...and this is why you don't listen to AMD customers talking about JHM!

B6/7 S4/RS4
#1

We all know that AMD and it’s lone lonely employee jason@amd have a crazy obsession with JHM. As a result, we see these crazy campaigns by AMD’s 5 customers attacking JHM at any opportunity they get.

The latest example was ‘tridoctor’ who turned out to actually be gesTTalt from audizine. Funny…trolls love to sign up here under new names as if we don’t find them in 5 minutes.

Anyway, he was quick to talk a lot of shit about the JHM supercharger kits, under his new tridoctor name. Wonder why? Oh…because he bought an AMD supercharger and clutch. Well, bought is putting it loosely. We already know that AMD have been struggling to sell their kit. First step was to change the name to AVIVA hoping to disassociate themselves from the disaster that is AMD’s reputation. Then they changed the name AGAIN selling it as the GMG supercharger system for the B7 RS4. We also know that they have been GIVING AWAY their shit to forum members. Pretty sad little shop there. No wonder they hate JHM.

Anyway, now we see this absolute gem posted on audizine…

[quote=gesTTalt aka tridoctor]…a more aggressive tune like JHM (seen 91 oct timing at 30+).
[/quote]
So…what can we take away from his comment? JHM is ‘aggressive’…and he has even seen 30+ degrees of timing on their 91 tune!

OH MY GOD!!! GET THE KIDS INSIDE…IT’S GOING TO BLOW!!!

Actually no, he’s just a moron trying to shit-talk JHM to help his friend at AMD.

Let’s have a look at another B7 RS4. It is requesting an ‘aggressive’ 30+ degrees of ignition timing. Basically 30 degrees from 3500 to redline. Even hits 31.5 degrees at one point.

I guess the owner should be worried about his tuner!

Well…who is the ‘aggressive’ tuner in question? Audi. More specifically, quattro. That’s a log of my stock RS4 from 3 years ago. ::slight_smile: And THAT is why you never listen to an AMD customer when they talk about the competition.

http://audirevolution.net/addons/albums/images/729968961.jpg

#2

lulz - this has come up a few times in PM’s. I’ve advised those that were worried about these “Aggressive claims” to log their own stock car to see what the OEM calibration calls for at different RPM’s. Just do a third gear rip to redline and log both the accel and decel. I also suggest they blip the throttle in neutral to watch the values change since we witnessed another ex-RS4 owner scream to the masses about the lean condition he witnessed.

It’s a good exercise to do anyway just from a data gathering standpoint.

Hopefully one day they’ll (the doubters or those that are concerned because of the haters’ claims) realize the crazy claims false statements were fabricated from uninformed haters and or the competition.

#3

AMD is clearly pathetic. We’ve seen them blow up how many cars now because they don’t know what their doing? The only thing AMD can do is talk bad about all the other products out there to try and scare people into buying something from them.

Most people seem smart enough to laugh AND off understanding it’s one desperate guy trying to push parts he didn’t make. The few people that have AND branded parts all seem. Unstable mentally, uneducated mechanically and sooner or later liars. I truly believe the one guy at AND targets uneducated people then tries to scare them into terrible products out of fear.

#4

We sell a performance tune. Yes our performance tune will be more aggressive than stock but still well within all of the safety parameters of the motor.

#5

Hahaha, pretty great. I had a very similar discussion with a guy about my 996tt tune. He has an EPL tune, and we shared logs, and he emailed back flipping out about my timing. . . I sent him my stock logs which were very very similar timing wise. He then said he didn’t know but that his EPL tune was much less aggressive.

#6

This same idiot… Tridoctor/gesTTalt also posted he never saw more than 28.5 degrees of timing on his APR RS4 tune.

I guess APR thought it would be a good idea to pull timing for you vs stock?

That may also explain why 3 different APR tuned RS4s on the 034 dyno put up less power than a stock RS4 there did.

#7

Idiot indeed. My stock S5 made more then 28.5. Just proves an AMD customer is a dumb customer.

#8

Tridoctor . . . isn’t he the one who claimed, bizarrely, that it was THIS forum that convinced him to go AMD? Ya that makes sense.

Funny - we found out about his alternate AZ profile within minutes. We always find out who comes on here to troll lol

#9

I really like that you guys keep finding the trolls. Funny how they’re all linked to the same sad shop.

#10

Dude they are so obvious it isn’t even a challenge. On top of that their knowledge is like a third grader, but their mentality is if they go around screaming false information or just plain horrible info the LOUDEST is that everyone will believe them. I’ve said this a dozen time…AMD isn’t even playing the same game as JHM, to JHM they don’t exist and never will. They need to stick to the 17yr old B5 owners or find a equally uneducated platform to promote their tuning skills in.

#11

That’s some ridiculous shady crap right there. I guess some people have quite a lot of spare time to spend it on such bs. I wonder what’s the age group in this scenario. From the usual trolls on AZ, I could tell they’re not younglings by fat like most of B5 crowd, which is really embarassing…

#12

This guy gesTTalt is like 40-45 from what I’ve heard lol.

#13

Want to know why he thought that was aggressive? The boosted cars can’t run these levels of timing. He’s probably developed an opinion on timing request because of what he has heard from people who think they understand acceptable parameters for tuning…on boosted cars. AMD ring any bells? We have already seen them talking about timing in this regard, as have their troll customers.

Everyone knows saying a tune is “aggressive” is a kiss of death. He made no mistake there…he was trying to cast negative light.

So a couple of other rs4 owners posted that they havr seen 30 degrees of timing requested on theit stock tune, even though gesTTalt categorised JHM as aggressive because he saw 30 degrees of timing request.

Here was his first exchange/response…

Huh? You can specify 93 vs 91 on your stock audi tune now? lol
FYI he never posted anything for followup

Here’s the second exchange with someone who shoots down his blatant attempt to make jhm look bad.

[quote=ny07rs4]^I have as well and others I’ve logged with or shared files with have too.
[/quote]

Again with the 93 question? The stock fucking tune is the stock fucking tune. It doesn’t matter what gas you put in.

The requested timing is mapped by whoever wrote the calibration. It doesn’t care if you’re in california or Toronto or sweden…Using 91or 93 or 100. The parameters of the stock tune are the same, as written by the tuners at audi.

If the car needs to pull back timing because of knock detection, then you can discuss gas and octane. But if you’re talking about a tune and calling it aggressive because a parameter is the same as stock, you’re stupid. On trolling.

Then jasonAMD can’t stay out of it any longer. Clearly his coached little puppet gesTTalt is fucking the plan up so he steps in…to show he is just as dumb as his puppet.

LOLOLOL now the insinuation is that some tuners disable knock sensors. Who, audi? Because your boy over here called jhm and audi aggressive for running more timing than Apr lol.

I guess the failed attempts to paint jhm parameters as aggressive are getting to them, so now they want to talk about disabling knock sensitivity. Classic jasonAMD. Not sure who he is referring to but JHM actually jacks up the safety on many stock parameters. This is why you hear stories about guys who ran cel free while stock or on another tune getting a cel immediately after getting a jhm tune. The increased sensitivity and lower threshold to trip a CEL shows immediately when something is wrong.

There was a b5 guy, meow/manatee who started a thread here asking what was ‘too much’ timing retardation. Attempting to say jhm was too aggressive when one of their customers saw a bunch of timing being pulled on his car. Actually dumbfuck that was JHM protecting the car. If they were aggressive the car would pull very little timing. When we pointed that out to him, he disappeared.

I also find it funny how everyone is saying how fast this amvivagmg install is? They’ve been at it for 4 days now and the car isnt done. They started the 23rd. Today is day 5. They did carbon, clutch, supercharger. That’s it. These are the two guys who designed the kit…and they take 5+ days?

#14

I could do it in 3 days on my garage floor…lol

These guys are absolutely pathetic. They should just go about their business and stop trying to knock on JHMs credibility. Most of these guys discussing techincal info probably couldn’t find their valve stem to check their tire pressure.

#15

Also interesting to see this post from MRC, the most respected tuner in the UK about ignition timing levels on a customers car they tuned/decatted/carbon cleaned…

[quote=Doug@MRC]How does a normally aspirated car make such big gains? Flowing 178gs, a 20% gain in airflow alone. Running 31 degrees timing stock with 5-6 degrees retard, this went upto 37 degrees timing with no retard. The graph shows the gains in timing advance and airflow.
[/quote]
Looks like AMD and their puppet gesTTalt should go freak the fuck out on MRC and Audi for those ignition timing levels!

#16

One thing that continues to stand out is how AMD keeps making claims about other companies tunes when we all know he has no idea what’s going on in other companies tunes. It’s more desperation on AMD to try and scare people into an inferior product.

#17

…and if we get technical AMD doesn’t tune anything except B5 S4s that have a road life of less than 90 days. Their RS4 kit was tuned by EPL, then they dumped them for UM…the facts are no one has been successful at tuning an NA RS4 besides JHM…who would you trust to tune the same ECU in a boosted application?

#18

Speaking of B5’s… the proof in the pudding would be tweets’ AMD B5. If that was (a) running and (b) breaking records, we would hear no end of it. Instead we hear all this “timing this” and “aggressive RS4” that.

I can’t take AMD seriously on their RS4 when they have this one sort of project (b5) doing nothing. APR, JHM, MRC, GIAC, all have some pedigree on other platforms.

#19

I’m not a big fan of people taking quote out of context and using it to slander others. However, when one puts out any comments, it’s fair game on the internet.

Here is the full quote from my post:

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/02/2e8ebenu.jpg

My comparison was to the 91 oct APR program, which I called conservative based on my logs (which includes my last set of dyno pre sc baseline pulls). If you read,
I advocated that person I was responding to get either JHM or Revo. There is little timing pull with APR, and can do with more timing. I’m don’t see where I’m bashing JHM. That is the only section I mentioned JHM and it was focused on on this post.

I made the mistake of misreading two post thinking they were talking about APR, when in fact it was about stock. I commented thinking it was APR. Hence mentioning 91 vs 93 program.

I want to thank Jake for changing his post (which initially said something like duck or cover up) to something more informative. He also describes the tune as “more aggressive then stock.” His comparison is with stock and my with APR, both of us state that JHM is more aggressive. I do not think aggressive = unsafe. Aggressive is fine with me. I do explicitly call APR conservative and imply that if you want more power, go with a different tuner.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/02/ute9u5y6.jpg

When I spoke about timing, it related to the WOT pulls, not decel or part throttle where there is time well above 30 and 40*

I’m currently data logging and will be doing a post dyno on Tuesday. I’ll post all my data and dyno comparisons on AZ. That’ll be a running post as I update it with more info as I gather them. I’ll pop in here and post a link for anyone interested.

Here are the logs from pre sc dyno:

Mods - Ebwerks catless, JHM intake spacers, APR V1.1 test pipe tune, BC forged 19x10 wheels with 265/35 PSS tires

You’ll notice timing does not exceed 28.5.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/02/hada4udy.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/02/pyqybu8u.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/02/unytyte8.jpg

#20

tridoctor - why waste your time with pre- and post- dyno charts? That will tell you nothing. Do some real testing at the track - you can do logs there as well. Dyno numbers aren’t respected that much on this forum.