Thread: 400 RWHP Club?
View Single Post
      01-11-2013, 04:29 PM   #85
tom @ eas
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
tom @ eas's Avatar

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Anaheim, CA

iTrader: (17)

Garage List
2010 BMW M3  [5.00]
2015 BMW M4  [3.50]
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve View Post
Thanks for your reply.

I don't know if it's just the way to comes across but you seem to have an issue with Mike.

I have lead by example for a long long time.

Dyno operators were always just posting high STD numbers without anything else. They were using blatantly the highest vs the lowest graphs of any particular setup for years.

Until a few of us came along and set the record straight. I was one of those people and there are a few others who did even more who I will not name.

You are on many other forums - you have seen dyno graphs with our tuning etc on independent machines. Multiple runs I should point out of std or base line vs tuned.

E92 M3 - We cannot see the point of putting our own dyno graphs up especially from a Dyno Dynamics which reads so much lower than any dynojet. Worst thing is we cannot release any DRF style files because DD never developed such brilliant software!

So, we stick to letting our customers go where ever they want and have their cars tested.

However, since you have called us out and made a comment about leading by example we will start posting the many many tests we have done here.

Talking about agenda's, is it common knowledge you do sell and validate your own in house products. I have tested the same products but never released any information on those. I will send it to you though.
No one is a victim here.

I don't have an issue with anyone. You were not called out. Mike was not called out.

The same criteria for power expectation and verifying claims should be expected from everyone, as everyone can benefit from this information, share and improve. There will always be skeptics. Proven power (among other things) can simply sells more tunes, right? It would also prove the safety factor as well.

Let's locate those customers that have been on dynojets so we can benefit this information. If low numbers are your primary concern, we can simply measure deltas on the Dyno Dynamics instead - which is what should be compared, instead of peak numbers.

We build, we test, we race, we let others race with, we get feedback, and then we post results. If they don't work - we don't sell them. We've dropped a number of companies in the past for not achieving this alone.

Egos do get bruised in the crossfire, sometimes dissolving relationships. Just have to maintain an open mind and move ahead, and learn from those mistakes.

In the meantime, responding to your PM shortly.

Originally Posted by signes View Post
Some good info/debate in here, hope it stays civil. Happy to offer my car as a guinea pig for various tunes back to back...

Sal, sent you a PM to see if you would share some of the specifics you like to log using the BT tool. I'd like to log those for a baseline run then load the OEM software update to 240E then a tune. Mike, owe you a call on this as well (will try later today.)
Looking forward to seeing your results.
Tom G. | european auto source (eas)
email: web: tel 866.669.0705 ca: 714.369.8524 x22