Didn’t the JHM tuner just tell you to stick with Jfonz?
So to that end, get some logging done and send it off to jfonz.
I’m still in the process of learning as I go along. Jason mentioned something about Count Vohn specifically tuning for a manual boost controller (which I purchased from JHM last night) and that other tuners may only use a workaround method with the N75 valve. It makes less sense to me to use a tune with workarounds.
Others might dispute the n75 work around and feel tuning only mbc is the work around…
I too am all about learning and would be interested in cv take and compare / contrast between the two approaches. Without revealing any trade secrets obviously.
I personally have no idea which way is better but I’m assuming that since Count Vohn likes the MBC approach, it’s the better way. However, either way, I do like the idea of having the ability to change the amount of boost from inside the car.
That is my point. I want to learn and know why one is used in favor of the other.
The stock map sensor pegs at about 23psi, so the ecu doesn’t know how much boost the car is making above 23psi. When running with the stock n75, I assume that is where the workaround is needed…
Are you retarded? Do you honestly not believe that my car has been running for over a year, or do you actually know that what you are saying are lies as they come out of your mouth? For your credibility’s sake, I hope you are referring to my build taking a total of 2 years until it became my daily driver (… over a year ago), and not that you are trying to say that my build still isn’t running since the initial teardown, as it seems it would be below your intelligence to try to blatantly lie about something that is so easily verified on the internet lol. I don’t really care if you and the AR toughguys believe things that aren’t the reality about my car, but I am honestly curious to find out if it is just ignorance with you, or if it is willful deceit. It’s looking more and more like the latter, as lately you have shown FAW-level disregard for spewing things that are blatantly untrue and unfounded. So much for your moniker of “Inconvenient ‘Truth’” speaker.
[quote=“Zero_Tolerance,post:182,topic:3893”]
Jason himself really said to you that using the N75 is the hack workaround? Using an MBC is as much of a hardware hack as setting the N75 to open loop/flat DC is a software hack. I’ve got both a JHM/Hallman MBC and an N75 to play with, so I’ll see which I like better personally, but one way is not THE hack and the other way THE correct way.
With regard to the tuner discussion, I’ll give my opinion. I respect CV’s knowledge and body of work (enough so that I’d definitely have him on a short list of people I’d consider working with (as an example), if I had a project up his alley [and this is where you que the nutswingers to quote my previous sentence, saying,“You would work with him, but there’s no way he’d work with you jibberslive” hardy hardy lolerskate rofl.]) I say this disclaimer, as I’m not a troll or some ignorant hater. However, I respectfully disagree that withholding a tune in this situation is solely some sort of ‘it’s in the customer’s best interest’ altruistic move. I can respect and appreciate the part about showing other tuners respect, and wanting to get the previous tuner’s approval before beginning any work on a car that they had previously tuned. However, (in a hypothetical scenario) if tuner Y respectfully reaches out to previous tuner X and tuner X gives him his blessing to tune the car, then from then on there is nothing inherently respectful about refusing to tune. Respect was shown, reachouts were made, and everything would be in the clear with all green lights go to proceed (*if the new tuner wanted to chose to take on the project, which no tuner is required to take on every project that would like to commission them).
From that point forward, it doesn’t inherently serve the customer to ‘respectfully decline because it’s in the customer’s best interest.’ There’s nothing inherently worse for the customer if he decides to have tuner X fully tune the car, then decides that he would also like to try tuner Y on a different ECU to compare/contrast so that he can choose to run the tune that he feels best suits him/his car. If we extrapolate this hypothetical out further, assuming they are all reputably ‘safe’ tunes, it wouldn’t be any worse for the customer to also buy ECU’s from tuners U, W and Z (maybe GIAC, APR and EPL), and do a full shootout to figure what ECU he would most like to run out of all of them (if he so chooses to spend his time/money on that). Other than maybe wasted time/money by the customer (though who is to tell another grown person what they can/can’t spend their own money on), and again assuming all of the tunes are reputably safe, there is no downside from the customer’s point of view. From the tuner’s POV, there might be some downside to being randomly thrown into some uncontrolled ‘shootout’, but I’m talking strictly about from the customer’s POV.
Assuming the process in the first paragraph is already completed (reachout, respect shown, blessing given, etc), for someone to say to a potential customer that they are rejecting tuning them solely on the basis of protecting the customer from themselves and that it is in the customer’s best interest, it is a little patronizing. It’s similar to when one of my previous roommates tried to kick another roommate out of the house before the end of the lease, and the roommate trying to use the logic of, “I want to stay friends with you, so I’m having to kick you out so that we can remain friends,” when really he was just taxed by the problems that the other kid created and didn’t want to live with him. It wasn’t in the kid-who-was-getting-kicked-out’s best interest to leave, though the kid kicking him out was trying to paint it as such.
On the flip side, I definitely respect and understand if someone were to simply say, “I’d rather not work with you under these conditions,” as no one is obligated to do work for anyone else (the good ones can be especially selective, if they so choose). Zero Tolerance is obviously ignorant (in the true meaning of the word, not necessarily with negative connotation) about cars and the car industry, and has a capricious personality, so I definitely wouldn’t hold it against CV if he thought it were in his own best interest to respectfully bow out of the entire situation. I don’t, however, believe that it is necessarily in Zero Tolerance’s best interest to not be allowed to have 2 separate tuners tune the car at two separate times, as an altruistic motive would imply.
They’ve both got +'s and -'s. An MBC is a pretty foolproof and simple way of controlling boost, in that a strictly mechanical device allows the boost to build to a certain pressure, and then there is a hard cutoff.
MBC +'s: simple (less to go wrong), good protection against overboost, allows the system to spool as fast as physically able
MBC -'s: less control and modulation of anything other than a relatively binary open/close situation, tougher to integrate into the ECU to use boost/wastegate related failsafes (ie, no limp mode of reduced boost possible if an engine issue were to pop up, like the stock ECU programming would call for)
N75 +'s: since it’s controlled via the ECU and can be opened/closed to any value between 0% and 100%, it gives you much more control over the boost profile *when you are within the stock MAP sensor’s boost range (so you have complete modulation/control below ~22psi with a stock B5 S4 ECU setup, and above 22psi you can set it to a flat value, so it essentially acts similarly to an MBC from 22psi on up), boost PID control (which means you have maps to control the boost overshoot/undershoot/oscillation, and can get it tuned in for a specific setup, whereas with an MBC a simple spring is all that determines the boost PID).
N75 -'s: it’s electrical and more complicated (more points to fail, and hence more prone to failure), isn’t as dead reliable as an MBC regarding hard peak-boost limit setting (have to be more careful with overboost), requires tuning skill and knowledge to properly setup the boost profile and boost PID (whereas an MBC is more of a ‘set it with a single nut and go’ type of setup)
That’s a quick overview of MBC/N75, though it’s not necessarily always black/white with the above, as some people use combinations of MBC/N75 together to cap peak boost with an MBC, yet still have limp mode and other N75 features available. And also, the hard cap of 22psi limit to actively control via the N75 isn’t necessarily a real ‘hard limit’, as people are on the brink of some tunes that will be able to actively control up to 40 psi and above on the stock B5 S4 ECU.
[quote=“jibberjive,post:187,topic:3893”]
Are you retarded? Do you honestly not believe that my car has been running for over a year, or do you actually know that what you are saying are lies as they come out of your mouth? For your credibility’s sake, I hope you are referring to my build taking a total of 2 years until it became my daily driver (… over a year ago), and not that you are trying to say that my build still isn’t running since the initial teardown, as it seems below your intelligence to try to blatantly lie about something that is so easily verified on the internet lol. I don’t really care if you and the AR toughguys believe things that aren’t the reality about my car, but I am honestly curious to find out if it is just ignorance with you, or if it is willful deceit. It’s looking more and more like the latter, as lately you have shown FAW-level disregard for spewing things that are blatantly untrue and unfounded. So much for your moniker of “Inconvenient ‘Truth’” speaker.
Hey little Bitch… Watch your mouth. Your build took an easy two years.
Frankly its still not even done ever since you revealed stock this stock that etc. once faw agreed to your challenge. Get to work and get the fuck out. How many times can you say you’re leaving and then come back like nothing happened?
P. S. Your keyboard diarrhea is raging. Ever heard of being succinct? We should change your username to tl:dr
How bad is “partial throttle” with an MBC/EBC? If I’m understanding correctly, it’s basically all or nothing regarding boost. Or am I misinterpreting what I’m reading in some conversations?
I can only comment on my daily driving which obviously is not under full throttle even 10% of the time. And I will say part throttle drivability is a non issue with my jhm tune. I don’t notice any negative aspect compared to my previous vast ecu k04 tune.
Waaa waaa, I think I hear the wambulance. Watch my mouth lol, all right e-toughguy 
I take it from your answer that you’re cognizantly being deceitful then with the incorrect stuff that you say. Too bad I previously gave you the beiiinefficientficientficientit of the doubt of ignorance.
You should see if there’s local MBC and non-MBC cars to get a test drive to see for yourself, as I’ve heard it both ways (MBC tuned people going to an N75 tune and saying the N75 is smoother, and MBC tuned guys that say part throttle etc. is as smooth as butter and that they’re more than satisfied). But then again, unless the cars you are comparing are tuned by the same tuner, you’re not going to really be able to draw any conclusions regarding that anyways, as smooth part-throttle/transient behavior is based on far more than just what type of boost controller (in fact, probably 95+% of the jerky part throttle issues I’ve seen are based on something other than boost management). Since most tuners usually only do it one way or the other, it may be tough to find two separate setups tuned by the same tuner, one with MBC and one with N75, which to compare. Jfonz has/does do both if I’m not mistaken, so maybe look for a couple of local jfonz tuned cars.
Jibberjive,
Thanks it was very kind of you to say what you have in regards to your thoughts on my work.
To clarify:
One: There is no tune, Fonz or JHM on the ECU.
Two: I told ZT I would not take on the project if, he was working with fonz. I asked him to contact fonz and see if he could get an ok to move to JHM. No mater how you size it, there are people who look to steal business from other people. I don’t like to even consider getting involved in stuff like that and I work to make sure Its known I don’t participate in such actions.
Three: I respectfully disagree that it doesn’t inherently serve the customer best to decline. While there might be entertainment value to the customers and other non involved people looking on from the sideline, that in itself, isn’t in the customers best interest. If you don’t have a relationship with a tuner I can see your point. However, in this and many situations like it, if the customer isn’t happy with the tune he should get support from his tuner till he or she is happy. (Note most people don’t even know what they are looking at or what is a “good tune” so take that with some salt) I or anyone popping in looking to be the hero is just not good practice. If the relationship breaks down or there is clear failure then, that starts another conversation. I have on countless situations turned away people, just because its just not a good practice, if your working with X tuner get them to fix it, and get them to make it right.
Four: Not being directly related to the situation or, in a position of responsibility for the outcome. Thus, being someone looking from the outside in, it’s easy to say protecting the customer is “patronizing”. Remember the tune isn’t being withheld because of a tuner standing back and saying I won’t do this because you’re working with someone else, It’s because the car isn’t ready, and tone of, the customer is just wanting a tune NOW. Jason@j-spec and I spoke and Jason said the car was not ready for a tune. So, I back Jason. If ZT wants a tune and Jason feels the car isn’t where it needs to be and ZT or anyone for that matter wants to just put a tune on when the car isn’t ready, then I have to move on after someone else gets involved.
Five: In the end, I think anyone has their standards. I have mine and I don’t do this for my ego, I don’t do it for money, I do it to help people. This keeps me and my work honest. If I think my work might lead to this guy or anyone having less than great results or even a failure I don’t get involved. I’ve done this over hundreds of cars, there is a formula, It’s not hard to now know when it’s best to just walk away. I have found that there is a big gap between doing the right thing for people and doing the popular thing with the people on the internet.
Six: You can control limp mode and take a car back to kill boost with an MBC. You just have to know how. You can also modulate how the turbos spool, it’s just harder to do. It takes lots of work to make the car drive like stock with a MBC and quite frankly most of the people who talk about an MBC and how its jerky don’t know what their talking about or how to tune for one. It is indeed much harder to integrate into the ECU as well. Even after I have helped several people by tuning for a 3bar MAP It makes no sense to lock someone into one set amount of boost. I feel and almost everyone that I have helped, feels like you pay all this money you should be able to turn up the power when you want it and turn down the power when you don’t need it.
Last thoughts. ZT is a great guy who has been on a harsh journey with a hard learning curve. At this point he is going to work with JHM and Jason@J-spec. Everyone has watched ZT and wants to see him do well. Part of making sure that happens is knowing when to help and when to hold off.
Thanks for the reply. And this is why I respect you more than the notorious core of sourpuss users here. You state what you mean, you can have a solid opinion about something but are able to state it without a plaguing air of condescension, and your posts are made without being overly contentious.
The reason why I made my previous post somewhat abstract and made it somewhat hypothetical is because I was trying to make a point about one part (and only one part) of this real situation (the ‘I’m doing this for your own good’ part that I don’t necessarily agree with), without addressing the other parts of the real situation. I understand that the car may have issues and may not even be ready for a tune at all at this time, and my post above was to be read with the assumption that ‘said’ hypothetical car would be receiving the tune(s) after there were no hardware or other issues.
I think the difference in our opinions on ‘multiple tunes from different companies’ comes from a fundamental difference in our view of the tuner/customer relationship. You say in point 3 that a customer should only go on to a different tuner once/if he has already exhausted current tuner relationship and is convinced that the current tuner can’t make him ‘happy’. I don’t see it like that, as if all tuners are on the same linear scale and one tune can only be better/worse/tied with another tune (whether that scale is based on happiness or whatever else). I think of it more like this, that different tune/tuners generally have different characteristics/styles, and there’s no shame in getting multiple tunes from different places (even if you are ‘happy’ with the current tune, and maybe just curious about others), to see which style you like best. Or maybe you’ll end up like multiple styles, and you’ll use both of them in different situations.
As an illustrative example (these stupid things come to my mind), to me it’s like someone who has only ever tasted Mountain Dew. He likes Mt Dew, it’s his favorite drink, but does that mean that because he likes Mt Dew that he shouldn’t ever try Pepsi to see what he thinks? There’s no shame even if he picked up ALL of the Pepsi products to try out to see what he likes and how they compare, and maybe he’ll end up finding out that both Mt Dew and Rootbeer are his favorite drinks, and that he prefers them on different occasions so he’ll stock them both. Is it that Mt Dew and Rootbeer are intrinsically better or worse than Pepsi and Welch’s? No, they’re just different and shouldn’t necessarily try to explicitly compare them on a linear scale of better-than, worse-than, or equal-to.
Back to the actual point of my first big post though, assuming the car is healthy and assuming there’s none of these other circumstantial tuner relationship complexities (like being worried about intellectual property protection, which automatically writes off the possibility of working with both of these particular two tuners), I’m of the opinion that there is no inherent detriment to the consumer if he chooses to buy one complete tune here, and later chooses to buy a different complete tune there. It’s not inherently ‘in his best interest’ to work with only one tuner ‘til irreconcilable differences do you part.’ Of course, circumstantial complexities and relationship dyamics can make it his best interest to do X or do Y, but it’s the people/circumstances directly involved that determine that, and not because working with 2 separate people is inherently bad for the consumer.
That’s my take on it anyway, see it as you will.
Quick thoughts on some of your numbered list:
From #2: Makes sense. I guess this alone precludes the entire discussion of ‘is/can ZT work with both Fonz and CV’.
From #3: Agree to disagree. Like said above, I think we just look at the tuner/consumer relationship through completely different paradigms, and in my view there doesn’t necessarily need to be a ‘hero’, ‘failure’, ‘unhappiness’ etc or any need to justify getting multiple tunes from multiple tuners. It could be that someone simply wants to try some variety in their life, and they don’t have any qualms about paying for two different tunes.
From #4: Like I said above, my big 1st post was talking about a car without issues. Understandable (and wise) that you don’t want to start tuning a car that is not ready for it, however, that’s not what my post was about.
From #5: Again, noble, and wise practice, to be able to turn someone away when you don’t think you’ll be able to benefit them, but that’s not what my post was about.
From #6: I was just giving a general overview of MBC vs N75 implementation in cars. I know there’s multiple types of limp modes, and multiple ways to control boost, I was just saying that with an MBC (standalone) you’re not going to be controlling limp mode via the boost solenoid like you would with the N75. And regarding spool, of course load/throttle etc can all be controlled via the ecu, and you can dial a boost profile around an MBC, again, I was just saying that you don’t control boost via the boost solenoid and PID maps, like you do with the N75. Regarding a tune being locked into one boost setting, I’m a fan of multiple boost profiles and on-the-fly map switching myself. They don’t need to be locked into one boost profile when using and N75.
My last thoughts: ZT does seem like a good guy, and I don’t say ‘ignorant’ with a bad connotation, he just simply hadn’t had these types of experiences before. I wish him the best with you, JHM, whomever ends up taking this on.
Thanks for the reply, and don’t feel obligated to reply to this wall of text. I’ve likely said pretty much what I have to say on the subject ha.
JibberJacka$$, you are waking up my neighbors with all this typing. Please shut up.
Just because you drive your car almost everyday, it doesn’t mean that your four year old build is finished. Saki is rarely wrong when it pertains to the particulars of your build. If you didn’t fix your trans, fuel pump SITUATION, or finish your tune, your FLOP is not complete and is in the same pot with NYCVRsix AND guru’$ excuses.
Jibberfuck, your so ridiculous that you can’t even get a full sentence out without offending this forum…yet you stil reserve your right (blah blah blah) to post on whatever forums you want. No one here really gives a shit about what you have to say, what claim to fame can you honestly stand behind to show some type of credibility? What has your built B5…or self-tuned POS done? You give dragstrip pointers, but haven’t seen a strip in…? Well maybe you’ve never seen a dragstrip.
Go somewhere else and write ebooks…I heard kindle was hiring.
…now cue the ethug…hater…AR sour puss rant that will be at the least 5000 words
When I owned a twin turbo BMW the tunes were very different. They were piggy backs and had several different selectable maps that you could change with the accelerator pedal. The way I see it with having different tunes on different ECUs is like having these maps for my Audi. I can have one ECU with an all out race map and one with a map for the street where the car drives as close and smooth to stock.
I figured Count Vohn’s tune would be my daily driving tune and the J-Fonz tune would be the one to experiment with and draw every last ounce of power without being too concerned with road manners and street driveability.
To me that makes sense but that could be because of my “map” background.
The STE PPD offers the selectable maps that you are looking for:
www.getste.com/store
- Display Boost, AFR, and other performance data in the cluster driver information display LCD
- Built in MAP sensor capable of reading up to 44 PSI!
- Peak Boost Recall: Boost & RPM.
- AFR run replay - Provides a quick snapshot of your AFR data & RPM from your most recent WOT pass.
- Plug and Play Installation: Each unit comes with built in factory connectors and hand built harnesses for a "Plug and Play’ Installation
- (2x) Auxiliary 5v sensor inputs: Can be adapted to display data from various aftermarket sensors such as wideband O2, oil temp, fuel pressure, water/meth flow, etc.
- Automatic Data Logging! - PPD creates a time stamped log with the following data elements every time the driver goes wide open throttle (WOT). The logs can be retrieved at a later date using your computer.
- TPS, RPM, Speed, AFR*, N75 Duty Cyle* Note: Optional external feeds required.
- Programmable Audible Alerts- RPM limit, over boost, etc.
- Performance run monitor: 0-60, F.A.T.S, etc
- Extended capabilities through external add on modules. The following optional add-on module will be available at product launch:
- Plug and Play Micro Shift Warning LED
- Plug and Play integrated N75 electronic boost control provides the following features:
- Complete control over the OEM N75 valve.
- 3 driver definable boost maps (low boost, mid boost, HIGH BOOST)
- Instantly change boost map via menu control stalk (I love this feature!) - RPM Compensation: Eliminates boost tapering (drop off) at high engine RPM)
- Gear-based Mapping: Adjust your boost based on gear (will be added later via firmware update)
Factory connectors are provided to facilitate plug and play installation and is designed to KEEP THE ECU HAPPY! (No check engine light related to disconnecting the N75).
The addition of external modules and upcoming firmware updates will continue to expand the device’s capabilities.
Just go with the CV tune for DD and all out attack. Are there flashloader options for the B5, kind of like the B6/7, albeit credit based. Having said that, I’m a believer in just having one tune that’s daily driveable AND great for the strip.
To paraphrase some of saki’s rants, you’re not going to line up at a red light and say “hey, wait a second, I’m just going to swap ECU’s” just as you don’t drive around on race gas (PT excepted).
Maybe CV can chime in - was the 10.8 JHM RS6r car a civilised daily driven car? I presumed yes because the B6 JHM car was used for baby duty.