
It's the same for both and the answer is that it depends on how well the tuner set up all of the compensation tables. If you specifically mentioned your situation, I'm sure they would spend extra time making sure the full range of conditions you're likely to encounter are properly accounted for.
He is correct, Sam already has good compensation tables so he puts it on all the VPros he tunes.
-George
07-30-2008 | 07:05 PM
#145
LOL. Sam is *the* man and master tuner at GT Motorsports.
Oops I guess he was really asking you specifically - sorry. 
Originally Posted by George@GTM
You make my job easy Raj
...
-George
...
-George
Last edited by rcdash; 07-30-2008 at 07:07 PM.
Sorry guys I'm trying to read through all the bickering in this thread to help me understand. I live on the east coast btw!!!
07-30-2008 | 11:51 PM
#149
The amount of misinformation here is quite sad... Those that know me, and many do not post for the said reasons, know that I am not here to make money, and my posts have ALWAYS been int he spirit of passing on unadulterated and objective information. My comments/rankings of the EMS were/are based on a diferent point of view that I felt were not expressed in this thread and can help the OP and everyone else see things more clearly.
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
07-31-2008 | 12:23 PM
#152
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: Plano TX, Queens NY
Originally Posted by GurgenPB
The amount of misinformation here is quite sad... Those that know me, and many do not post for the said reasons, know that I am not here to make money, and my posts have ALWAYS been int he spirit of passing on unadulterated and objective information. My comments/rankings of the EMS were/are based on a diferent point of view that I felt were not expressed in this thread and can help the OP and everyone else see things more clearly.
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
07-31-2008 | 01:51 PM
#153
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: AZ
Originally Posted by GurgenPB
The amount of misinformation here is quite sad... Those that know me, and many do not post for the said reasons, know that I am not here to make money, and my posts have ALWAYS been int he spirit of passing on unadulterated and objective information. My comments/rankings of the EMS were/are based on a diferent point of view that I felt were not expressed in this thread and can help the OP and everyone else see things more clearly.
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
07-31-2008 | 02:09 PM
#154
Originally Posted by 1ZweetZ
Well I had a chance to discuss with Jason about the Batch fire. It is NOT and has NEVER been batch fire. If you read it somewhere, it was wrong. That is why you should quit going off of what you are reading, and try going directly to the source for you questions...if you truly want the correct answers that is. I asked him if he could make a few posts on here to answer some questions, and he basically said he doesn't have the time to argue with people on the forums (which is what it always turns in to). His product speaks for itself. The ECU's they use are on more vehicles than Motec, Haltech, and AEM combined...it's an O.E.M. ECU, and they are sold in the millions per year, not hundreds or even thousands. The core software structure is also that of O.E.M. fuel calc's, timing calc's etc... What he does is all the trick stuff like nitrous control, traction control, boost control etc.. Your opinion is that Motec is the best in the world...that is fine... stick with that. The capabilities that have been shown to me, far exceed that of what motec has or any other aftermarket ecu, so I chose the ProEFI route. It's a matter of choice and opinion. I also asked him why he left AEM, and basically they didn't want to improve the product and develope it to keep up with the times... he had nothing bad to say about them, just that they wanted a different direction. I can appreciate that!
+10000000000000000000000
gurgen was right, The amount of misinformation here is quite sad...
I believe most of his tuning knowledge comes from books, so you cant really blame him from going of what he reads, he should have known better not to trust everything he sees on a message board....besides the fact that he is talking about something eh still has no clue about and has never used...OH WAY BUT HE READ SOMETHING SOMEWHERE ON MY350Z
If he thinks the motec is the best, so be it... its probably why it cost 1000s of dollars more...and big overkill for out cars anyways.
IMO at this point the thread shoudl be locked.. OP got his answer
Last edited by IIQuickSilverII; 07-31-2008 at 02:35 PM.
07-31-2008 | 02:51 PM
#155
Originally Posted by GurgenPB
Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars,
I haven't seen a single person on here asking about their race car..so far Hans is the closest to a "race" car that I know of, (im new to this board so there could be more) and his car is running pretty damn good.
Originally Posted by 1ZweetZ
It's a matter of choice and opinion.
Well there you have it..that explains exactly what this argument is all about. CHOICE AND OPINION. If PRO EFI wasn't promising then I don't see why a big shop like intense would not only sell it but use it on their flagship VQ car.
07-31-2008 | 08:37 PM
#157
Originally Posted by GurgenPB
The amount of misinformation here is quite sad... Those that know me, and many do not post for the said reasons, know that I am not here to make money, and my posts have ALWAYS been int he spirit of passing on unadulterated and objective information. My comments/rankings of the EMS were/are based on a diferent point of view that I felt were not expressed in this thread and can help the OP and everyone else see things more clearly.
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
Unfortunately, I no longer have the time I used to have to sit down and write 1000+ word responses to carry my points across and refute the misinformation point by point, which I can definitely do in this case. That being said, Jason Siebel's (sorry if misspelled) comments/characterizations of the "self adaptive features" and batch fire versus semi-sequential injections,(and I did in fact read in one of the original threads on the ProEFI that the 48pin model was indeed batch fire, so I am not making it up... so if that was not represented correctly, then that was the problem to start with... and I know full well the difference between batch fire versus semi/full sequential injection) are definitely very much overblown. Adaptive tuning is nothing new, Autronic mostly pioneered it (or, rather, implemented in far greater degree than others) in their ECU's 5-6 years back. Before their ambition cought up with them and brough them back to earth). The truth is, there is a reason why adaptive tunign is a rather moot point for serious setusp, is that it's never going to get you close enough by itself... EACH DARN cell still needs to be tuned individually regardless, so even if it worked perfectly and helped you get started, it will never put you reliably into a state where you cannot touch the cells at all.... they still need to be gone over. So, is it means that the adaptive tuning is there to prevent the engine from blowing up? Well, that will only happen on a very poor/non-existent underlying tune.... remember, every real knowledgeable person in the field will tell you, from Ben Strader, to Bill Hartman, to Neel Vasavada, to Paul Yaw, to Gaylon Baker (just to name very few) that "autotuning/adaptation" is a gimmick, one that no serious setup can rely on. Tha being said, Motec has one of the most consistent individual bank (and for that matter individual cylinder) LONG AND SHORT term fuel trim compensations that I have ever seen, with fully customizable STEPS and DURATIONS (each on its own 3D table). Once you achieve a solid base tune, with the Motec trim, you will NEVER EVER EVER be in trouble, and, in fact, ALWAYS be within 0.15 AFR points from target even in high inherent AFR delta scenarios.
To me, comparison of Motec to ProEFI is downright laughable, as is the allusion of an anecdote where a tracker had a a spare Motec ECU and that being a sign of lack of reliability. LOL... plain ludicrous. Please, anyone, go on some serious tuning forums (well there are only two actually) and see how many people have hardware problems with the motec, essentailly NEVER. the ONLY time you should be careful, is when you reflash teh ecu to a newer baseband. firmware version, where as is the case with any reflashes, a stable voltage is required since we are dealing with a non-EOC (execute on chip) memory, which is what EEPROM/NAND flash devices are (and if you are performing an update/wipe track side well that you are a real dumb ***). The rest of the comparisons that were attempted between the MoTeC and ProEFI are even more ridiculous. I will say this however: with a combination of full sequential injection (and hence the ability to tune injection timing), individual injector dead time compensation and some other methods, I was able to achieve a super-smooth idle (one that rivals my Audi A8) with 880cc PE injectors (individually bench tested) at 18:1 AFR; you cannot feel any vibration on the steering wheel AT ALL while the car idles. I will GUARANTEE and challenge anyone to do that on a 3.5L VQ and such huge injectors (btw, not even peak and hold, plain old saturated injectors).
On a different not, the idea that the former (one of) AEM creator trashing his former creation (the AEM) is quite sad... what is he gonna say about the ProEFI when he moves on to the next thing, and what are all the upsells of the ProEFI going to mean then?! The truth is, AEM software is extremely quirky, even in it's new iteration, but it works fairly well for what it does. I would certainly trust IT more than I'd trust the ProEFi jsut on the account of maturity. I know exactly who codes the software at AEM, and those guys are mostly mathematicians, and not automotive engineers at heart... hence the quirly and unintuitive nature of, for example, the idle control on the AEM (not completely closed loop - but can be made to work OKAY if you know what you are doing).
In my humble opinion, when you have something to sell on the forums, for you to achieve any real credibility, you need to be EVEN MORE objective and methodical than a regular forum contributor would, and not trash other products (and certainly not the best in the world). That makes me, and a lot of others, have essentially zero outright belief in your credentials. Then again, that's just me. ProEFI is a viable product, and with a year or tow of a maturation cycle it may be acceptable in some real serious setups. Until then, it can be an acceptable option in street cars, and would have been even more so with a fully open software platform. But please, whoever chooses it, for your own good, do not have the illusion that this is as good as it's made out to be. For $2000 with the harness/map sensor, no DBW, limited software, there is a better option for the money (again IMHO).
RCdash, thanks for the kind words. kno
Thanks for contributing to the misinformation with your arrogant know-it-all post.So the major car manufacturers got it all wrong when they invested time and $$$ in developing adaptive learning capability for their OEM ECU's??? And I'm supposed to take your word for it that it's a gimmick? LMAO
And quite frankly, who the f*ck are you to call out Jason Siebels, a very respected tuner and a legend in the Supra community???
What is your superior real world experience in developing and racing with aftermarket engine management systems compared to that of Jason? And while you find comparison between the Motec and ProEFI laughable... I laugh at the fact that numerous dyno graphs posted on this forum of ProEFI equipped cars tuned by Jason have significantly smoother graphs with smoothing set at zero, than the graphs of other shops/tuners posted on here using other engine management systems with their smoothing set at 5.
The 48-pin ProEFI box is good enough to make a fully streetable G35 that makes 906whp and has had flawless OEM quality ECU performance on the dyno, street, and the track since last year. What more could 99.99999999% of us ask for?
Last edited by RudeG_v2.0; 07-31-2008 at 10:32 PM.
07-31-2008 | 09:28 PM
#158
I am currently running the SS box with my stillen supercharger. On the top end Im getting some pinging. I think I need to run a better EMS that can control more than just timing. I believe Im running lean at the moment...I really need a tune, and would just like to get rid of the SS box.
What would you guys suggest to take care of my FI set up?
What would you guys suggest to take care of my FI set up?
Last edited by Nforce1; 07-31-2008 at 09:31 PM.
08-01-2008 | 06:53 AM
#159
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: AZ
Originally Posted by Nforce1
I am currently running the SS box with my stillen supercharger. On the top end Im getting some pinging. I think I need to run a better EMS that can control more than just timing. I believe Im running lean at the moment...I really need a tune, and would just like to get rid of the SS box.
What would you guys suggest to take care of my FI set up?
What would you guys suggest to take care of my FI set up?
08-01-2008 | 06:59 AM
#160
Originally Posted by RudeG_v2.0
The 48-pin ProEFI box is good enough to make a fully streetable G35 that makes 906whp and has had flawless OEM quality ECU performance on the dyno, street, and the track since last year. What more could 99.99999999% of us ask for?
That sums things up nicely IMO rude, i cant wait to get my car done with teh proEFI.
Also, i am even sure thats how rcdash feels too, about the haltech, which i am not familiar but looks promising too. just like SnyperZ said "If PRO EFI wasn't promising then I don't see why a big shop like Intense and SP would not only sell it but use it on their flagship VQ car." and its the same things for Injected and Haltech
[/thread]