gen7 tuning gurus please step inside...
- Thread starter ski_dwn_it
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
- Status
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
Norb....yeah I agree a turbo on there would be a sweet addition
Just not sure I want to get that crazy...I think a new chassis would be in order with that addition (read 1/2back the car). 
Blownvette - you are a jackoff, of the first degree.
(sorry mods if I broke a rule with that comment, but how is this pertinent to the conversation?).
Just not sure I want to get that crazy...I think a new chassis would be in order with that addition (read 1/2back the car). Blownvette - you are a jackoff, of the first degree.
(sorry mods if I broke a rule with that comment, but how is this pertinent to the conversation?).
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
Norbs...
I should also add, forgot to with the fending off of the trolls, that I went out again this weekend.
The car ran again 10.5s, and the track is about .2sec slower than our normal track. My buddy races with me there at Quaker, then runs Pittsburgh with a near exact setup and gains .2sec and 3 mph at pittsburgh (which is representative) of most of the tracks we hit.
The DA was 1800-2500 through the day and I did gain over last week with some leaning out of the fuel. It seems to like a setting of 13.44 A:F with 37* of total timing.
I gage my gains/losses by calculating the last interval of the strip. Basically 1/4 mile ET minus 1/8 mile ET = Delta
A lower Delta is what I shoot for. This eliminates variations that happen with wheel spin and seems to work well.
As the day went on the track started to get worse and worse. Eventually I called it quites, but got in 9 passes total.
What I noticed is the DFI nails the fuel VERY well. I started at 12.9 from the weekend before, and it was dead nuts on even with the 500 or so ft DA change. Then with each minor adjustment to fuel, it still was within a 5% correction range.
I think its time to hit a dyno to fine tune each interval and get max juice from all ranges. At the track is makes it difficult to pin down individual RPM ranges.
Any suggestions there? The system is very consistant. A few of the runs I ran I did not make changes and the car ran within a hundreth or so run to run.
MAN THAT IS WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR WITH THE BRACKET RACING>
I also wanted to give myself a pat on the back for some EXCEPTIONAL lights. Too bad it wasn't a race day. All my lights were from .502 => .515 Could have been in the $$ if it was a race day.
Anyways thanks for the help. DFI has my vote for ease of use. Its really quite simple and I thank Norbs and others for helping me get over the "Starting Jitters" Its like getting into a Cold pool, you just have to jump in and then its not too bad.
Again thanks..
I should also add, forgot to with the fending off of the trolls, that I went out again this weekend.
The car ran again 10.5s, and the track is about .2sec slower than our normal track. My buddy races with me there at Quaker, then runs Pittsburgh with a near exact setup and gains .2sec and 3 mph at pittsburgh (which is representative) of most of the tracks we hit.
The DA was 1800-2500 through the day and I did gain over last week with some leaning out of the fuel. It seems to like a setting of 13.44 A:F with 37* of total timing.
I gage my gains/losses by calculating the last interval of the strip. Basically 1/4 mile ET minus 1/8 mile ET = Delta
A lower Delta is what I shoot for. This eliminates variations that happen with wheel spin and seems to work well.
As the day went on the track started to get worse and worse. Eventually I called it quites, but got in 9 passes total.
What I noticed is the DFI nails the fuel VERY well. I started at 12.9 from the weekend before, and it was dead nuts on even with the 500 or so ft DA change. Then with each minor adjustment to fuel, it still was within a 5% correction range.
I think its time to hit a dyno to fine tune each interval and get max juice from all ranges. At the track is makes it difficult to pin down individual RPM ranges.
Any suggestions there? The system is very consistant. A few of the runs I ran I did not make changes and the car ran within a hundreth or so run to run.
MAN THAT IS WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR WITH THE BRACKET RACING>
I also wanted to give myself a pat on the back for some EXCEPTIONAL lights. Too bad it wasn't a race day. All my lights were from .502 => .515 Could have been in the $$ if it was a race day. Anyways thanks for the help. DFI has my vote for ease of use. Its really quite simple and I thank Norbs and others for helping me get over the "Starting Jitters" Its like getting into a Cold pool, you just have to jump in and then its not too bad.
Again thanks..
Originally posted by ski_dwn_it
Blownvette - you are a jackoff, of the first degree.
(sorry mods if I broke a rule with that comment, but how is this pertinent to the conversation?).
Since you asked the question, here's the answer.
You were the one that brought up the stock ecm, and even mentioned your ability to tune it, and the problems the stocker has. Here are your own words, about that matter.
It seems only fitting that folks know all about your talents, and your knownledge of the stock ecm and it's alledged problems, since you mentioned them.
******
Guys.
The car runs good for the most part - I am very rehersed in tuning stock ECMs - so that experience has helped.
******
I was expecting that my WOT would in the 101kpa range....that is were they were in the stock ECM. ????
******
The stock computer served me pretty well till I got this new cam then it went haywire. Hence the DFI.
******
Thanks for bearing with me, but stock ECM did not create these "good" problems I am now struggling with. lol.
IMO, you have no room to call anyone any names.
- Joined
- May 26, 2001
- Messages
- 9,208
What am I missing here???
Blownvette and Bruce, I am missing something here?
Until you both posted, I only see an exchange of info between 2 people. Stay out of this thread until you can explain to me, privately, what and why your reasons are for posting off topic here?
Blownvette and Bruce, I am missing something here?
Until you both posted, I only see an exchange of info between 2 people. Stay out of this thread until you can explain to me, privately, what and why your reasons are for posting off topic here?
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
It also seems only fitting that you should add to your comments that I have tuned nearly every fast car there is on the vetteforum (stock ECMs). Cars that run anywhere from 10.0s to low 11s in full weight cars, through muffs, naturally aspirated and also that we are NOW running a full 1sec quicker on the same injectors (you said 2 years ago were going to melt down) and through the same MAF that you said were both maxed out on the 406 we ran.
Talk about what you know and not what you think you know, and going fast is NOT something you have a clue about - your ETs show that. 13sec in a turbo car is nothing to write home about.
-----------------------------
Thanks NIck. And I do appologize for the comment (not here to argue with people I could careless about), just get sick of the same few guys that follow me around trying to make me look bad. Makes me feel feel special though. 
Norbs and DFI guy.,.I do appreciate your help and comments you have shared with me. The DFI system has been a pleasure to work with - it definately has the flexability to cover the needs that I had, RPMs >6k through the entire run. I have been able to fine tune my tables to cover every range I will encounter.
Thanks for getting me through the first baby steps and speeding up the DFI familiarization process.
The MAP readings were again verified to be a direct result of crappy BP at the track. The DA meter was reporting BP in the mid to high 26 range NOT the best of air, hence the MAP readings being less at WOT. Most of the tracks we hit are in the high 28s to low 30s.....I plan to race again at PRP, and will report what I run here and what the MAP readings are.
and also that we are NOW running a full 1sec quicker on the same injectors (you said 2 years ago were going to melt down) and through the same MAF that you said were both maxed out on the 406 we ran. Talk about what you know and not what you think you know, and going fast is NOT something you have a clue about - your ETs show that. 13sec in a turbo car is nothing to write home about.
-----------------------------
Thanks NIck. And I do appologize for the comment (not here to argue with people I could careless about), just get sick of the same few guys that follow me around trying to make me look bad.
Makes me feel feel special though. Norbs and DFI guy.,.I do appreciate your help and comments you have shared with me. The DFI system has been a pleasure to work with - it definately has the flexability to cover the needs that I had, RPMs >6k through the entire run. I have been able to fine tune my tables to cover every range I will encounter.
Thanks for getting me through the first baby steps and speeding up the DFI familiarization process.
The MAP readings were again verified to be a direct result of crappy BP at the track. The DA meter was reporting BP in the mid to high 26 range
NOT the best of air, hence the MAP readings being less at WOT. Most of the tracks we hit are in the high 28s to low 30s.....I plan to race again at PRP, and will report what I run here and what the MAP readings are.Originally posted by ski_dwn_it
It also seems only fitting that you should add to your comments that I have tuned nearly every fast car there is on the vetteforum (stock ECMs). Cars that run anywhere from 10.0s to low 11s in full weight cars, through muffs, naturally aspirated
Talk about what you know and not what you think you know, and going fast is NOT something you have a clue about - your ETs show that. 13sec in a turbo car is nothing to write home about.
.
Since Nick's taking his time to the off list reply.
I'll just say, post some links to support your claims, that I said *(you said 2 years ago were going to melt down)*, or admit you're lying.
And link to where I said or infered pegging the maf would cause a *Meltdown*, or again admit you're lying.
Please remember now, your again provoking this, with your lies.
All I did previously was answer a question of your's, and now your attacking me for no reason. Remember, you were asking the question.
BTW, some folks don't want to cage their cars. BTW, when's the last time you took your vette on a 800+ mile road trip, without using a trailer?.
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
Bruce, your not a very good reader either....read what I wrote again....I did not say the MAF was going to melt down, I said injectors.
As nick had mentioned, a few of us were discussing the DFI system and until you guys showed up is a decent discussion. Now it has regressed to arguing - big surprise.
I did not come here to get into a pissing match with you over stuff that is clearly working for me, and not so much for you. If you want to keep your car slow, that is fine...its your car - but don't make excuses. And cages are only required for quicker than 11.4 or 11.99 depending the track. Just don't tell those of us that are doing well we do not know what we are doing. And since you asked, this past weekend I took the car to a old college friends house that was 200 miles away - and it ran like a champ - on 92 octane. 15mph in a 600+ hp motor is not too bad, and a few times I was playing with the go peddle.
At the end of the day you and blown were just trying to stir up trouble - don't lie and say you weren't - its pretty obvious.
As nick had mentioned, a few of us were discussing the DFI system and until you guys showed up is a decent discussion. Now it has regressed to arguing - big surprise.
I did not come here to get into a pissing match with you over stuff that is clearly working for me, and not so much for you. If you want to keep your car slow, that is fine...its your car - but don't make excuses. And cages are only required for quicker than 11.4 or 11.99 depending the track. Just don't tell those of us that are doing well we do not know what we are doing. And since you asked, this past weekend I took the car to a old college friends house that was 200 miles away - and it ran like a champ - on 92 octane. 15mph in a 600+ hp motor is not too bad, and a few times I was playing with the go peddle.
At the end of the day you and blown were just trying to stir up trouble - don't lie and say you weren't - its pretty obvious.
Originally posted by ski_dwn_it
Bruce, your not a very good reader either....read what I wrote again....I did not say the MAF was going to melt down, I said injectors.
As nick had mentioned, a few of us were discussing the DFI system and until you guys showed up is a decent discussion. Now it has regressed to arguing - big surprise.
I did not come here to get into a pissing match with you over stuff that is clearly working for me, and not so much for you. If you want to keep your car slow, that is fine...its your car - but don't make excuses. And cages are only required for quicker than 11.4 or 11.99 depending the track. Just don't tell those of us that are doing well we do not know what we are doing. And since you asked, this past weekend I took the car to a old college friends house that was 200 miles away - and it ran like a champ - on 92 octane. 15mph in a 600+ hp motor is not too bad, and a few times I was playing with the go peddle.
At the end of the day you and blown were just trying to stir up trouble - don't lie and say you weren't - its pretty obvious.
You asked a question, I answered it. You've gone to making an issue out of it.
LOL, your assumptions, just make you look more and more foolish.
Show me where I said MAF doesn't work, again, you're the one making up nonsense as you go along. BTW, while you ranting about going 10s with a MAF, there's been a TR that's done 9s.
15MPH in a 600+HP car????????
Talk about a slow ride.
200 miles at 15 MPH, LOL... Or did you, again, get confused?.
You're the one making the claims about how well you know the stock ecms, and the link provided proves otherwise.
Like I said, I don't want to cage my car, period. You opinion of my actions is just nonsensical.
Just because you've taken to lieing, doesn't mean others do. I just posted a neutral response, and YOU took to make an issue out of it. Not to mention it was YOU that took to namecalling, or are you in denile about that too?. I was just reading thur the post when your namecalling caught my eye. Again, it was you that was looking for an arguement. You could have been civil, but took to the childish tactic of being slanderous.
BTW, got any links to support your claims, about what you allege that I've said?.
Maybe to you, but not everyone thinks like you.
A simple apology, from the wrong doer would end it.
All I did was answer a question of his, and he wanted to start lying about what I've allegedly said, and bringing up matters not even remotely connected to the original posting. Maybe you don't care about your credibility, or take offense to being wronged, but that's just YOUR opinion. If someone is going to lie, or make false allegations, I reserve the right to respond, at every occasion.
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
Bruce your right and I am wrong.....happy...now go fill kid's minds, that listen to you, with whatever you want. I could care less. Just stay out of my posts,, like I do yours .....easy enough?
Norbs - Just an FYI - I made a few quick passes tonight and the Kpa was in the 101 range - here in some better air..as expected.
I am planning on hooking the fans up to the DFI sometime in the near future. I have it on a manual switch - and am going to start looking at the diagrams to get started. I would like to have the main fan and aux fan on at the same time - I also would like to have the fans either on all the time at the track, or off all the time at WOT, which is why I have them on a switch, I have noticed that if they kick on going down the track, it can waiver the ETs by a hundredth or so...so for more consistancy I just keep it on all the time.
Norbs - Just an FYI - I made a few quick passes tonight and the Kpa was in the 101 range - here in some better air..as expected.
I am planning on hooking the fans up to the DFI sometime in the near future. I have it on a manual switch - and am going to start looking at the diagrams to get started. I would like to have the main fan and aux fan on at the same time - I also would like to have the fans either on all the time at the track, or off all the time at WOT, which is why I have them on a switch, I have noticed that if they kick on going down the track, it can waiver the ETs by a hundredth or so...so for more consistancy I just keep it on all the time.
WTF is wrong with some people... a guy asks for help on a specific topic and morons insist on spouting off about anything under the sun.
Anyway... Fan outputs are low side switches meant to control the fan(s) via a relay. Your DFI will automatically shut both fans off at WOT (TPS% > 80) without any intervention on your part. You can also program it to turn fan #1 off when the second one comes on, or set it to tie fan #1 to your AC request input line. Fan #2 uses the Shift Light output so you can only use 2 fans if you aren't using the shift light function.
Glad to hear your MAP readings are figured out. Did your times pick up in the better air? How much tweaking did you have to do to it at the higher MAP levels?
Anyway... Fan outputs are low side switches meant to control the fan(s) via a relay. Your DFI will automatically shut both fans off at WOT (TPS% > 80) without any intervention on your part. You can also program it to turn fan #1 off when the second one comes on, or set it to tie fan #1 to your AC request input line. Fan #2 uses the Shift Light output so you can only use 2 fans if you aren't using the shift light function.
Glad to hear your MAP readings are figured out. Did your times pick up in the better air? How much tweaking did you have to do to it at the higher MAP levels?
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
ADFIguy...
Thanks for the info...
I am no electrical guru, so you mean low side being they simply supply enough juice to kick the relay over to turn the fans on right?
If that is accurate, I should be able to simply tigh into my relays that are currently there to turn on and off the fans.
Good news on the fans at WOT, figured there would be some creature comfort like that to disable at WOT. Just been so damn busy with everything else that I have not had time to research out the details.
Again this info - gets me a little jumpstart to it all.
------------
Your question about the KPA/Air. Unfortunately the last two times, and only times I have run with the DFI system has been at Quaker City, OH. The air at both races was around 2000-3000DA, last time in the 2800DA range. With a BP of around mid 26s, pretty poor.
We race many different tracks throughout the year, and since Quaker has T&Ts that you get about 10 runs in at, I have been focused on going there to get this thing dialed in. But it has been our experience that Quaker is about .2sec slower (independant) of the weather, and about 2-3MPH slower than the other tracks. Talking with a few of the locals there this past weekend, they claimed that the last portion of the track is actually uphill. This theory was confirmed when 2weekends ago I raced with a buddy that ran 10.5s in nearly the same setup as me, went back to Pittsburgh Raceway and did nothing to the car except fill it with more gas, and ran 10.3s there, in nearly the same DA weather.
My kPA testing to get the 101 was done around my home with some quick bursts- in some cooler weather than I had been previously racing in. So there were no timeslips associated with them, but antisipate the car should run 10.4s to 10.3s in the heat at PRP, which is exactly where I want it to run at in the heat. When the cooler weather comes along in the fall it usually picks up about .2-.3 sec from the summer weather. So I am hoping to be in the 10.teens to 10.ohhs range. And MAYBE if all the stars align perfectly - with a trip to New Jerseys mineshaft air in the fall - possible a 9s pass.
For what the car is, power everything, full weight (actually heavier than stock with all the safety stuff, ect) I am VERY pleased with the results I have been getting out of it. Bottom 10s is probably where I will stop tweaking it and then just get serious about bracket racing. I usually go several rounds with it at - and then will just work on getting it more consistant- which it already is pretty deadly - and works real well. The IRS (independant rear is a big power hog, with all the u-joints and angles) so if I get bored with bottom 10s, I will put a solid axle in it and it should have no problem shaving some more ET.
Again thanks for your help.
Thanks for the info...
I am no electrical guru, so you mean low side being they simply supply enough juice to kick the relay over to turn the fans on right?
If that is accurate, I should be able to simply tigh into my relays that are currently there to turn on and off the fans.
Good news on the fans at WOT, figured there would be some creature comfort like that to disable at WOT. Just been so damn busy with everything else that I have not had time to research out the details.
Again this info - gets me a little jumpstart to it all.
------------
Your question about the KPA/Air. Unfortunately the last two times, and only times I have run with the DFI system has been at Quaker City, OH. The air at both races was around 2000-3000DA, last time in the 2800DA range. With a BP of around mid 26s, pretty poor.
We race many different tracks throughout the year, and since Quaker has T&Ts that you get about 10 runs in at, I have been focused on going there to get this thing dialed in. But it has been our experience that Quaker is about .2sec slower (independant) of the weather, and about 2-3MPH slower than the other tracks. Talking with a few of the locals there this past weekend, they claimed that the last portion of the track is actually uphill.
This theory was confirmed when 2weekends ago I raced with a buddy that ran 10.5s in nearly the same setup as me, went back to Pittsburgh Raceway and did nothing to the car except fill it with more gas, and ran 10.3s there, in nearly the same DA weather. My kPA testing to get the 101 was done around my home with some quick bursts- in some cooler weather than I had been previously racing in. So there were no timeslips associated with them, but antisipate the car should run 10.4s to 10.3s in the heat at PRP, which is exactly where I want it to run at in the heat. When the cooler weather comes along in the fall it usually picks up about .2-.3 sec from the summer weather. So I am hoping to be in the 10.teens to 10.ohhs range. And MAYBE if all the stars align perfectly - with a trip to New Jerseys mineshaft air in the fall - possible a 9s pass.
For what the car is, power everything, full weight (actually heavier than stock with all the safety stuff, ect) I am VERY pleased with the results I have been getting out of it. Bottom 10s is probably where I will stop tweaking it and then just get serious about bracket racing. I usually go several rounds with it at - and then will just work on getting it more consistant- which it already is pretty deadly - and works real well. The IRS (independant rear is a big power hog, with all the u-joints and angles) so if I get bored with bottom 10s, I will put a solid axle in it and it should have no problem shaving some more ET.
Again thanks for your help.
So no links to support you allegations?. Looks like that puts you in the position of being a liar.
Links, admitting your a liar, or apology would be the thing to do, IMO.
It's sad seeing you define yourself as a liar with your first thread.
I'm eagerly waiting to see where I used the term Meltdown, as you've discribed.
BTW, nice seeing you get past one of the problems of the 165 as far as resolution goes, with going to the F.A.S.T., which is what I saying along about what one of the 165 problems were....
Now, if you'd been listening instead repling out of anger, like you are here, you might have caught that years ago. Oh well, your doing a grand job of defining who/what you are, and the earlier link, is begining to look more and more truthful.
So far it looks like about all you've done is lie, and misquote me.
ski_dwn_it
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 96
Bruce, look I am not going to take your bait and play your childish games. You were the one that came on here with an attitude and started ranting. If you want to start an internet battle go elsewhere I have better things to do. I have proven about EVERY one of the rediculous "myths" wrong that you could throw out at your 16 and 18 year old audience that think your a tuning god. Yet many of them after seeing the results we were getting converter over and started building setups like ours. That pissed you off- well sorry, but I don't set out to appease you or anyone else. I am at the track to get results...plain and simple.
Not sure why your babbling about the 165 ECM, GO find the posts were it went EVERY bit as quick, actually quicker by a tad than the 730 ECM But for all intense purposes they ran identical - few hundredths off. Here is a video of it running 10.47.....hmmm that is a little quicker through the SAME MAF you said was maxed out at 11.0s.
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/Ski-10_47.wmv
The ONLY time it the 730 ECM went quicker was at NJ and I did not have a chance to test the MAF against it, cause I broke a rear spindle. Here is that run:
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/10.33ski.wmv
There was NO difference between the two at ALL. And with the MUCH larger cam I am running now, the 730 ECM was MUCH worse trying to control it. The MAF did not even flitch at it, and ran it nearly perfect (But I am sure you contest that, that is fine- but look I am the one running the CAM and ECMs- NOT YOU so save the hot air, I could care less what you think).
And if all that is NOT enough, Corky is STILL running the 870 ECM, same exact setup as me, with a slightly a smaller cam - and during our visit to NJ last fall, he ran 10.27@132MPH, though the same MAF you said again was holding him/us back, and through the same injectors @ 45psi you said were static at 11.0s@123MPH. We are now making arund 100 hp more on what, AIR?
You had your little spys come to the track back when you contested what the 406s ran, and they verified what they saw was true. If you don't believe us today, haul your **** over to quaker and take a look and show us what you got. The Jesse and Corky show will be back in OH soon for your viewing pleasure.
My decision to go to DFI gained me virtually nothing in ET, but the car is mUCH more consistant. What I dial in it runs - you know as well as I do - the stock ECM have too much garbage built into them and trim this and trim that - not enough to matter on your 800+ mile cruises - but it DOES matter when your trying to dial to .01sec consistantly and accurately. I was screwed out of several races last year when the car decided out of the blue to change .1 sec for no reason, then would run the numbers again next pass. Could have I dug into the code and perhaps manipulated it - but I don't care to do all that BS screwing around when its all there in a nice new neat package like DFI. Not to mention now I have complete control over the 6000+ RPM range that the stock systems give ZERO resolution for. You of all people that preach about resolution, should understand that. But again I Don't care if you like the decision I have made or not, or if you approve of it. Nor does anyone else probably care to hear your opinion of it all.
Again if you don't have anything to add to the ORIGINAL topic at hand, and just wish to armchair preach about what you know about tuning - save it - I have heard it all and don't particularly listen to people that can't get results on their own stuff. Just common sense- no offense.
Save the rebuttle reply, cause nobody gives a damn - I already admitted I am a liar and your right about everything. Like that you were right about our cars not being able to break into the 10s with the MAFs on them.
Now let focus on the regular schedule programming.
Not sure why your babbling about the 165 ECM, GO find the posts were it went EVERY bit as quick, actually quicker by a tad than the 730 ECM But for all intense purposes they ran identical - few hundredths off. Here is a video of it running 10.47.....hmmm that is a little quicker through the SAME MAF you said was maxed out at 11.0s.
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/Ski-10_47.wmv
The ONLY time it the 730 ECM went quicker was at NJ and I did not have a chance to test the MAF against it, cause I broke a rear spindle. Here is that run:
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/10.33ski.wmv
There was NO difference between the two at ALL. And with the MUCH larger cam I am running now, the 730 ECM was MUCH worse trying to control it. The MAF did not even flitch at it, and ran it nearly perfect (But I am sure you contest that, that is fine- but look I am the one running the CAM and ECMs- NOT YOU so save the hot air, I could care less what you think).
And if all that is NOT enough, Corky is STILL running the 870 ECM, same exact setup as me, with a slightly a smaller cam - and during our visit to NJ last fall, he ran 10.27@132MPH, though the same MAF you said again was holding him/us back, and through the same injectors @ 45psi you said were static at 11.0s@123MPH. We are now making arund 100 hp more on what, AIR?
You had your little spys come to the track back when you contested what the 406s ran, and they verified what they saw was true. If you don't believe us today, haul your **** over to quaker and take a look and show us what you got.
The Jesse and Corky show will be back in OH soon for your viewing pleasure. My decision to go to DFI gained me virtually nothing in ET, but the car is mUCH more consistant. What I dial in it runs - you know as well as I do - the stock ECM have too much garbage built into them and trim this and trim that - not enough to matter on your 800+ mile cruises - but it DOES matter when your trying to dial to .01sec consistantly and accurately. I was screwed out of several races last year when the car decided out of the blue to change .1 sec for no reason, then would run the numbers again next pass. Could have I dug into the code and perhaps manipulated it - but I don't care to do all that BS screwing around when its all there in a nice new neat package like DFI. Not to mention now I have complete control over the 6000+ RPM range that the stock systems give ZERO resolution for. You of all people that preach about resolution, should understand that. But again I Don't care if you like the decision I have made or not, or if you approve of it. Nor does anyone else probably care to hear your opinion of it all.
Again if you don't have anything to add to the ORIGINAL topic at hand, and just wish to armchair preach about what you know about tuning - save it - I have heard it all and don't particularly listen to people that can't get results on their own stuff. Just common sense- no offense.
Save the rebuttle reply, cause nobody gives a damn - I already admitted I am a liar and your right about everything. Like that you were right about our cars not being able to break into the 10s with the MAFs on them.
Now let focus on the regular schedule programming.
Sorry, but again, your lying. All I did is answer a question of your's, and you took to wanting to lie and mistating things. It was you that acted childish with your comment towards another member. In doubt?, try rereading the thread.
With you credibility now having such serious problems, why would any one believe what you state as fact, about one ecm being better then another.
Again, thanks for the laughs, and admitting to being a liar.
Ah you finally post a reply to something tech, and it's just nonsense. Why don't you back up your claim about having so much tuning expertise, with sharing a little?.
LOL, you're in good company with S_D_I!. Your version of history/ the truth, is about as good as what he customers found in his chips.
ding.wav
- Status
