ProEFI Release Date and Pricing!
#361
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: TX
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rcdash
There's virtually no data on that forum and very few users so answers posted there would be of little use to this community, at this point.
#363
Originally Posted by rcdash
There's virtually no data on that forum and very few users so answers posted there would be of little use to this community, at this point.
Jeez guys, lay off if you can't answer the posted question. The adaptive stuff is another way of compensating for changing conditions, just as correction tables for the FCON are. It's debatable which is better since it all comes down to the software implementation, which is still under constant development for the proEFI.
"Adaptive Learning IS NOTHING LIKE feedback control. If you start your car in the dead of winter with the oil nearly frozen, the feedback loop for your idle control may get you there....eventually, but the car will stall continuously, and run poorly. With adaptive learning, the computer looks at the error, and plugs those values into the appropriate maps, thus eliminating the error. DO NOT confuse this with feedback control. Feedback control runs pid loops to trim until the error is gone, but as soon as you say...hit the throttle and return to that point...the feedback loop has to start ALL OVER again. With adaptive learning that process is ELIMINATED. Adaptive learning is derived from feedback control...they are in NO way the same or even related."
So in short, feedback will ALWAYS have an error that needs corrected, ADAPTIVE eliminates errors....completely. Making the drivability SP described. Now I don't know about you guys, but I sure like the way modern vehicles drive, so if I don't have to give that up....why would I?
Last edited by 1ZweetZ; 04-29-2008 at 08:28 PM.
#364
New Member
iTrader: (18)
Originally Posted by 1ZweetZ
It doesn't appear you really want answers...
Originally Posted by 1ZweetZ
...
So in short, feedback will ALWAYS have an error that needs corrected, ADAPTIVE eliminates errors....completely. Making the drivability SP described. Now I don't know about you guys, but I sure like the way modern vehicles drive, so if I don't have to give that up....why would I?
So in short, feedback will ALWAYS have an error that needs corrected, ADAPTIVE eliminates errors....completely. Making the drivability SP described. Now I don't know about you guys, but I sure like the way modern vehicles drive, so if I don't have to give that up....why would I?
If your correction maps are spot on, then adaptive tuning offers no advantage. I posted a much more technically credible explanation up above and I'd rather someone with their own thoughts or the technical expertise to discuss the point respond, rather than regurgitating a canned response. No offense.
And I could go post over on the proEFI site, but I'd rather post here for two reasons:
1. This thread is here - if I post over there, the my350z community (the intended market for this product) will likely not benefit from the response, only I will. I could copy and paste between forums, but I choose not to and am happy to wait for a response or a discussion regarding questions that are on topic and relevant to this platform.
2. If the product is announced here - I see no reason why questions regarding support of the product cannot be supported here. If Jason does not wish to respond because he is too busy, well then that demonstrates an inability to support the intended market. I don't believe that is the case since we are fortunate to have experts from Intense and SP supporting this product. Both have been very forthcoming with good, solid data and excellent support on this thread. I appreciate their willingness to explore this product with enthusiasts and shop owners trying to grasp the merits of a relatively new technology for this platform.
------------------------------------------
EDIT: Further "discussion" (subsequent posts) in response to 1ZweetZ deleted as I don't think they were helpful.
Last edited by rcdash; 04-30-2008 at 04:24 AM.
#365
New Member
iTrader: (13)
Originally Posted by rcdash
I personally think that for most users/customers, it won't make that much difference (not noticeable anyway).
+1 on friendly competition and development of the community
I just wan to add that for example today here the temp changed from 101 down to 65 as it is now... quite a bit of change for a day... i don't doubt there are many benefits to adaptive learning. Thats not saying that other methods are not good, but just to point out that this methods allows the proefi to "evolve" the tune for each driver to their specific driving habits, location etc..
#366
Originally Posted by rcdash
Oh really? I think you have a nasty habit of being antagonistic. Pick on someone else. You've already been warned about posting off topic.
Yes, I have read the same explanation multiple times - and I don't buy it on technical merit - not yet. If the output is the same, regardless of what algorithm is used to achieve that output, then what does it matter and why is one better than the other?
If your correction maps are spot on, then adaptive tuning offers no advantage. I posted a much more technically credible explanation up above and I'd rather someone with the technical expertise to discuss the point respond. No offense.
Yes, I have read the same explanation multiple times - and I don't buy it on technical merit - not yet. If the output is the same, regardless of what algorithm is used to achieve that output, then what does it matter and why is one better than the other?
If your correction maps are spot on, then adaptive tuning offers no advantage. I posted a much more technically credible explanation up above and I'd rather someone with the technical expertise to discuss the point respond. No offense.
#367
Just got this back from ProEFI.
"The reason adaptive learning is widely used by the O.E.'s is because you absolutely can NOT account for every dynamic in the engine. Sensors can't be placed in the best possible location (inside the combustion chamber) and therefore several assumptions must be made. THings like the temperature of the air actually entering the cylinder, and cylinder temperature can not be based upon coolant temperature alone, and sophisticated calculations PREDICTING combustion temperatures are made. The predictions are still just that. So standard air temp corrections and coolant temp corrections are only accurate under some running conditions, and no where near ALL running conditions. That is where adaptive learning comes in. The exact same running conditions even hours apart can require slightly different trims based upon a number of things not limited fuel vaporization and how this affects the mixture entering the combustion chamber.
I hope this helps"
"The reason adaptive learning is widely used by the O.E.'s is because you absolutely can NOT account for every dynamic in the engine. Sensors can't be placed in the best possible location (inside the combustion chamber) and therefore several assumptions must be made. THings like the temperature of the air actually entering the cylinder, and cylinder temperature can not be based upon coolant temperature alone, and sophisticated calculations PREDICTING combustion temperatures are made. The predictions are still just that. So standard air temp corrections and coolant temp corrections are only accurate under some running conditions, and no where near ALL running conditions. That is where adaptive learning comes in. The exact same running conditions even hours apart can require slightly different trims based upon a number of things not limited fuel vaporization and how this affects the mixture entering the combustion chamber.
I hope this helps"
#370
Registered User
Originally Posted by rcdash
Just my opinion, but let the unit speak for itself, and let go of the hype. There is some truly great potential there. BUT IT IS NOT READY AND NOT VALIDATED FOR ANY TIME OF CLAIM TO BE MADE REGARDING ITS SUPERIORITY, OR LACK THEREOF. Kudos to the early adopters willing to take a chance and share their experiences with the rest of the community.
"Actions speak louder than words"
#372
Registered User
Originally Posted by App6MT
Any ETA for the 128pin?
#373
New Member
iTrader: (18)
Originally Posted by IIQuickSilverII
HOW IS IT NOT READY?
did you miss the threads of the twin gt37r Z, the 76S turbo thread, foreingsodas car with a perfect tune @ 0 smoothing, the PL gt35r tune.....(thats not including supras runing the system)
explain why is it that you clain its not ready?
did you miss the threads of the twin gt37r Z, the 76S turbo thread, foreingsodas car with a perfect tune @ 0 smoothing, the PL gt35r tune.....(thats not including supras runing the system)
explain why is it that you clain its not ready?
I think many of us are wanting to see what others have to say (shops that are EMS platform independent and can provide unbiased insights): Julian, Sharif, Sam, Juan, Jeremy, Dave, etc...
I don't understand why shops have to pay $3000 per copy for the tuning software. Shouldn't the software and hardware be bundled together? I guess I don't understand the business relationship between ProEFI, Intense and Sound Performance.
Blackstar - you made a point, but you went overboard. There is never call to be disrespectful, especially when some of these topics represent the livelihood for many of this community.
Last edited by rcdash; 04-30-2008 at 01:04 PM.
#374
Sponsor
Sound Performance
Sound Performance
It is blatently obvious that Blackstar has ulterior motives and is perhaps affiliated with another competing shop.
Let's get this thread back on track!!
Let's get this thread back on track!!
#375
Sponsor
Sound Performance
Sound Performance
Originally Posted by rcdash
I don't understand why shops have to pay $3000 per copy for the tuning software. Shouldn't the software and hardware be bundled together? I guess I don't understand the business relationship between ProEFI, Intense and Sound Performance.
It is because the computers and software are built/written by Motorola and were designed for OEM applications. Every copy of the software we purchase from Motorola cost us $3K. They wont budge on the price. ALthough they are somewhat helping in the new consumer software development....... and even that is costing ProEFI a bundle!!
#376
Registered User
Originally Posted by SoundPerformance
It is because the computers and software are built/written by Motorola and were designed for OEM applications. Every copy of the software we purchase from Motorola cost us $3K. They wont budge on the price. ALthough they are somewhat helping in the new consumer software development....... and even that is costing ProEFI a bundle!!
rc, I believe the reason dealers have a different software then what the end-user will have, is because they will have the access to change certain perameters they feel the end-user shouldn't have access to. This is only because, not every person who gets a stand-alone EMS knows what to do with it, and tinkers with the settings (I personally think that was the downfall of the AEM). Everyone wants to think they know how to tune, but the vast majority don't. Not to say there aren't capable people out there that would be able to.
#380
Sponsor
Sound Performance
Sound Performance
Originally Posted by ZU L8R
Blackstar has been banned
Thank you.... I am all for an open discussion of any aspect of this thread... but being slanderous and disrespectful is crossing the line!