Topic: Wester's GMPP tune

[elff]

Just out of curiosity, Is the GMPP tune the same price as the race tune?
$495?

[Critterman]

Goat, Joe, Mike, and Chuckdoc all always post 15-20 more hp and a bit more torque than my Supercharged setup regardless of what stage I am at.  Haven't dyno'd stage III yet, but will tomorrow and I expect to be somewhere between 260-270 at the wheels.

Once again I will get my but kicked on the dyno, but I still give them a run from their money

[chuckdoc]

Thats just cause I am a lousy driver.

[lil goat]

So I always thought that using crank horsepower would be a great way to compare cars that are run on different dynos. Since we have torque management, I assume the rated crank horsepower is pretty close to 260hp on every car.

If you dyno stock, then do mods, then run on the same dyno, you will get an increase of a certain percentage. Then you just add that percentage to the stock 260.

No need to try to calculate drivetrain loss or care about different dynos.

Is there any merit to this simple math that I assume will work?

 Brake horse power is a useless number used to sell cars, the drive train loss on our cars is about 17%, it is not affected by the dyno, the numbers just don't matter, it's the delta (change ) that matters, and the torque curve. The learn down is disabled on both the GMPP and Lyndon's tunes. The numbers only matter to bench racers, I spent $100 to get data to send to Lyndon as he has made a major upgrade, numbers didn't change much from his last tune, the curve did, you will see when Ben posts his numbers, he has the last tune from Lyndon.  The GMMP tune needs some tweaking but now we have the data Lyndon needs to do it, GMPP stock it makes good horse power, torque is not near as good a Lyndon's non GMPP tune.

[elff]

I don't think we are anywhere near 17% drivetrain loss. 

I really want to see Uranium's numbers from today.
on the dyno you were on, we can do a simple calculation and find out the percentage for that dyno.

[lil goat]

If you want that number good for you, tell us how your car drives without a drive train. Why don't you spend the money and go get your own dyno sheet? Typical numbers for stock cars are 225 at the high side  and usually about 215 on the low, that is almost exactly 17%, U-238's was 19% drive train loss today, a totally meaningless number as it will be different on every dyno. I have seen Dynojet numbers in the 240's for stock GXP that is 8%, the average is about 16-17% which is actually less than a lot of cars 20% is a commonly used number, by the way the 17% number works on the NA too, that's where it first came from, drive train loss is about the same. I will say it again the numbers don mean squat, before and after a mod is the only real way to get meaningful numbers. DBG car with just a Magnaflow, was 232 after a tune on the same dyno it was 280, those are meaningful numbers, I was there for both runs he had a 48 HP gain! That is a number worth knowing, today I was 50 hp higher than U-238 that is a meaningful number, Lyndon latest tune did not increase HP a lot, torque went up a little and the torque curve is much flatter, that has meaning.

[elff]

I have my own Dyno Sheet.  Been there done that.  In fact, we tested 4 cars on the same day, at the same Dyno and had similar results which we posted.  Joe then corrected the numbers for Kenny.   Slightly higher results that the dyno you used today, but due to the numbers you posted today, we were able to mathematically equalize everything.
That's when the numbers become important.  To get as close a comparison of apples to apples.  Will it be 100% accurate.  No, but it will be a hell of a lot closer than all of the seat of the pants comments. 

For my calculations, I actually used U-238s drivetrain loss[Almost 19%] from today and applied it to our results. 

It can be summed up pretty easy.

At the current moment,
$495 buys you roughly
11hp and 16tq
On top of the GMPP Tune.

Those are numbers that can help people decide how they want to spend their money.
Is a flatter TQ curve with the above increases worth $495 on top of the GMPP price?

It's a question people will have to answer for themselves.

More detailed discussion over in the following thread
http://kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=2562.new#new

[tazz]

The only problem is that #'s are just that #'s nothing more nothing less.  
Just based off the numbers Unless the person is trying to squeeze every ounce of power most would probably say No.  The problem is that numbers don't really tell you the whole story.  Different Dyno and dyno setup give different #'s as well as different days and condition even after they do some basic factoring.  One should really be looking at the Tq curve and what it looks like when compared to another tune since that is what really gets you going and down the road.   I can actually have a lower Hp and Tq #'s and still be quicker than you period which will win a race.  If I have that given high Tq over a more sustained time than you(FLATTER CURVE) I will for the most part be quicker than you.  Maybe not a higher top speed in which Hp makes the difference there but top speed really doesn't win typical drag races.  I for one would like to see graphs of all four of the Tq & Hp curves far a stock auto GXP vs GMPP auto GXP vs a Wester's tune auto GXP vs a Wester's GMPP tune auto GXP or manuals for all four done on the same dyno the same day.  That in my opinion would give a better overall info to make a informed decision than just numbers.

[LatinVenom]

Elff it really is about 17% drive  line loss and not as high as 19%.
The number is really about 215.8RWHP +/- 2%. There is no way around it, although a lot of people love the inflated numbers.
By the way lil goat the reason DBG is consistent with 13.5 in the 1/4 is because base on math his real RWHP is really 251 RWHP or 3145lbs at 251 RWHP = 13.59 ET. Again this will have a +/- 2% accuracy depending on the true weight of the car with driver and fuel.
Is it not kind of interesting that the numbers you posted on that Dyno for your car were at about 251.9 RWHT.
To this old timer those are the real numbers and the reason his car does not go into high 12's.
He can probably go to 13.3 or 13.2 but never any lower with the tune and mods he has today. That does not mean that Lyndon cannot get more power, but rather a few more logs specially at the track and I am sure he can get additional power for DBG and lower his ET.
By the way Tazz is absolutely correct about Tq specially as he points out if it can be sustain for a longer period of time.

[Imaj]

Is my thought correct in that a tune can only go so far. I mean...getting 50 more hp out of a tune is about the max....Yes? We are dealing with a production car here. Can one expcet to see a 100hp gain from a tune alone?

[lil goat]

I have my own Dyno Sheet.  Been there done that.  In fact, we tested 4 cars on the same day, at the same Dyno and had similar results which we posted.  Joe then corrected the numbers for Kenny.   Slightly higher results that the dyno you used today, but due to the numbers you posted today, we were able to mathematically equalize everything.
That's when the numbers become important.  To get as close a comparison of apples to apples.  Will it be 100% accurate.  No, but it will be a hell of a lot closer than all of the seat of the pants comments. 

For my calculations, I actually used U-238s drivetrain loss[Almost 19%] from today and applied it to our results. 

It can be summed up pretty easy.

At the current moment,
$495 buys you roughly
11hp and 16tq
On top of the GMPP Tune.
Those are numbers that can help people decide how they want to spend their money.
Is a flatter TQ curve with the above increases worth $495 on top of the GMPP price?

It's a question people will have to answer for themselves.

More detailed discussion over in the following thread
http://kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=2562.new#new

You are not looking at the right graphs the Wester's GMPP was 225 on the HP and almost 290 on the torque, I know it's hard to read unless you were there the Westers' GMPP lost HP, it had more torque, so lost 20 hp and gained 30 on the torque compared to the stock GMPP. It is a work in progress. LV you and your math, there are way to many variable's to calculate anything, you would have to have better numbers, HP does not get you down the track torque does. I have not seen ANYONE's that were consistent between 2 dyno's, you are doing math with erroneous numbers. If you take DBG's 1/4 mile numbers an calculate backwards, those will be real based on his skill level and the mods on his car, and the weather and the track, and the traction he gets. If you could figure and predict all this so easily there would be no need for racing. Cars and horse power can not be put in finite terms, period. I believe there was something off on that dyno yesterday, but for comparison purposes between the cars that were there the results were valid. It is also a good baseline for when any of us do more mods, if we go back there we can see the change good or bad, that is what dyno's are for not bench racing.

My last dyno run showed a 287, that was an eddy current dyno with 9% compensation, that would put me at 258 uncompensated and the tune has been vastly improved since then, if you get the new tune you will immediately know what I mean.

I do agree with elff, the GMPP from Lyndon is not ready for prime time, the GMPP made almost as much hp as I did unmodified, but torque was pretty low. Bryan had the Wester's and bought the GMPP, so why not try it. From where I sit the Wester's alone is still the best deal, if you have the GMPP I would not spend $495 to add Wester's yet either. That may change now that Lyndon has some feedback and data. Bryan did tell me he liked the Wester's GMPP better than the stock GMPP, but is it worth $495 on top of whatever you paid for the GMPP? Not yet to me. I will hold off buying the GMPP until some more work is done.

[elff]

Goat

I am in complete agreement with your last paragraph.

[lil goat]

Yes if given the choice it is very clear to me Wester's makes the most HP and torque, and is the cheapest, The GMPP kit does work out cheaper if you do not have access to HP Tuners, but it drives nothing like his latest tune. I have seen everyone who upgraded form the previous Wester's tune rave about the improvement. Not all improvements show on the dyno. They do a steady smooth push on the pedal to WOT, damn sure not the way I drive.

[kennysabarese]

Hrm, I think I wanna go catless, but I don't wanna spend the money on Wester's until his GMPP is ready... what to do what to do...

[Uranium-238]

Buy HPtuners now and learn how to delete the code yourself?

[snaponbob]

Is my thought correct in that a tune can only go so far. I mean...getting 50 more hp out of a tune is about the max....Yes? We are dealing with a production car here. Can one expcet to see a 100hp gain from a tune alone?

With a high flow cat or catless downpipe and low restriction exhaust it is reasonable to expect +/- 285 whp and +/- 325 wtq out of the Wester's tune. Using a 17% loss factor that is about 330hp/380tq at the crank. That is +70hp and +120tq. On a stock LNF those increases will be smaller, but the Wester's tune WILL deliver more than the GMPP tune, stock or modded. Until Lyndon is satisfied that he has an effective and STABLE retune of the GMPP software and he FLAT TELLS ME to go buy the kit, my plans are to stay with the stock map sensors. He is absolutely convinced that there is more to be had with the stock sensors OR the GMPP parts but is not going to dive 100% into that pursuit until his customer race engine season winds down. But it does seem that he has acquired more information from other sources that needs to be "digested", so I am hopeful for 2010 !!!!

[snaponbob]

Hrm, I think I wanna go catless, but I don't wanna spend the money on Wester's until his GMPP is ready... what to do what to do...

Try THIS. E-mail Lyndon and ask him, if AFTER you buy a tune for your current set up, how much will he charge for the GMPP tweak. If it is just a new file for free then get his tune NOW and enjoy the fun.

[DeepBlueGXP]

Elff it really is about 17% drive  line loss and not as high as 19%.
The number is really about 215.8RWHP +/- 2%. There is no way around it, although a lot of people love the inflated numbers.
By the way lil goat the reason DBG is consistent with 13.5 in the 1/4 is because base on math his real RWHP is really 251 RWHP or 3145lbs at 251 RWHP = 13.59 ET. Again this will have a +/- 2% accuracy depending on the true weight of the car with driver and fuel.
Is it not kind of interesting that the numbers you posted on that Dyno for your car were at about 251.9 RWHT.
To this old timer those are the real numbers and the reason his car does not go into high 12's.
He can probably go to 13.3 or 13.2 but never any lower with the tune and mods he has today. That does not mean that Lyndon cannot get more power, but rather a few more logs specially at the track and I am sure he can get additional power for DBG and lower his ET.
By the way Tazz is absolutely correct about Tq specially as he points out if it can be sustain for a longer period of time.

LV, this was done on lousy track conditions and with tires rated 400 (hard rubber, all season) and poor reaction times and high humidity/high temps.  Based on that, you cannot reverse the the forumula and speculate that I have 251RWHP.    I did a 13.4 in Viginia and everyone was having hard time hooking up there.  I just got a hold of some spare rims that once that rubber is worn off I'll put on some DRs and then we'll see what I can do.

You are not looking at the right graphs the Wester's GMPP was 225 on the HP and almost 290 on the torque, I know it's hard to read unless you were there the Westers' GMPP lost HP, it had more torque, so lost 20 hp and gained 30 on the torque compared to the stock GMPP. It is a work in progress. LV you and your math, there are way to many variable's to calculate anything, you would have to have better numbers, HP does not get you down the track torque does. I have not seen ANYONE's that were consistent between 2 dyno's, you are doing math with erroneous numbers. If you take DBG's 1/4 mile numbers an calculate backwards, those will be real based on his skill level and the mods on his car, and the weather and the track, and the traction he gets. If you could figure and predict all this so easily there would be no need for racing. Cars and horse power can not be put in finite terms, period. I believe there was something off on that dyno yesterday, but for comparison purposes between the cars that were there the results were valid. It is also a good baseline for when any of us do more mods, if we go back there we can see the change good or bad, that is what dyno's are for not bench racing.

I agree

[kennysabarese]

Buy HPtuners now and learn how to delete the code yourself?

I have HP Tuners, and can turn off the light but isn't the rear O2 sensor affect how the ECM mixes AFR?

[Uranium-238]

I dunno. Does it?

[lil goat]

Nolanb spoke with Lyndon last week, he does not yet have enough data to make adjustments to the 2007 GMPP, we will do some scans later this week. It would seem the results from the 2008 GMPP he adjusted are very different. Like I have said before the 2007's and 2008's require a different tune. I would love to see someone with the GMPP and a 2008 get the update from Lyndon. I bet it works well.

[kennysabarese]

Someone with an 08 please try this

[elff]

So Goat, Lyndon already took the results of your Dyno and modified the 08 version?

I don't have the money to buy it, but I'd be willing for my car to be a guinea pig at MM6.
We can backup my current tune, load the 08 one, test it out for a while, do some data logging, send the information back to Lyndon and then put my stock tune back on so there is no stealing.  Pure testing and that is all.

[lil goat]

So Goat, Lyndon already took the results of your Dyno and modified the 08 version?

I don't have the money to buy it, but I'd be willing for my car to be a guinea pig at MM6.
We can backup my current tune, load the 08 one, test it out for a while, do some data logging, send the information back to Lyndon and then put my stock tune back on so there is no stealing.  Pure testing and that is all.

My results just showed he needed more data for the 2007, he has a 2008, he did the testing on it, his wife has been driving the Modified GMPP on the 2008 all summer.

[DickW]

I have an 08 with GMPP and will be willing to pay for the tune. I have HP tuner and was waiting to see improvemennt on GMPP tune