Faulty sensor…“Just map it out”
Man, this thread got super interesting.
I get the feeling that a lot of you are not used to having your conclusions challenged (perhaps professionally, but not in this area), especially by someone who’s very data-driven. The burden of proof is a lot higher in engineering than some of you might be accustomed to. Don’t take offense if someone is skeptical at first blush.
I think almost all engineers are skeptics, and I include myself in that statement. And JCViggen, you may just have to accept that you’ll never get the level of proof you want. Isn’t so much of engineering based on making reasonable assumptions based on incomplete information?
Basically, can’t we all just get along? ;D
Europe many people have the jhm tune and many guys have switched over from MRC to Jhm with happy results of better power.
Here are the facts.
Jhm has the fastest tuned cars. You can say over and over that you need to see more cars to prove that but FACT wise this list is a collection of cars all over the world that actually tested there cars. Further the cars that did test and didn’t make the list did include more of the other tuners you listed. The results of those other tuned cars was way slower then the jhm cars. You don’t see more brand X tuned cars on the list because the market has already shown the best is jhm. So your not going to see a wide range of differently tuned cars. People have either switched or they know what works.
In the USA the burden of proof is much greater then over in europe where everyone is sold on dyno sheets that have been prove. To be useless. More lies and bull parts have been sold to the guys in europe based off a dyno sheet then any other.
So the market has shown what’s worked the best (jhm) the performance has shown what’s the best (jhm) until you can shoe proof that jhm isn’t the fastest your argument over more needed data is a wasted argument. Based on actual facts and data jhm is the best performance tune. Your working under well this company might be better or might be. No let’s work off facts first. Then talk speculation
Mattshaver it’s not a matter of being challenged. It’s a matter of challenging something but having a sold argument to back it up. That didn’t happen and we have all seen too many guys like JC get ripped off because they think they need more data or they believe. If your an engineer you work off solid facts. You can’t say you need more data when you actually have data. If your an engineer and you don’t have data you work with the data provided. And that wasn’t what was happening. Thus turbulence.
And lastly this isn’t directed at anyone but I’m not a fan boy I’m someone that did intense testing before I got my tune. I logged Apr giac and a few others. I was told there’s not much difference from many engineers. Turns out they were all wrong and the same people that said you can’t are good power were proven wrong by the jhm tune. The v8 na market has been flooded with bull parts that actually loose power but dumb people bought them. The one company jhm has worked to try and show there products work. They go to the track they have customers that constantly get the same record breaking results as jhm did. Most other company’s are lazy and rip people off with this dyno Jaz.
When. You see jhm customers trying to save someone like JC that’s what it is. Loads of us have been ripped off and bought into the hype of false parts. We have seen what works and we want to share it. There’s always people that think they need more information. Well the company’s that don’t want to prove anything in the real world will give you an over load of information just not proof. So when you see sakimano or euro or even me saying something it’s because we are trying to save people from the mistakes of others.
Do I take it you have no explanation why that RS4 was faster at high speed than a C7 RS6 which traps 120+ mph? I mean, you asked me to show you that it’s faster, which I did, and you’ve ignored that completely since then.
[quote]Here’s what happens when an RS4 with no mods other than JHM exhaust with cats does the same test. Twice.
[/quote]
And at only a 25.5 degrees C lower temp, too. Not even going to bother counting the time gained shifting.
Who’s keeping the nonsense going now? Straws…
[quote]He put the 546 number in his signature on another forum
[/quote]
It’s on rs246.com as well, where you are a member too, so no need to go all the way onto Volvospeed.com really.
[quote]2.4 seconds.
Wow… 546 hp!
Only problem is my RS4 with just an exhaust does it in 2. 4 seconds in the vids I posted above, and that’s with a manual gear change.
[/quote]
In your haste you appear to have typed wildly incorrect numbers. I’ll let you figure it out. That car is running well now, no MILs (funny story actually that rear lambda was literally welded into the main cat, hence somewhat difficult to remove) and certainly faster than that. I have a vid from a few days ago which is roughly 0.3s quicker than yours. Or 10%. And not at -12C either. Even so a C5 boat with a slushbox needs a lot more power to match an RS4 at lower speeds. 0-60 the 540 horsepower won’t really beat a 380 hp B7 either. This is not news.
[quote]Not feeling too confident in jcviggen’s performance acumen.
[/quote]
Is this the “I can’t handle logical arguments so I’ll go for ad hominem instead” phase?
At this point you seem more interested in trying to discredit me than to actually have a sensible discussion. Did I start calling you names? No. You might not have liked my point of view, but you know what they say about opinions. If you don’t like it, make a mental note that I’m an idiot and move on.
Your behavior is becoming rather primitive.
Anyway, not much of a resume, but I mapped this car myself from scratch. It went pretty well with a little GT2871, stock 997TT performance from a silly Volvo. You’ve probably seen it but were only looking for dirt. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To23ObPRYbQ
It seems to have gotten lost in the confusion that I am in complete acceptance of the fact that this cannot realistically be proven one way or the other.
It’s just that there are people here who are convinced that it’s a proven fact that there is no tuner in the world who can map an RS4 as well as JHM can. And as far as I can see there is insufficient evidence, but they’re not having that kind of blasphemy apparently.
Thank you for the sensible note, Mr. Reasonable person!
Do I need to point out the massive irony of you mentioning the burden of proof and then commit the logical fallacy in the next sentence when you shift the burden onto the one questioning the claim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
I guess I just did, sorry.
Great point, but the same guy asking for all of this definitive proof is…
- Letting a mechanic that hasn’t done anything special with a B7 RS4… tweak his ECU
- Staring at videos of gauge clusters and saying they are the fastest he has ever seen
- Trusting companies like MRC that use dyno sheets to sell products
He is asking for all of the proof from JHM, but doesn’t demand it from others. What proof did he have when he chose a guy to tune his RS6 I wonder?
So Engineer of you ;). Maybe there is a tuner that can do it as good. If there is, the community has not been made aware of it and you don’t seem to be suggesting anyone in particular. You’re dying for a “proven fact” and will not submit to an “accepted fact”. It’s good enough for the other enthusiasts here - I’m not saying that that should make it automatically good enough for you but maybe trying to ram your personal logic down everyone’s throat isn’t that great either?
If you just want to try to win an argument by blurring common sense with your own unrealistic criteria, just say so.
So at least you admit it. You are in fact asserting a claim - namely, that there is no realistic way to prove that one tune is faster than another. That’s a sort of a convenient nihilism that perhaps gives you some self-satisfaction while allowing you to argue until you’re blue in the face. Fortunately, most people can see through that and do in fact believe that tunes are measurable.
I’ll tell you one thing is for sure, tuning companies must love potential customers of your persuasion. Since nothing is provable, everything is valuable.
Sorry I thought you were smarter. Apparently not. You seem to miss any real point. From what you’ve posted I guess sadly it’s not surprising. So you don’t address the point you know I’m making you resort to intellectual inferiority and single out the phrases. You still haven’t shown a faster car.
I sorta lol at that too when he mentioned the irony cop out.
Exactly
More people that get it.
In the end I suppose people like JC are willing to loose all credibility to try and win am argument. There’s one born every minute I suppose. In the end the bar is set and the standards have been set and tested. The conversation he keeps going on about it proof but as I said prove jhm isn’t the fastest…bottom line is he can’t so the intellectual submission is to default to asking for a never defined scope of needed information.
Oh well. JCviggen if your car still has issues let us know.
I do think it’s funny that he’s comfortable ignoring the success jhm has had and inferring there is nothing definitive to say they are, as some here believe, best.
Then in the same thread he says he is trusting his car to a tuner who has never tuned an rs4 before lololol…nevermind has he proved his merit.
The one point he kept referring to is the cheap cost of his tune. I guess out of one side of his mouth he’s an engineer demanding the best, but when the rubber meets the road he’s looking for the lowest cost provider.
It’s technically possible but practically difficult. That’s the reality of it.
What everyone here is ignoring is that the metrics for measuring performance in Europe are notably different from the US. There are hardly any dragstrips and no culture of drag racing at all. I have asked several times precisely which “imperical data” has been used to conclude that MRC cars are inherently slower than JHM cars and it seems to be problematic to reproduce.
I am not convinced that an RS4 which does 450 bhp on MRC’s magic dyno would perform noticeably worse in a race against a JHM tuned car if all other mods are similar - and the stock cars performed similarly as well. Maybe it would, and that would settle it. But it’s never been done, so who knows.
Using the same logic as is being used here I could conclude RS4s which were shipped to the US are faster than any other. After all, Saki’s car has the world record for a stock car. What a remarkable coincidence that of the thousands of RS4s sold, the world record is held by the same bloke who maintains the list. There is as much data to “prove” cars sold in the EU are slower than there is to prove that JHM > MRC.
To settle this you could do it a couple of ways.
- Use a 3rd party dyno in a controlled environment and test maps back to back.
- Race 2 cars against each other and swap maps between them.
- Use a large amount of data from drag strips which is sufficient to reach an acceptable margin of error. You’d need a roughly equal amount of cars for each type of tune.
It seems very plausible that JHM has been established as the best tuner by far on your side of the pond but no true comparison with the rest of the world has ever been made. With what I know about ECU tuning, it seems unlikely that a single tuner would find a significantly better way of tuning a car than any of the others who have spent hundreds of hours on the same type of car. (particularly one with a significant following in terms of aftermarket tuning)
There is no such thing as magic. Nor is there a way to keep it a secret. Binary code doesn’t lie.
Because it’s a temporary solution. I’m not going to pay top dollar only to overwrite the map into oblivion in 6 months.
How hard do you think it is to remap throttle body behavior? Not very. It’s worth a bit of money to get it done until I get the car back to Europe. But it’s not worth 750$+. What’s so crazy about that?
Your own car is proof that the stock mapping is absolutely fine for making good power. Code out the silly throttle limitation and it’s a great map. I don’t like the car feeling this dead in the first half of the rev band so I’m willing to pay some money to change that issue. It’ll probably match your car in the 3-8K test after which is decent enough to say the least. As you’ve not so far bought a tune I will go out on a limb and assume that you agree the level of performance is acceptable.
Saki is still CPO, so that is probably the reason he hasn’t been tuned yet, I think.
I also can’t believe how closed minded you are on your idea that[quote] it seems unlikely that a single tuner would find a significantly better way of tuning a car than any of the others
[/quote]
That is like saying everyone in your field is on the same level…and that can’t change. So you are only as good as everyone else, you aren’t any better and can’t be. You can’t be smarter, you can’t put extra effort into your work, your end product will never be better. (Do you realize how retarded that sounds?)
In the domestic world there are probably tens of thousands of tuners, from professionals to basement bobos, but the big names rise to the top because they are better than everyone else. They have the fastest cars and tune the most cars. They are better than everyone else because tuning is way more than “simple coding” mindset you apparently have.
***You’re basically saying everything people said in 2009-10. They said the N/A B6/7 S4 would never do THIS, THAT or the OTHER. They said, “How can JHMs N/A tune be so much better than the rest, you can only pull so much power from an N/A motor?” Do you know what happened? JHM demolished all the other tunes in head to head races, 1/4mile times, etc. Your thinking becomes flawed though when you start using the dyno as an exact measuring stick. I can agree that they have their place as a tool, but they mean nothing when it comes to actual driving and acceleration dynamics in the real world. We have actually seen plenty of cars (similarly modded) dyno the same or better than JHM cars, only to loose an actual race by 4-5 car lengths.
Just recently JHM entered the 2.0T A4 game and like usual, the same mentality exists. So far JHM has easily taken over the spots for top times, they also have customers with less mods making videos against other tuned cars with more modifications with them easily pulling a few cars in a single gear.
You just like to talk… a lot… about nothing, or all of the “what ifs” …typical.
[quote=“euroswagr,post:133,topic:6786”]
It’s not simple coding, and it takes a lot of time. But it is a relatively simple logical process once you know all the ins and outs of a specific car’s ECU software (the part with that doesn’t get rewritten).
Every capable tuner out there can see exactly what JHM has done to their maps if they feel they’re missing a trick somewhere. There’s no way to hide it.
About 2 years ago I was at a large tuner (Porsche, but still) and they quite literally had just about every tune I’ve ever heard of on their computer. You load them into the editing software and it’ll make your life very easy by highlighting (or using a different colour) the bits that are different.
Even my RS6 has a mixed MTM/MRC gearbox map. I had previously bought an MTM gearbox chip and upon examination it had a couple of changes in the “D” program which MRC’s didn’t. He couldn’t tell right away what they did without looking it up so he just asked me which version I wanted. He mashed the maps together in all of 2 seconds. Copy pasting works.
There is absolutely nothing preventing tuners from doing this. Respected tuners who are very dedicated to a particular type of car will be aware of every trick anyone’s ever come up with. Intellectual property doesn’t really apply either. Geographic separation avoids wars from breaking out fortunately.
this is where your ignorance is showing. That’s like saying thoracic surgery is a simple logical process once you know all the ins and outs of a persons internal organs.
You make it sound like you just have to read a couple of books, change the throttle, change the timing, and you’re done.
GIAC and APR change 4 or 5 parameter sets on their RS4 tune for example. These are two of, if not the two largest tuners in the Audi world. They adjust timing, AFR, rev limiter, speed limiter, throttle…and that’s it. When I joked in a thread that this is all that APR changes, a representative from APR scoffed and said ‘WELL WHAT ELSE IS THERE?’.
JHM changes well over 100 parameters in their RS4 tune. I’ve spent some time talking to their calibrator and the changes he makes are astounding. Both from a performance point of view, and from a safety and protection point of view. It took him years to develop the B67 S4 tune (it’s about 7 years old now). He has taken that information and carried it forward and now has a full 5-6 years tuning the Rs4, always adding. Before this, he was busy tuning the fastest B5 S4 (K03 record, K04 record, first B5 with an interior in the 10s etc).
But you’re right…it’s relatively simple. Just need to read a book and you’re fastest. Of course MRC, MTM, APR, GIAC haven’t done so yet. We’re all just waiting for them to do these relatively simple things.
p.s. it says a lot that you’re also advocating tune theft in your post. I don’t think you’ll last long here seeing that.
Are you serious? Where am I advocating anything? I said what actually goes on. End of. It’s as much theft in the legal sense as it is when one F1 team copies another team’s front wing design.
I paid for the MTM chip from their official dealer in the US (which has since closed up shop) and I made sure that the chip I bought was the one that got soldered into my TCU.
And yes, there are a ton of things to change outside of the maps. It doesn’t do you much good to change the timing map if the knock sensors and algorithms put it back where you started. But, again, it’s all out in the open.
I am under no illusions just how complex these ECUs are compared to the one I worked with. It’s a different era and they need to be fooled in a lot more ways with each new generation. But at least I have some experience at it.
Dude you keep changing your mind every other post.
It’s simple and logical…then you talk about the complexity of the ECU.
You are probably a mediocre (insert discipline) engineer who needs his hand slapped by a ruler every other day by the guys that actually know what the fuck is going on. This is only my assumption, but it is based on your inability to take a step back and look at the things you’re saying.
You are jut all over the map to be honest, no pun intended.
Knowing the ECU is only a small part of the equation, I think you’re forgetting the b-e-n-e-f-I-t-s of knowing the power plant a tuner is trying to extract power from. IMHO, this is one of the things that separates the professionals from the hobbyists and the “tweakers” from the calibrators…research, revisions, testing…and RESULTS.
Nice RS4! Gotta love that euro look, as the trunk makes the booty so wide in comparison to NA ones. Any plans to completely convert to TI exterior?
It’s interesting to read a nice argument. However, four last pages are extremely tiring to read and really zero new info provided. It’s just the same thing over and over and over ohh and over again. What I would suggest is to go through a lot of research and you shall find an additional info you’re so desperately saying is missing. No one is going to go through the headache of digging it up and spoon feeding the info that has been covered numerous times here and on other forums over last several years. Take your time and search. You’re welcome to draw your own conclusions upon that, but you cannot seriously discount the info shared in the quarter mile list. The quarter mile list as it is now by itself might not be the perfect example of output measurement, but it’s damn near close. I’ll take it over any pretty dyno sheets comparisons or speedo tests by themselves any time of the day. This is what has been compiled over the years of r&d whether it’s by companies or customers themselves, it is what we have now and it’ll grow as more info is put out there. If you find or have more info to share then by all means please do.
It’s really not the case. Let’s educate you.
I live in a province (in canada) that has a population the same Netherlands (aka the 12th most populated country in Europe) and is larger than any country in Europe. Other than Russia (which is mostly in Asia) Ontario is the size of France, Sweden and Greece combined. We have a grand total of 3 dragstrips.
“Oh but Canada is different to the US where drag racing is far more prevalent”
Sure if you want to try more excuses. Let’s test them.
How about california? That’s 40 million people. Same size as all of Poland or all of Spain. Grand total of…3 dragstrips.
Oops.
‘but california isn’t into cars’
Sure, we’ll what about Michigan? Home of Detroit… The car capital of Earth. They don’t call detroit motor city by accident. 10 million people total population in Michigan . The hands down car craziest place in America…must be dozens of 1/4 mile drag strips right?
Nope. 5. Same as in the UK, which is not much bigger land mass either.
Not to mention the dozens of airstrip rental drag racing events across Europe that pop up every weekend in the summer.
This exists across Europe. Ignorant Europeans like yourself make this mistake a lot though, so don’t feel bad.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re arguing about at this point. Counting drag strips per capita and size? And I thought I was being pedantic.
If we look at the topic at hand, RS4s, and the amount of 1/4 mile results you have from them, how big a percentage is from Europe? Shouldn’t take long to count. What is your explanation for the complete lack of times from Europe on your chart if not cultural/practical differences? Just curious.
When European car magazines road test / performance test a car more often than not there won’t be a 1/4 mile time. That alone indicates a difference in what is used as a performance metric which is recognisable to everyone.
Most of Europe is on the metric system anyway so a quarter mile is a bit difficult for us to imagine. Insert Pulp Fiction reference here.
Some magazines will test 200, 400 and 1000 meter times where the middle one is close to a quarter mile but not quite. And trap speeds, if they are measured, is the speed at the end of the run rather than an average over the last xx feet (don’t remember how many)
A good site compiling performance testing from all German magazines used to be einszweidrei.de but they got legally challenged and had to stop doing that. Still, thanks to the interwebs you can still sieve through the data and see the performance tests http://web.archive.org/web/20120218183321/http://www.einszweidrei.de/
Still, it’s pretty far off topic at this point. I said that your sample size for european tuners is too small to draw a conclusion, and I’ve not seen that contradicted. Whichever unofficial data was not included in the list appears very hard to find on youtube, google, or rs246.com directly.
I’ll post updates to my car as they happen, until then I think we can stop going in circles.