Topic: Anyone up for independant testing of different tunes?

[Gentleman Jack]

OK, who is up for some independent testing!!!  I have a perfect "donor" car- bone stock GXP.

Here is what I propose:  We get four ECMs - one each for the GMPP, DDM, Wester's and Trifecta.  Rent out a dyno for 1/2 day and go to town.  Using the same car, same day same conditions:

Stock run
GMPP run
Wester's run
Trifecta run

Now, I want to be clear here - this is not meant to be a challenge of tuners!!  As we all know, these guys / gals are very good at what they do.  Any of them could make a tune that blows up our engines, but produces otherworldly HP / TQ numbers.  The reason would be to show the different graphs, with all other factors being equal.  This would give people some real world INDEPENDENT data to make a decision one way or the other.  To date, after much searching, I have not seen any testing done like this.  The cost of this endeavor could be paid for by bake sale or other fundraising efforts, or by donations of time / ecm etc.  I know there would be some other variables to take care of, but off the top of my head, this would answer MANY questions.  It would also eliminate the variance in performance of one car to the next.  Research shows up to 20% variation in output from one engine to the next off the same assembly line.  (OK OK that was totally made up to sound good, but there is a % difference, I just don't know what it is from one engine to the next- I call BS on myself.  Sorry)

Anybody have any ideas on how we could streamline this effort or perhaps, you feel this effort to be pointless?  Don't worry, you won't hurt my feelings. 

I am a new owner of a Solstice and have not been this excited at tinkering with my ride since I owned a '78 Pontiac Phoenix! 

Steven

[kwtoxman]

Steven,

Interesting idea. I would say this proposal deserves an independent thread in the tuning forum in general. That way you aren't linking the idea to any tuners specifically. Why don't you post that again there.

I think the reason you haven't seen this is because it is so hard to set up. But that doesn't mean it can't be set up.

FWIW Imaj's tune results show the difference between his wester's race tune and the first time trifecta has been used on the car.

[snaponbob]

Steve, it is my understanding that each computer must be programmed to you car and that this must be done at a dealership. (I forget what the term is.) After that is dealt with, the next little Kappa LNF quirk is that the computer needs some drive time to sort itself out with the new flash. (Example; I have loaded tunes that would barely run for a few moments but after a few drive cycles the car rane great.) Of course, each tune should be written to your car. Lyndon has his own procedure, Vince's is similar but different, and the GMPP tune must be installed at the dealership. The GMPP requires its own sensors, Vince's "ignores" the MAP sensors, and you would have to talk to Lyndon to see if he has a GMPP re-tune ready.

Given the variables in the OS's, you probably have a better shot of doing just three - Stock, Wester's, and Tribeca. The GMPP is pretty predictably going to produce what has already been posted on three different forums.

Just some thought. BTW, why swap ECMs when you can use HPT for Wester's and Tribeca has their own proprietary cable/box assembly.

[Sly Bob]

Great idea but one that may be difficult to pull off but certainly worth a shot.

I have split this from the other thread as it deserves a thread of it's own and doesn't really belong in a thread discussing the Trifecta tune.

The results would be interesting although others will no doubt chime in regarding the potential pitfalls that may arise with this scenario.

[spicy3480]

This is a very good idea, but it will be really hard to put this together...good luck!  I am curious to see the graphs and results.

[Kelu]

Tierra del Sol that's a great way comparing numbers on the dyno but we already know, GMPP is the weakest, Westers is more powerfull and reliable as has been proven so many months in many cars, Trifecta is doing more numbers even than Westers'. Both Westers and Trifecta are having nice graphs. The only thing which is discutable about Trifecta is might not be reliable (as some guys expressed) which I personally don't agree. So your test is nice but we already know many aspects. The general idea is we want to see more cars tuned by Trifecta and if it is possible how they are acting over time.

Can someone correct me:
Read the stock in car ECU with HPT and then write the other new ECUs with the info read?

[CJ Krause]

 kind of funny on being unreliable. been running 13 months on a tune. never had one issue. yepper unreliable
and mine was the very first ever HHR 2.2 LS to be tuned and no one else has broke the code on the 05 balt 2.2 or the 06 HHR 2.2. so if he is still the only one to ever tune one i am scratching my head as to why the others havent

so to me i dont understand this unreliable comment.  mine was first and same tune cept some minor tweaks for power improvements and never one problem. so i would say the tunes are very reliable from trifecta
to be honest Vince has more experience tuning GMs since that 98 % of what all he does

kidding aside a lnf and an lnj are pretty much the same no matter what car they are on. there are some minor differences because of the cars but still basically and mechanically the same

to do this right you would need to dyno tune that particular car that day w all the tunes on 4 new stock ecms.
this is not a cheap venture by no means and wondering if you are expecting all to do it for free.

to me the more tunes Vince does will prove the avg gain in WHP and WTQ and those numbers will not lie especially if they are dyno #s

[snaponbob]

I guess I need to step in as a Moderator. Hopefully, people will understand that what I am about to say is NOT directed at anybody, but only in general.

Off handed assessments as to what a tune may or may not do, without any back up data, is simply conjecture. And that does not help anything. Even before the Trifecta issue hit this site, there have been a lot of huffing and puffing about all sorts of things (and I am guilty of a bit of that in the past - but TOO much) based on nothing more substantial than impressions and opinions. FACTS rule. Let's try to keep the conjecture to a minimum. Vince will tune HIS way, Lyndon will tune HIS way, GM has already produced their product, BTF, GMR, BSR, and others have theirs. It may be better to ask about how things DO work instead of postulating how they may not.

That's it. Semi rant mode "off".

[Uranium-238]

I think the Trifecta tune should be fine, as far as reliability is concerned. However, they're the new players in the Kappa world, so it's understandable for people to be concerned about reliability. It's not that their product has a problem, it's just that to us it hasn't been around long enough for everyone to feel warm and fuzzy about it. In time, the facts will prove themselves.

[Gentleman Jack]

Wow, that got going fast.   Thanks for moving this to its own discussion, I should have known better.  No disrespect was meant to Trifecta for stepping in on that discussion.

To recap some of the questions as to why the set up is the way it is:

As stated, the cars need to learn the tune.  By having 3 or 4 ECMs all tuned to one car, you can instantly swap out the ECM, eliminating the learning curve ( i think).  Here's how it would go:  Get tune "A"- drive for a few hundred miles (laughing all the way- ha ha ha ha ha)
Get tune "B" - repeat, but with different ECM
Get tune "C" and a new set of tires (do I really have to explain why?)

If my understanding is correct, you would then be able to take the car to the test shop, start with the stock tune on ECM1, test.  Replace ECM1 with ECM2 (already driven to learn) and test.

I am not sure who it was that asked if I was looking for all this for free, you obviously missed my bake sale idea.

I realize a WHOLE BUNCH of information is out there.  The problem is as has already been stated, Apples and Oranges.  That's why using the same car, same shop etc has so much value.  And to top it off, I would just as soon white out all the actual numbers off the graph since they are meaningless (ok, not completely) and just confuse the issue.  Compare the graphs side by side by side (by side...) and pick which one you like the best for your car!  The same procedure could be done with common mods to see how different tunes impact different mods (or vice versa)

I realize this isn't a cheap venture, and can't subsidize it on my own.  BUT- it is science!  Until this test or similar testing is done away from the tuning company garage, we will all remain skeptical of whatever info is posted.  That doesn't mean we don't trust the tuners, or love the products!  Independent research is the way to go, and it just may make sense!

I realize this will not please everyone, so I say again, please feel free to post both pros and cons to this.  Just be sure to follow the forum guidelines, we don't want any moderators having to step in again!  (PS- Thank you for that!)

Steven

[kennysabarese]

I think when you unplug the ECM it will forget what it's learned.

[rich71]

things not all being equal on dyno to dyno, i agree, its just a tool to document increase from a stock run. That said, alot, if not all the issue regarding our newest tune is the max boost. We are all boostaholics and we get caught up in that number vs everything else going on. Honestly, i have been indoctrinated by the cult of kappa which the 1st commandment(maybe 2nd) is do not overboost the turbo. Then after the 3rd glass of koolaid, i was conditioned, that sustained boost of 25(i even forget at this point i am so confused) pounds is a no no...engineers, and turbo techies, on this side of OZ stated that increasing sustained boost to these levels up to 30 isn't safe and/or good to the longevity of the turbo. Have these turbos on the lnf really been in the real world long enough to really know what we are doing to them???  those numbers have been counter intuitive to everything i have learned on these forums these past few years.  i rely on these forums for guidance.....and that is what it really comes down to, offering guidance. no absolutes... I am a big boy and can wrench with anyone, electronics, forget about it. Leave that to the masters. this new tune exposed my bias, whether good or bad, and has forced me to re-opn my eyes in fairness....I moved on to westers, but i still love my BSR too and would still recommend it to a stocky... anyway, i just wanted to share what stumbling blocks are out there for me and why...

[sol_man]

I would love to see the graphs on this too.  Keep me posted!

[snaponbob]

I think when you unplug the ECM it will forget what it's learned.

Correct. Additional comment on turbo life conjecture - it is just that. Even the "experts" don't know. In over three years worth of reading on three forums, I recall only ONE case of a turbo "failure" (which may have been a foreign object that was ingested by the engine). Frankly I think it is fair to assume that GM built in a lot of "reserve" built into the turbo as it has to have an expected life span of WELL over 100K miles. If I change my tune source I will live with what happens, and I think as far as the turbo is concerned I expect NOTHING to happen. If we ran up our turbos to insane EXTeNDED boost levels as the diesel pick up guys do I would expect failures like they have. But we don't so the likelihood is much lower. Bottom line, we have to wait and see if these things start popping. 

[Critterman]

Sounds to me (remember I don't have a dog in this fight) this would be a great project to be worked out and done at a national meet.  Get the vendors in one spot, book a dyno.  Do drawing for the donor car, and make it happen.  It would have to be closed to the vendor and the lucky winner, otherwize it would just be a zoo.

[lil goat]

I think the comparison idea is great, with at least one caveat, like Bob said our cars need to learn at a minimum 100 miles. G0-N Def and I tried the HP Tuners change the tune and re dyno thing long ago, DeepblueGXP was there, it didn't work well at all. On top of the learning thing there is the problem of heatsoak. You absolutely can not compare runs on different cars on different dyno's on different days. The best you can do is eliminate as many of the variables as you can. Use the same car on the same dyno with different tunes is the best you can do, unless you can run out and drive 100 miles between runs this won't be on the same day. Here is what I think would work.

1) Dyno car with no tune, establish baseline.
2) Install tune, which ever one you choose. Drive the car at least 100 miles, more would be better. Dyno car.
3) Install different tune, again drive car, dyno car.
4) Just keep doing the same thing with as many tunes as you like and can afford.

Unless you find a dyno shop willing to play along this is going to get expensive at roughly $100 for every dyno run. The results would at least be comparable, this is a good time of year to do this. Temps are down as well as humidity so the runs should be comparable.

Guys remember, I live on the East Coast, there are far more than one way to get to Chicago if you get my meaning. You can get a good tune from many places, it depends on how you drive and what you want to do with the tune as to which might be best. Please get over the whole numbers thing until the above procedure is followed you just can't compare them. You can look at the hp and tq curves and you can compare them, you can look at AFR numbers they should not vary much between different dyno's and there is a ton of info in the AFR numbers.

[kennysabarese]

I think you might have an easier time with 4 cars with no mods, same dyno different tunes.

[Gentleman Jack]

Alright, lets recap:

Swapping ECM still requires relearn, so my first theory is somewhat flawed.  additional input says that same car, couple hundred mile drive same weather = good results.  Good thing for me I live in San Diego, where it's always 72 and sunny

What are we really looking at for costs?

4 ECM's X $150 = 600.00  ( I already have the stock one, so we save 150.00 right there!)
3 Tunes X 400.00 = 1200.00 (bake sale?)
Dyno hours= 2 hours per tune? X 4 = 800.00

The gas to drive all those smile filled miles - (1000 miles @ 20mpg = 50 gallons * 3.12 = 150.00 roughly)

 Total cost= $2,750.00  Truly not a bad investment for the info that gets created.  They spend that in .05 seconds on Viagra research.  (was that over the line? )

NOTE:  I am not looking for anything for free for myself!  If my car is used for the testing, I will return all tunes, donated items, fundraising paid for items can be raffled off, sold to highest bidder with proceeds donated to charity, whatever!  I will buy the tune I like the best when the test is done.  I just want the information.

SO, that's out of the way, phew...

Now, is this really doable and how do we raise the money?  Would the tuners be willing to donate a tune that gets returned to them after testing?  That is a normal occurrence.  GM donates a car to Car and Driver to test and flog, then the return it, maybe that can be worked out here?  That would take a MAJOR cut from the cost.  Can we raise money via auction?  Clean out your garage / closet / house of unwanted items, put them up for bid etc.

Do we have any vendors/sponsors that are NON TUNING companies that may let us borrow a dyno here and there?  or a reduced rate anyhow?

I think this is realistic, and from the response on here, I am not alone.  Do we spread this out to other forum sites as well?  If we had 1000 people interested, the buy in is only 30.00.  Consider it your raffle ticket with the prize to be awarded one of the 3 tunes used in testing!

Hey wait - that could actually work...   What do you think?

[Gentleman Jack]

One more thing to add - I was researching the Learning behavior a bit more.  Here is what I gathered:

Two types of learning- long term and short term.  Long term takes a good 100 miles plus.  Short term, 3 or 4 starts stops cool downs..)  When removing the ECM or disconnecting the battery, the only loss is the short term learn (fuel grade, driving habits) not the long term learn, which is what causes the non-function on the first key cycle of some tunes / re-tunes.

If this is correct, every tune would be playing the same field, meaning not having learned the short term info, but would be equal, having already been driven enough to learn the long term info.  And by run 3, if the shop would allow shut down and cool of period, they would be at 95% or better of the short term learn.

That is my understanding of it. 

SO, how do we get it done?  I think vendors would be willing to donate a tuned ECM for short term use (testing only) if they were provided with the data that was collected.  Heck, they pay big bucks for independent testing...  They would only have to donate an ECM and tune that they would then get back and be able to sell (maybe to ME!)


Steven

[shabby]

our cars need to learn at a minimum 100 miles.

This really isnt necessary, plus its such a waste of time to drive around and then re-dyno that i can't even imagine anyone even doing this. Doing more runs on the dyno is about as much as i would do.
From my first wot run after a flash to another wot run a month later there was very little difference in the logs if any at all.

[tazz]

Depending on where and when we decide to this I might be up for it.  I have a 07 GXP auto that just has a GMPP tune with K&N filter.  My wastage mod could be undone as well as the boost solenoid by pass in advance to give a good base line run of just the GMPP tune with K&N filter.  Depending on the price of a tune "hint maybe a decent discount" Id be willing to donate my second ECM or the ECM with my GMPP tune and have the Trifecta or Wester's tune put on either ECM.  I don't have HP tuners and really not looking to purchase HP tuners so Id really perfer to have 2 tunes on one ECM that could just be changed on the fly as with the Trifecta tune.  Ive actually done ECM swap on another vehicle before and just to minimize problems I tend just to run one or the other almost exclusively for most of the year unless I have to take it into the dealer then I swap them out but and with the GMPP tune it's covered so no need to do that one ECM 2 tune one being stealth and you be good to go.
Still out on the fence as to which tune I would get but one I would need my spare ECM the other I wouldn't.  If I get the tune that could be put on one ECM I would be willing donate that ECM for the price of a tune or use of a tune and the details could be worked out.   

[Gentleman Jack]

I would be willing donate that ECM

Tazz,

Ok, here we go!  We just dropped our cost another 150.00!  Anybody else have a spare ECM to donate? (and obviously get back)?  I don't know how all the tuning issues would be worked out, but the ball is rolling.  Anybody else got anything?

Also- does anybody have a relationship with any of the tuners that might be able to key them in to this thread to see if they might be interested in helping out?  If a PM is prefered, that will work.

Tazz - pm sent for off topic item.

Steven

[Dave@DDMworks]

After some of our recent testing and tuning, and seeing some other dyno charts, I am sure we would be happy to offer one of our LNF tunes for this kind of testing. Although it should be decided in advance, what we are tuning for, max pressure, max power, max torque, max power under the curve, max torque under the curve, etc. Let me know!

Dave
www.DDMWorks.com

[snaponbob]

Uh oh. Tuner's pandora's box.

[Gentleman Jack]

Although it should be decided in advance, what we are tuning for, max pressure, max power, max torque, max power under the curve, max torque under the curve, etc.

AN EXPERT!  Dave, welcome to the thread!  My apologies for leaving DDM out of the original list - it was out of ignorance, not mal-intent I promise!

You bring up a very intersting question- what are we testing for exactly?  My gut says - I want the best!  Unfortunately, I ate some beans tonight, so my gut has questionable judgement.

Personally, I am very rarely going to be going over 100 mph, so top end to me is not the goal.  I also will not be doing much drag racing.  I would want a tune that provides me as much low end torque as possible without giving up passing gear on the freeway.  I tend to shift my automatic myself, as much as the computer will let me and love the feeling of being pushed back in my seat at 30 mph (say, merging on the freeway or exiting a tight turn)

There are many of you out there that race - autoX, drag race, mountain climbing, whatever... I would love to join you, but....  (another time)  Your tune would be specific to your needs as a racer and therefor may not meet the goals of this experiment.  

I guess what I am getting at here is, the test should be (IMhumbleO) mostly about driveability on a day to day basis.  Low end punch, early onset boost - power where it is most usable everyday.

Any thoughts?

Steven

PS- One down!  Three to go!

Steven