PowerChip VS ESS (NA TUNE)

[dcgolfdr]

couldn't one company buy the other company's tune and then analyze the data from the ecu. I know nothing about tuning so if this is a stupid question then I apologize in advance.

[TheKosherStogie]

Why did DJLS5 post get deleted??? crazyness

[RGuard250]

Originally Posted by sammyrusso

Why did DJLS5 post get deleted??? crazyness

I noticed that too... he didn't violate any rules either.

He made some strong points and his post shouldn't have been deleted.

[TheKosherStogie]

Originally Posted by RGuard250

I noticed that too... he didn't violate any rules either.

He made some strong points and his post shouldn't have been deleted.

that for sure...ridiculous that it got deleted.

[J08M3]

Same here... my post got deleted and I said nothing negative about either company

[ghosthi32]

me too...

[FStop7]

I am a PC customer so I am inherently biased, but I want to see this shootout happen because if there is something better, I want to know about it.

The fact is that Mike called out ESS -

We're happy to go head to head with ESS at any time at an independant dyno.

And if you call someone out, you definitely need to follow through on it.

That being said, my car has run great with the PC stage 2 flash, it broke traction at 5,000rpm in first gear when I jumped on the gas today - with warmed up AD08s.

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by FStop7

I am a PC customer so I am inherently biased, but I want to see this shootout happen because if there is something better, I want to know about it.

The fact is that Mike called out ESS -



And if you call someone out, you definitely need to follow through on it.

That being said, my car has run great with the PC stage 2 flash, it broke traction at 5,000rpm in first gear when I jumped on the gas today - with warmed up AD08s.

+1 lets stay on topic everyone...

[sales@ESSTuning]

One thing people should understand is we could care less what any software tuner runs for AFR's and timing. The only reason we want this information shared is if we are going to put our tune head to head with another we want the public to know we are comparing a 100% safe flash to another 100% safe software flash. We have no idea what PC runs for AFR's or timing as we have never seen an official dyno from them with this data so we would rely on the info shared during testing. I can understand if Mike or PC feels that by sharing this data with the public it might somehow compromise any advantage they might have in the market but if we were going to agree to do this test we would require this data to be shared by both parties.

For reference on AFR's and timing on this motor in NA form here are the numbers that most will agree are correct. These are the numbers we would expect to see on a 100% safe NA tune. For this test a stock car can be used for reference to record the AFR and timing set by BMW.

AFR: Safe level AF ratio is 12-13.8 WOT, ideally less than 13.5 under high
load / high RPM to ensure safe combustion temperatures.

Timing: On 91 octane, anything above 1.5-2 degrees more than stock timing is overly aggressive, ~3 degrees is max on 93.

[m33]

Originally Posted by FStop7

I am a PC customer so I am inherently biased, but I want to see this shootout happen because if there is something better, I want to know about it.

The fact is that Mike called out ESS -



And if you call someone out, you definitely need to follow through on it.well put

That being said, my car has run great with the PC stage 2 flash, it broke traction at 5,000rpm in first gear when I jumped on the gas today - with warmed up AD08s.

A stock one will let the tires loose at that gear and rpm

And its not like ESS Went after PC , now ESS is offering to come out to Cali

I still dont think PC is going to follow through ....

[m33]

Originally Posted by iBeJayKaying

Get Dinan in here too.

I bet Dinan runs safe AFR's

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by m33

A stock one will let the tires loose at that gear and rpm

And its not like ESS Went after PC , now ESS is offering to come out to Cali

I still dont think PC is going to follow through ....

im going to guess if it does happen its happening in cali

Originally Posted by m33

I bet Dinan runs safe AFR's

so safe that its stock

[spdu4ea]

Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M

The concept of a "custom tune" on the E9x M3 for a specific set of engine performance mods is very perplexing to me...since the Siemens MSS 60 ECU features a target-based software algorithm that uses three parallel 32-bit microprocessors (and more than a dozen engine senors) to calculate the horsepower & torque of the S65B40 V8 engine in any gear, and at any rpm.

Since the basic software coding tables are designed by BMW to adapt on it's own (within a fixed preset target range), it's interesting to here how any tuner can claim they wrote a "custom tune" for a particular M3. (since the basic engine management software does not support a very narrow software programming methodology)

...But you don't have a problem with off the shelf tunes? If what you said is true, then the stock software should make as much power as generic "stage 1" flashes.

So while the ECU may feature a sophisticated target-based algorithm, it still needs someone to tell it what targets to shoot for, and those targets will change based on a number of factors. This is why custom tunes are ideal -- they're tailored for your individual engine and how its responded to your individual mods -- not a generic "intake exhaust" file...

Originally Posted by major_kusanagi

I disagree. I am no expert when it comes to chip tunes and mechanical or electronic engineering. However, I am quite well versed in scientific research design. All I read was how to have a controlled environment with strict parameters for establishing a control group and experiment group while minimizing the possibility of contamination. I thought PG's recommendations were spot on, which will only benefit all the forum members who are following this thread. Why is that biased?

PG's rules weren't as scientifically sound as you make it out (statistical bias in throwing out all data except from runs 9 & 10) and he asserted his rules as if they somehow had been universally recognized (dynapack dyno -- really?)


And his bias is pretty clearly shown here:

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

Why won't it happen? There's been a challenge, and there's been an acceptance. I don't see a scenario that PC could back down without being accused of creating dangerous tunes that they don't want exposed to the public via ECU data logging.
.
.
.
If the ECU battle does happen, then all of the data becomes public -- AFRs, spark advance, VANOS, and dyno charts. That's a huge win for everybody in the public. If the ECU battle doesn't happen, then that's just as important for the public as well -- because it says that PC has something that they don't want the public to know.

Why should PC give everyone (especially their competitors) their intellectual property for free? In an engine's tune, you have 3 main variables for power: AFR, ignition timing, and cam timing. If you've spent hundreds of hours optimizing the power by making small changes and retesting, why let your competitors benefit from your findings?


If you're legitimately concerned about a tune being unsafe -- monitor the knock system. At least that way you will see actual indications of an unsafe tune and not rely on an educated guess from an "unbiased" tuner. And if you're concerned that a dynojet won't load up the car enough, do some single gear vbox pulls and get actual real-world data.

[ghosthi32]

this thread went to the gutter...

good post spdu4ea

[spdu4ea]

Originally Posted by Rom3n

I can understand if Mike or PC feels that by sharing this data with the public it might somehow compromise any advantage they might have in the market but if we were going to agree to do this test we would require this data to be shared by both parties.

For reference on AFR's and timing on this motor in NA form here are the numbers that most will agree are correct. These are the numbers we would expect to see on a 100% safe NA tune. For this test a stock car can be used for reference to record the AFR and timing set by BMW.

AFR: Safe level AF ratio is 12-13.8 WOT, ideally less than 13.5 under high
load / high RPM to ensure safe combustion temperatures.

Timing: On 91 octane, anything above 1.5-2 degrees more than stock timing is overly aggressive, ~3 degrees is max on 93.

Ok, hypothetically speaking ESS and PC do this challenge and share all info with each other. It turns out that you guys have very similar power outputs, but PC has a small edge over a 500rpm range. You look and see his AFR and timing are essentially the same as your tune's. That pretty much leaves Vanos for you to tweak so a few dyno runs later -- lo and behold -- ESS version 2 with PC-matching power...

So that's a lot of information to give away. Without that AFR and timing data, all you'd know is that its possible to make more power over that 500rpm range, but you wouldn't know if the power was made by changes to AFR, timing, or Vanos (hours of dyno time vs minutes)

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

...But you don't have a problem with off the shelf tunes? If what you said is true, then the stock software should make as much power as generic "stage 1" flashes.

So while the ECU may feature a sophisticated target-based algorithm, it still needs someone to tell it what targets to shoot for, and those targets will change based on a number of factors. This is why custom tunes are ideal -- they're tailored for your individual engine and how its responded to your individual mods -- not a generic "intake exhaust" file...

that statement makes no sense what so ever...

what lemans was trying to explain was for a tune to technically be "custom" the entire "file(mapping/timing/etc)" would have to be re-written from scratch...

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

PG's rules weren't as scientifically sound as you make it out (statistical bias in throwing out all data except from runs 9 & 10) and he asserted his rules as if they somehow had been universally recognized (dynapack dyno -- really?)

dynojets are the least realistic compared to a mustang dyno, maha, dynapack,....

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

Why should PC give everyone (especially their competitors) their intellectual property for free? In an engine's tune, you have 3 main variables for power: AFR, ignition timing, and cam timing. If you've spent hundreds of hours optimizing the power by making small changes and retesting, why let your competitors benefit from your findings?

If you're legitimately concerned about a tune being unsafe -- monitor the knock system. At least that way you will see actual indications of an unsafe tune and not rely on an educated guess from an "unbiased" tuner. And if you're concerned that a dynojet won't load up the car enough, do some single gear vbox pulls and get actual real-world data.

im pretty sure none of the tuners are giving anything away? this was previously discussed in a prior posts...AFR's and timing are key to a healthy engine, we're not talking about tuning a turbo car theres very little room to fuck around in an NA motor....

Originally Posted by ghosthi32

this thread went to the gutter...

good post spdu4ea

how so...?


a few topics that should be discussed while we're waiting are:

-how do you know overly aggressive tunes (lean AFR's, agressive timing) can harm an engine?

-what makes a "custom" tune different from a shelf tune? what are the differences in AFR's and timing? how big of a difference is there?

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

Ok, hypothetically speaking ESS and PC do this challenge and share all info with each other. It turns out that you guys have very similar power outputs, but PC has a small edge over a 500rpm range. You look and see his AFR and timing are essentially the same as your tune's. That pretty much leaves Vanos for you to tweak so a few dyno runs later -- lo and behold -- ESS version 2 with PC-matching power...

So that's a lot of information to give away. Without that AFR and timing data, all you'd know is that its possible to make more power over that 500rpm range, but you wouldn't know if the power was made by changes to AFR, timing, or Vanos (hours of dyno time vs minutes)

so right now your predicting that ESS will "steal" Powerchips tune? come on now are you serious?....you shouldnt be posting in a thread when you have little to no knowledge of either company or the more knowledgeable members on this board

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by xxe92xx

how so...?

important post deletions.

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by m33

A stock one will let the tires loose at that gear and rpm

Not with wider/fully heated AD08s it won't, at least mine didn't beforehand.

[Ben335]

I had a post deleted also. Not sure why? I just responded to a post and said nothing bad about either company. In fact, I run PC's tune now.

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by ghosthi32

important post deletions.

the only post that shouldnt have been deleted was DLS's he had alot of very good information that he should retype in a new post

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by xxe92xx

the only post that shouldnt have been deleted was DLS's he had alot of very good information that he should retype in a new post

well i said that this challenge should be discussed between PC and ESS with nobody interfering. i guess i said something wrong