OK, enough of this beating around the bush FAST likes and dislikes

[Reggie West]

If this post gets deleted so be it but I am getting sick of this bull****.

These are my observations having used a FAST system for about 18 months now.

Pros

The FAST system is a definite step up from a batch fire DFI, which was all there was unless you wanted to pay $10,000.00 for a MOTEC.

The ability to datalog just about any engine parameter you want is a great help at the track, dyno or even on the street.

The Wideband O2 sensor is definitely a very good tuning tool and takes the guesswork out of tuning the fuel map.

The Windows features that are built in make it just that much easier to use the program. It is pretty much a straight forward deal if you have used any kind of program to tune with prior to now.

Any time you can go to the track, datalog the run, analyze it and make informed decisions you are way ahead of the game from when Buicks first were intercooled some 17 years ago.



Cons




I am fully aware that the WB sensors will not last for an extended period of time. That is just the nature of the beast and it is accepted. What makes this so difficult is that in order to get a new sensor, you must send the unit back to FAST and let them calibrate a new sensor to your ECM and then it is sent back to you.

This is prohibitive in terms of cost ( even though when you say Buick it costs 3 times as much) and time lost because the unit must be sent back. At the very least, FAST should be able to send out a new sensor and calibration disk to the end user to reduce the amount of time this takes.

I do not like the level to which FAST deems it necessary to keep their product proprietary.

Software.
I have a software problem in my program as well. I am not seeing the random number problems others are. I do have a problem where I cannot adjust any trigger to commence datalogging on the computer. It seems stuck no matter what I do. The only way I can log at all is by using the manual trigger and that does work.

This is a case in point of why I, as the consumer, should not have to pay an additional $30 for a newer version of the program just to fix a problem that should not be there in the first place.

Of course I called FAST and their answer to my dilemma ( in essence) is " That will cost $30. It should not cost me a dime for a defective program. I should not be charged shipping for it either. There should be a software fix sent to me so I can use the product the way it was designed and assured it would function.

If you have customers informing you that the software you have designed for the system that you charge $2500 to $3500 for you should absolutely be proactive in getting a software fix out to ALL of your customers immediately with any hesitation, complaints or denials.

Rather if you see posts up on this board about software problems you should be making contact with them and finding out how FAST can make their customers happy with the defective product you just sold them. I dont care if the product was purchased through a vendor or directly through FAST ( which I know does not happen but I am using this as an example). Your company relies on the orders from your vendors, if their customers are not happy then market dynamics dictate that they will take their money elsewhere sooner or later.

FAST cannot have it both ways. You cannot use this board as a very good source of information about how your product performs in the real world and then decide what you like and do not like.

I am not advocating vendor bashing here at all. I understand that the boards purpose for this is to not allow a board for information turn into a group lynching over things that can be resolved properly.

There is a point though that any business selling anything has a certain responsiblility to make good on the promises of their product.

The fact that you get to hear about problems on this board should not be used as a shield for what I would consider constructive criticism regarding the product you sell. The moderators of this board will not allow any information on here that would be considered damaging.

I dont believe this is either. Time will tell.

If anyone takes issue with what I have said here you can e mail me directly.

 

[blackholehunter]

I thought all that was necessary with replacing the w/b is a calibration disk that comes with it?

 

[norbs]

The price after the sensor is calibrated to the ecu, doubles the actual sensor cost, this is what is the issue everyone does'nt like

 

[Jesse]

I am not advocating vendor bashing here at all. I understand that the boards purpose for this is to not allow a board for information turn into a group lynching over things that can be resolved properly.

We will not remove , lock or close this thread , as long as it does'nt turn in to a he said she said , lynch mob , bashing , false statements or innuendoes , bandwagon jumping , foul language or personal attacks.

This is a case in point of why I, as the consumer, should not have to pay an additional $30 for a newer version of the program just to fix a problem that should not be there in the first place.Of course I called FAST and their answer to my dilemma ( in essence) is " That will cost $30. It should not cost me a dime for a defective program. I should not be charged shipping for it either. There should be a software fix sent to me so I can use the product the way it was designed and assured it would function.

Maybe a rep from FAST can answer this question....lets see were this goes


Jesse

 

[RickWI]

Ok, off the top of my head

Here is what I like, I have stuck the the DOS version by the way.

I like the layout of the FAST software. I think it is one of the easiest formats to understand and base program.

The DOS version is stone reliable for me. Never had a hiccup.

For what I need it for I think the data logging is excellent. A great feature.

The FAST hardware has been bulletproof for me for over three years now. So I would have to say the quality is top notch.

The few times I have needed it support with FAST over the phone has always been top notch. I have always talked with Mike

Some things I think could use improvement.

Written support materials included with the system are very poor.

Having to pay for corrected or updated revisions is a poor business practice in this market area. Companies such as EFI technologies offer lifetime software upgrades for free as well as others. Revised and updated software should be downloadable.

 

[Craig Smith]

Upgrades for anyone who owns a copy of C-Com WP should be free. The only cost that should be associated with it is a $25 charge for a copy of the software itself for anyone who doesn't already own a copy. If for some reason it isn't happening this way it will be corrected. I agree with this point.

Also, replacing a wide band sensor does not require sending an ECU back in. It never has and never will. Replacement sensors are shipped out with a calibration disk.

I am on my way out of town for a few days but I will have some more specific info on this and more, and I am sure that what I have to say will be well received by everyone. I'll bring everyone up to speed on the latest changes we have made and how we are going to go about a few things.

 

[Reggie West]

Waiting to hear from you Craig.

 

[Ricky Trussell]

I am on my way out of town for a few days but I will have some more specific info on this and more, and I am sure that what I have to say will be well received by everyone. I'll bring everyone up to speed on the latest changes we have made and how we are going to go about a few things.

TTT

 

[Craig Smith]

OK, OK, I lied.

My NEW excuse is, I'm busy with Christmas stuff. Yeah, that's it.

I have not forgotten this, there's lots of good stuff to talk about. I will have some stuff up here for you all very soon. Or at least a new excuse by then!

 

[RickWI]

Great!

 

[Buicksx2]

Craig,

I have a question for ya as far as the O2 sensor goes.

I have had mine in place and running for over 4 years and haven't had a problem with it and car has been filled with nothing but 116.

When will you know if it's time to replace the O2?

Whats the longest anyone has gone with an O2 in a car filled with 116.

Just wondering if it's worth it to change and if it will have any positive effects on how the car will come or if I am missing out on any possible performance gains.

Thanks

 

[norbs]

not sure if this helps, craig may give you a different opinion, but from the research on the web, its rated at 250 hours on leaded fuel and 2500 hours on unleaded fuel. If its a race car only you could figure maybe 5 minutes run time per pass from start to end, works out to about 3000 passes, if its street use consider ALOT less. I would think the sensor response time would slow down, the update rate is usually every .1 secs. But if you read what motec says its 50 and 500 hours, so the hour rating is conflicting, depends who you believe.

 

[JDB]

I'm having a hard time believing that the new ECU is not ready for release. I was personally told by Lance that it would be out mid summer 03 without a doubt. He stated that the flash potential of the new box would make it certain that they could deliver by June~July.

No release date @ PRI?

Come on guys, talk to us!

JDB

 

[Ricky Trussell]

Originally posted by Craig Smith
OK, OK, I lied.

My NEW excuse is, I'm busy with Christmas stuff. Yeah, that's it.

I have not forgotten this, there's lots of good stuff to talk about. I will have some stuff up here for you all very soon. Or at least a new excuse by then!

Okay times up. Fess up or we'll take your santa from you!

 

[norbs]

Maybe he's still waiting for santa to visit ??? never thought of that one....

 

[Craig Smith]

A couple things I would like to bring you guys at least somewhat up to speed on are some recent changes to C-Com WP and the story on the new ECU.

Changes to C-ComWP
The hot topic with C-Com WP around here seems to be reports of data corruption within the calibration files. We have found what could be a cause of this problem and have implemented a change that will prevent this from happening. It has to do with repeatedly pressing the page up or page down keys to increase or decrease the values in a selected area. The more data points you had selected, the more likely it was that this problem could occur. If the all the data you were trying to change couldn't be sent from the PC to the ECU in between key presses, the information would go into a buffer and wait its turn to be sent out to the ECU. It appears that during the buffering process, there was an opportunity for data to be corrupted. Due to the very nature of the problem, the likelihood or severity of the problem seemed to vary from one machine to the next. Variables such as operating system, processor speed, PC manufacturer, etc. could all potentially have an effect. But anyways, we have made a change that will prevent this from being a possibility. I have read posts on here that state that data corruption was a possibility when interpolating a group of numbers as well, but I would dispute this.

I believe we will also reintroduce the "L" key by popular demand. For those of you who are not familiar with this, the L key would apply the current O2 sensor correction value to the cell in the table with the highest influence on the VE value. The intended purpose of this feature was to take the guesswork out of calibrating the VE table based on O2 sensor feedback and save the user a few steps in getting the job done. We took this feature out of C-Com WP because for a while it seemed like the feature was misunderstood and misused, and we got a lot of calls that we attributed to this misunderstanding and misuse. The better plan is obviously to clear up the misunderstanding and make the feature available again.

Last on this subject for now is that there will be upgrades to C-Com WP made available on our website. We have wanted to do this for some time and I guess there's no time like the present. The info on the website will be an upgrade only; you need a working version of C-Com WP beforehand. If you do not have a version of C-Com WP, it is available through FAST for $25. Upgrades will be offered at no charge through our website.

More to come AFTER dinner time...

 

[Otto J]

Craig, Are these upgrades available at this time?
Keep up the great work man, I love this system so much
We just ordered another one am installing one now.
THanks Otto

Ps i do all my own tuning plus a few others, If you have an understanding jhow things work and common sense, its a breeze.
2 cars that i have retuned on the dyno have both shown a minimum of 50 hp at the wheels increase.

 

[norbs]

Yes there is a GOD up there, " believe we will also reintroduce the "L" key by popular demand" Good work, now you won't have to listen to me crying.........

 

[Craig Smith]

New ECU

With regard to the new ECU design, it almost goes without saying that we are well past the date that we had at one time hoped and expected to begin shipping this product. A couple phases of this project have become far more time-consuming than we ever anticipated. Nonetheless, this system will address the "weaknesses" associated with the current system while retaining its strong points as well.

New stuff:
- 1 part number! The new system will be user configurable from C-Com as to which ignition strategy is being used. You will no longer have to pick and choose between options (IAC vs. nitrous, etc.) as we now have enough I/O on board to do everything we want and then a little. All boxes will have all options. Everything we've ever had is still there, plus the ability for tons more.

- No more having to return an ECU for reconfiguration! As changes and updates are created, they will be made available on our website. New features, changes, updates, etc. will be "flashed" into the ECU by the user.

- As previously mentioned, much more input/output capability. The 60 pin connector has been replaced with a 104 pin connector to accomodate the additional I/O channels. In addition to the I/O channels already on the present ECU, these inputs and outputs are generic in nature at this point and are ultimately configurable for a variety of purposes. This will allow us the option to accomodate user requests for specific features, or to simply assign certain features to a specific input or output. We've left as much room as possible for ourselves to make this a flexible product that can change with the times rather easily. When I said above that "all boxes will have all options" I guess there's some qualification to that. I suppose it depends on which updates or features you have installed in the ECU. The bottom line is that there isn't a need to give one up to get another anymore, and I don't see anyone running out of outputs on this one anytime soon.

- For the most part, the feel of the system and the way you use C-Com are not going to change. There will of course be changes made to C-Com to accomodate the possibilities that the additional I/O channels present for us, but the way you tune and manipulate data will be largely unchanged. Based on the vast majority of the feedback we receive from our customers, we feel that we have a straightforward, simple approach that people easily understand and appreciate and we don't see much of a need at this point to get away from that.

- There are still many features that it is too early to go into much detail on, but that info will be discussed as soon as it is practical to do so. I realize that some of this info isn't extremely specific but hopefully it's enough to give you all a feel for what we are trying to create for you.

Barring anything too strange, we should have our first batch of completed circuit boards in our hands next week. At that point, Lance and I will be doing extensive testing on the bench, making sure that everything on the board functions as it is supposed to. Once things are verified there, we hit the dyno, get a few installed in cars, and the beatings will begin.

Two things I don't know right now:

- When exactly it will be done;
- How much it will cost.

Our time frame for shipping, of course, will depend on how testing goes. The fewer the problems, the sooner we ship. We have a lot of time and work into the initial design so I feel pretty good that we won't have to spend a lot of time backtracking.

 

[Ricky Trussell]

Craig,

Thanks for the update!
One question I know will be asked.... Will we be able to buy the new ECU and use our old 60 pin harness plus an add on harness for the other I/O channels to help control cost of updating??

When you get ready test the unit live, I will gladly offer my street car as a test car.