ETs and tunes....

[StealBlueSHO]

Ok.... maybe I and just looking in the wrong places.... BUT! I am really confused...

I have been tuned by LMS, Unleashed, and AJPTurbo....

I watch the threads and I see people post ETs concerning their cars...with various tunes...


I know for a fact that AJPTurbo and Unleashed along with BCB run hotter timing and higher boost than LMS....

I can attest that between the three tuners I have used, LMS from a butt dyno and datalogging info seems to be slower... my God, the meth tune I received has no increase in timing and boost... it's identical to the non-meth tune except it has less throttle control with the datapoints I have collected... Unleashed is a step up from there based on the above mentioned point, and Brad trumps them all from a datalogging/butt dyno perspective...

YET I still these time slips where LMS tuned cars are putting down faster or as fast of times within a tenth or two of the others...

How is that possible with them running much lower boost and lower timing??

Brads feels the most wicked but the times from his tunes that people are posting are not all that great? Personally with his tunes I have kept up with Vettes on the street.. I refuse to believe that my car is unique in that regard...

Unleashed tunes run hotter than LMS but put down similar times... he runs more boost and timing... same story with BCB from the datalogs...

Having trouble parsing all this data....

Between distance, work, and family getting to the track is not easy... nor to be achievable yet... and 1/8th doesn't get me excited...

Thoughts?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FoMoCoSHO]

Ok.... maybe I and just looking in the wrong places.... BUT! I am really confused...

I have been tuned by LMS, Unleashed, and AJPTurbo....

I watch the threads and I see people post ETs concerning their cars...with various tunes...


I know for a fact that AJPTurbo and Unleashed along with BCB run hotter timing and higher boost than LMS....

I can attest that between the three tuners I have used, LMS from a butt dyno and datalogging info seems to be slower... my God, the meth tune I received has no increase in timing and boost... it's identical to the non-meth tune except it has less throttle control with the datapoints I have collected... Unleashed is a step up from there based on the above mentioned point, and Brad trumps them all from a datalogging/butt dyno perspective...

YET I still these time slips where LMS tuned cars are putting down faster or as fast of times within a tenth or two of the others...

How is that possible with them running much lower boost and lower timing??

Brads feels the most wicked but the times from his tunes that people are posting are not all that great? Personally with his tunes I have kept up with Vettes on the street.. I refuse to believe that my car is unique in that regard...

Unleashed tunes run hotter than LMS but put down similar times... he runs more boost and timing... same story with BCB from the datalogs...

Having trouble parsing all this data....

Between distance, work, and family getting to the track is not easy... nor to be achievable yet... and 1/8th doesn't get me excited...

Thoughts?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like to measure 3rd gear multi ET's for comparison.

I'm sitting at about 3.41 currently.

Do you have a recent log?

 

[StealBlueSHO]

Ok.... maybe I and just looking in the wrong places.... BUT! I am really confused...

I have been tuned by LMS, Unleashed, and AJPTurbo....

I watch the threads and I see people post ETs concerning their cars...with various tunes...


I know for a fact that AJPTurbo and Unleashed along with BCB run hotter timing and higher boost than LMS....

I can attest that between the three tuners I have used, LMS from a butt dyno and datalogging info seems to be slower... my God, the meth tune I received has no increase in timing and boost... it's identical to the non-meth tune except it has less throttle control with the datapoints I have collected... Unleashed is a step up from there based on the above mentioned point, and Brad trumps them all from a datalogging/butt dyno perspective...

YET I still these time slips where LMS tuned cars are putting down faster or as fast of times within a tenth or two of the others...

How is that possible with them running much lower boost and lower timing??

Brads feels the most wicked but the times from his tunes that people are posting are not all that great? Personally with his tunes I have kept up with Vettes on the street.. I refuse to believe that my car is unique in that regard...

Unleashed tunes run hotter than LMS but put down similar times... he runs more boost and timing... same story with BCB from the datalogs...

Having trouble parsing all this data....

Between distance, work, and family getting to the track is not easy... nor to be achievable yet... and 1/8th doesn't get me excited...

Thoughts?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like to measure 3rd gear multi ET's for comparison.

I'm sitting at about 3.41 currently.

Do you have a recent log?

3rd gear in its completeness? Hard to get that on the street... most of mine are right at about 100mph... anything over is mandatory jail time in my state..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FoMoCoSHO]

Ok.... maybe I and just looking in the wrong places.... BUT! I am really confused...

I have been tuned by LMS, Unleashed, and AJPTurbo....

I watch the threads and I see people post ETs concerning their cars...with various tunes...


I know for a fact that AJPTurbo and Unleashed along with BCB run hotter timing and higher boost than LMS....

I can attest that between the three tuners I have used, LMS from a butt dyno and datalogging info seems to be slower... my God, the meth tune I received has no increase in timing and boost... it's identical to the non-meth tune except it has less throttle control with the datapoints I have collected... Unleashed is a step up from there based on the above mentioned point, and Brad trumps them all from a datalogging/butt dyno perspective...

YET I still these time slips where LMS tuned cars are putting down faster or as fast of times within a tenth or two of the others...

How is that possible with them running much lower boost and lower timing??

Brads feels the most wicked but the times from his tunes that people are posting are not all that great? Personally with his tunes I have kept up with Vettes on the street.. I refuse to believe that my car is unique in that regard...

Unleashed tunes run hotter than LMS but put down similar times... he runs more boost and timing... same story with BCB from the datalogs...

Having trouble parsing all this data....

Between distance, work, and family getting to the track is not easy... nor to be achievable yet... and 1/8th doesn't get me excited...

Thoughts?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like to measure 3rd gear multi ET's for comparison.

I'm sitting at about 3.41 currently.

Do you have a recent log?

3rd gear in its completeness? Hard to get that on the street... most of mine are right at about 100mph... anything over is mandatory jail time in my state..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its pretty easy to compare matching RPM ranges...

There's so many variables of people doing street logs, that's I only data I feel is consistent enough to compare.

 

[sholxgt]

Curious...

Is it canned LMS tunes or LMS preferential customers that you see putting down great times?

You have all 3 tunes.  Have you run all three on your car at the track for a true comparison?

Just because I'm really old school, I don't trust even the data logs.  I like to see a time slip at a real track for the ultimate answer.

 

[StealBlueSHO]

Latest LMS and I have not done a 0-100 mph with Brads latest.. but the spark and boost are the same as this log from him...

This is why I am having trouble understanding these ET's that are posted.. HOWEVER..Hawkeyes remote LMS Methanol tune has him targeting 14.28psi and over 23 advance and mine is targeting 12.31psi and capped at 23 advance...probably partially explains the datalog and butt dyno feel vs ET...


4X log is LMS
Rev21 is Brad

 

[StealBlueSHO]

Curious...

Is it canned LMS tunes or LMS preferential customers that you see putting down great times?

You have all 3 tunes.  Have you run all three on your car at the track for a true comparison?

Just because I'm really old school, I don't trust even the data logs.  I like to see a time slip at a real track for the ultimate answer.

Both... actually.. but Hawkeye posted a remote meth tune from LMS that is demanding 2 more psi than mine and more advance... he stated his is not dyno tuned.. just remote canned tune...

I have not had a chance to get the track... BUT I just don't see how my LMS canned meth tune is gonna put down anywhere near the times that others have put down with their canned meth tunes from them... I think I have my answer now... there is no way that a tune holding 15psi and 25degrees of advance with methanol cooling the IATs and preventing knock is going to be slower than a 12.3psi tune with 23 degrees with methanol cooling IATS and preventing knock... I just don't see it...

Track is next.. but I suspect my suspicions are correct...  0-90 with brad is around 7.8 seconds and 0-90 lms is around 8.7 seconds.. and 0-90 in 8.7 seconds pretty slow...

 

[sholxgt]

I haven't posted my time because my tune from Brad is completely unfinished.  I stopped working with him and Unleashed due to my personal car running like complete crap with any SCT based tune.  It causes the minor stutter that my car has to spread like wild fire and make the car unenjoyable to drive on the street.  Runs fine WOT, but that's of little use for a daily driver.

That all being said, my car ran a 12.87@106 with Brad's unfinished tune.  I think that's decent given that I have the heaviest version of this platform (loaded MKS including even the panoramic roof and chrome 20" wheels) and an unfinished tune.  Was a bit disappointed in the mph, but it is what it is.  I ran it wide open through the traps and that's all it did 3 times in a row.  That was on pump 93 at about 75 degree ambient temps.

Not sure if it would run better with an LMS tune.  I spoke with them at length on the phone and they didn't want any part of trying to solve my cars stutter and didn't even want to sell me a programmer without making sure I understood it could not be returned under ANY circumstance.  At least Brad tried to help and was great to work with.

 

[TopherSho]

Latest LMS and I have not done a 0-100 mph with Brads latest.. but the spark and boost are the same as this log from him...

This is why I am having trouble understanding these ET's that are posted.. HOWEVER..Hawkeyes remote LMS Methanol tune has him targeting 14.28psi and over 23 advance and mine is targeting 12.31psi and capped at 23 advance...probably partially explains the datalog and butt dyno feel vs ET...


4X log is LMS
Rev21 is Brad

yeah i feel your confusion.  Brad has cars with my level of spark and timing making 12.8 and 12.7 ... and i cant get under 13.09.  and now that it is summer i cant get under 13.2 WITH 15/85 for TEMPS ... some cars are just different i guess.

 

[hawkeye93]

I'm sure you guys know more about it than I do, but the LMS spark/boost differences could be due to the fuel used.  On that 93WM run, I was actually running 100 octane fuel.  So perhaps where you started to sense some knock, mine didn't, because of the high octane.  So mine might have added timing after yours stopped.  If I had been using 93 octane, they might have been more similar.

Also, I have a PP, for whatever the shorter gearing is worth.

Sent from my OnePlus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[sholxgt]

Could the difference in LMS and Brad's tunes be the level of torque management on shifts?  My car with Brads tune still feels pretty mild on shifts.  Maybe LMS is letting it eat?

 

[sholxgt]

I'm sure you guys know more about it than I do, but the LMS spark/boost differences could be due to the fuel used.  On that 93WM run, I was actually running 100 octane fuel.  So perhaps where you started to sense some knock, mine didn't, because of the high octane.  So mine might have added timing after yours stopped.  If I had been using 93 octane, they might have been more similar.

Sent from my OnePlus 5 using Tapatalk

Sadly, I wasn't datalogging, but I suspect you have a point here.  My low mph had me guessing that my car was pulling timing up top.  It just doesn't run strong at higher speeds.  Car has never seen anything other than pump 93.

 

[StealBlueSHO]

I'm sure you guys know more about it than I do, but the LMS spark/boost differences could be due to the fuel used.  On that 93WM run, I was actually running 100 octane fuel.  So perhaps where you started to sense some knock, mine didn't, because of the high octane.  So mine might have added timing after yours stopped.  If I had been using 93 octane, they might have been more similar.

Sent from my OnePlus 5 using Tapatalk

I hear you and the answer is no, it wouldn't make any difference. You set desired boost and that is that... regardless of which octane fuel you use. You could be running 110 octane vs 93 and your desired boost will not change the way LMS sets up their tunes, or any tuner for that matter.

Spark is a bit different.. it will keep adding spark UNLESS you set a max spark value. This is usually seen as a constant 0 on your knock sensor.. so when you see your knock sensor go FLAT through an entire WOT run, you are getting the MAX spark value you can from that tune... regardless of octane. LMS sets the MAX spark value on mine at 23.. I CANNOT go over that value regardless of Octane...

yeah i feel your confusion.  Brad has cars with my level of spark and timing making 12.8 and 12.7 ... and i cant get under 13.09.  and now that it is summer i cant get under 13.2 WITH 15/85 for TEMPS ... some cars are just different i guess.

I am not terribly concerned with my datalog times compared to actual ET's.. but if I can compare two datalogs with time values.. I can get an idea... and to Brads defense, I have not seen a real fair heads up ET against another tune... a lot of "Brads tune wasn't finished" or "This was unleashed with e20 and brads 93 octane" etc... etc...

But people have posted heads up ET with unleashed and LMS... Unleashed and BCB, and BCB with LMS... but if other peoples remote LMS MEth tune are pushing 2psi more of boost and more spark than my lms meth tune.. that would make sense why in my testing I am just not seeing how LMS is able to hold up...

 

[StealBlueSHO]

Could the difference in LMS and Brad's tunes be the level of torque management on shifts?  My car with Brads tune still feels pretty mild on shifts.  Maybe LMS is letting it eat?

I believe there is SOME merit to this.. as BCB and Unleashed remove all torque management from the shifts... LMS doesn't remove ALL torque management from their shifts with the 4+X tunes, but severely reduces it.. Brad mentioned by at least half.. while on Brads tunes he leaves the stock the torque management values on shift.. he maybe changing that.. but he used too..

He explained to me that you can still have fast/harder shifts without removing the torque management which is technically a shift modulation which is there to preserve the transmission/ptu/rdu..

You will see in other tuners datalogs they drop the spark values at shift manually instead of letting the ECU manage spark at shift...

 

[sholxgt]

Minor changes in transmission and torque management behavior can have drastic results on the track that won't show on a dyno and won't be as apparent in a data log.

In other platforms, tuners can account for as much as a half second reduction in the quarter mile with nothing other than transmission programming changes.  Not sure about our platform.

I keep threatening to buy an LMS programmer/tune to try at the track.  If I keep this stuttering mess of a car, I just may do it for the fun of experimenting.

 

[TopherSho]

Yea... my spark drops to 4 degrees.. feels super weird when it does it. still not used to the feeling of it.

 

[SHOwoosh]

I'm sure you guys know more about it than I do, but the LMS spark/boost differences could be due to the fuel used.  On that 93WM run, I was actually running 100 octane fuel.  So perhaps where you started to sense some knock, mine didn't, because of the high octane.  So mine might have added timing after yours stopped.  If I had been using 93 octane, they might have been more similar.

Sent from my OnePlus 5 using Tapatalk

I hear you and the answer is no, it wouldn't make any difference. You set desired boost and that is that... regardless of which octane fuel you use. You could be running 110 octane vs 93 and your desired boost will not change the way LMS sets up their tunes, or any tuner for that matter.

Spark is a bit different.. it will keep adding spark UNLESS you set a max spark value. This is usually seen as a constant 0 on your knock sensor.. so when you see your knock sensor go FLAT through an entire WOT run, you are getting the MAX spark value you can from that tune... regardless of octane. LMS sets the MAX spark value on mine at 23.. I CANNOT go over that value regardless of Octane...

yeah i feel your confusion.  Brad has cars with my level of spark and timing making 12.8 and 12.7 ... and i cant get under 13.09.  and now that it is summer i cant get under 13.2 WITH 15/85 for TEMPS ... some cars are just different i guess.

I am not terribly concerned with my datalog times compared to actual ET's.. but if I can compare two datalogs with time values.. I can get an idea... and to Brads defense, I have not seen a real fair heads up ET against another tune... a lot of "Brads tune wasn't finished" or "This was unleashed with e20 and brads 93 octane" etc... etc...

But people have posted heads up ET with unleashed and LMS... Unleashed and BCB, and BCB with LMS... but if other peoples remote LMS MEth tune are pushing 2psi more of boost and more spark than my lms meth tune.. that would make sense why in my testing I am just not seeing how LMS is able to hold up...

I'll post up logs of torries 93 tune and brads 93 when I get home from work. Both are pretty much "finished" tunes. I Wil say looking at them brads 14psi with more spark is quicker to speed once moving. I don't compare the first part of the runs cause torries is at the track and I'm on the street for brads so it a huge difference in being able to launch. Hopefully I'll have some time slips here shortly for the 93 and an e30 we're just finishing up.

 

[bpd1151]

I know I LOVE my LMS dyno tune.

Top notch **** and still THE RECORD holder for THE FASTEST SHO to date (since 2015)...... AND, that's on my LOWER 525AWHP file.

The 617 file is projected to be a 10.7-10.8 pass, and quite honestly, dipping into the 10's will cause me to cage the car, which is ABSOLUTELY something I am NOT interested in doing. Also, my confidence in the drivetrain at level is not all that great.

However, I will say that FMC has a this/close working relationship with LMS, & contrary to all the back n forth bickering over the years, LMS does have access to tables/parameters that NO OTHER TUNER HAS......

So take it FWIW, but the proof is in the time slips.

All the data logging in the world ain't gonna get you there, and I would even argue how accurate the data may actually be.

But alas I'll digress.

Good luck in your continued efforts there SBS. Seriously though.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SHOwoosh]

Here's the logs. also have to take into account that all of Brads logs are with a full tank of gas, full size 18"spare where Torries track run was empty. Also included a AJP93 log with a little full throttle run through 4th and most of 5th from some guy that has the exact same mods as me . my track time with Torries was a 12.88 although I believe I could have went quicker given the opportunity to let it cool down some as that was the second of back to back runs. Hopefully the rain will stop here in central Fl on one of my weekends off and I can get to the track to run Brads tunes. Will do the 93 first then next trip will be the E30 tune and of course logs will follow.

 

[StealBlueSHO]

I know I LOVE my LMS dyno tune.

Top notch s*** and still THE RECORD holder for THE FASTEST SHO to date (since 2015)...... AND, that's on my LOWER 525AWHP file.

The 617 file is projected to be a 10.7-10.8 pass, and quite honestly, dipping into the 10's will cause me to cage the car, which is ABSOLUTELY something I am NOT interested in doing. Also, my confidence in the drivetrain at level is not all that great.

However, I will say that FMC has a this/close working relationship with LMS, & contrary to all the back n forth bickering over the years, LMS does have access to tables/parameters that NO OTHER TUNER HAS......

So take it FWIW, but the proof is in the time slips.

All the data logging in the world ain't gonna get you there, and I would even argue how accurate the data may actually be.

But alas I'll digress.

Good luck in your continued efforts there SBS. Seriously though.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I have no doubt that your tune is top notch. I'm sure a dyno tune with your gear is awesome. And I'm sure with all the money and time you spend with LMS they don't cut any corners and take their time... as it stands you are their "look at what we can do with that platform" customer. I appreciate the good luck... and thank you for answering my PMs and the valuable input you do provide to the community.

I believe my clarification has been answered at least on the LMS side... I would love to see a remote LMS meth tunes datalog from a 2010 -2012 MY...

I did send an email last night to LMS asking them (yet again) to double check my tune to make sure nothing was accidentally over looked... maybe they will actually respond with a real answer...thus far they can't tell me at what psi they would me to start the meth at...

And I also hold my other tuners to the same standard.. Brad has gone 33 revisions on my car. Just like LMS, I verified with Brad he was willing to do a remote meth tune... and I already knew Torrie would. I verified Torrie would tune the Alky Control setup...

I'm not picking on LMS, Brad, or Unleashed... like I said... attempting to parse the data here vs what I have is frustrating... something doesn't add up...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk