PowerChip VS ESS (NA TUNE)

[TLud]

This type of head-to-head comparison would be very interesting to see!

Originally Posted by m33

Now this is very ineresting !!!
All colective DATA is a must in this comparison , I wanna see what's safe and not so safe ...
I had a tune from a company which I will leave out so don't ask, that had limp tourq limit reached and rich codes , felt powerfull but wasn't safe so I ended up ditching it and going supercharged ........

Already public knowledge...

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...8&postcount=41

I remember following that thread and wondering what happened.

[TheKosherStogie]

good idea...would love to see this, but id bet it wont happen

[M3Alpine]

hope this happens. Sounds like a great idea

[sales@ESSTuning]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

This is an interesting idea. Here's how I think it should work.

• No custom tuning involved. Only a single, off-the-shelf tune would be allowed (not multiple tunes).
• Four cars should be run for the test: two bone stock cars, and two modified cars.
• Flash the vehicle and run the dyno. Then reflash the same vehicle with the competitor's tune, and run the dyno again.
• Repeat the same procedure on all four cars. See who wins.

In addition to running the dyno, very important AFR, spark, and VANOS data should be collected at the same time. This would mean hooking up an OBD tool -- such as Bavarian Technic -- to collect the actual AFR, spark advance, and VANOS cam timing at real-time during the dyno testing. In addition to horsepower readings, an independant engine tuner should look at the data, and analyze it and give his opinion as to whether or not one tune is safer than the other.

Mike, is this the type of test you had in mind? If it's not, then the results would be meaningless.

AJ said it would be fine if Mike wants to run a "custom" tune, stage 1, stage 2 or whatever. We will run our standard tune. The test needs to be done on a Mustang, MAHA or any high load dyno so that it wont respond to overly agressive timing targets or leaned out AFR's. Dyno conditions need to be similar to road conditions. All testing done same day with spectators. For fun we can take each tune out and test them 60-130 with a V-BOX.

[PunjabiM3]

Can we use my car as a modified one? I have Fabspeed high flow cats, x-pipe, Gintani sport muffler, drop in filter. I will be driving through SoCal on my way to Arizona March 20-21, and will be in AZ March 22-24 (and then making the permanent move to AZ mid April). If PC or ESS would like to use my car for this PM me...

[DLSJ5]

Originally Posted by Rom3n

For fun we can take each tune out and test them 60-130 with a V-BOX.

Now we're talking Roman. I know a GIAC tune with supplemental mods, making 363whp on a Mustang can do 10.71S, it would be great to see someone at the event, making more power, top that.

If it happens where would this event take place?

[PunjabiM3]

Like I said before, I am pretty much free most dates from March 20-April 15 and will be in the Phoenix area. I can travel out to SoCal as well. I am looking to get either a PC or ESS tune and am leaning towards ESS. My offer as the modified, non-tuned test car still stands...

[Lemans_Blue_M]

Originally Posted by DoNDoN

This is going to be great. I look forward in seeing the outcome.

+1

Yes, I think the NA tuning results are going to be very interesting indeed...

[DLSJ5]

Maybe I overlooked it, but I couldn't find an ESS NA tune dyno result in the DB, can we see one?

[sales@ESSTuning]

Originally Posted by DLSJ5

Maybe I overlooked it, but I couldn't find an ESS NA tune dyno result in the DB, can we see one?

Stock car on 91 octane

SAE corrected with AFR

[powertrip]

^^^ Those numbers look very nice for just a tune on 91, Roman.

[DLSJ5]

Originally Posted by Rom3n

Stock car on 91 octane

SAE corrected with AFR

Good stuff, Roman.

[m33]

Originally Posted by TLud

This type of head-to-head comparison would be very interesting to see!



Already public knowledge...

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...8&postcount=41

I remember following that thread and wondering what happened.

good find , lol thanks for respecting on not displaying the name
but now you know the end result , actually i have them to thank cause i would have never found ESS nor got supercharged

[TheKosherStogie]

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. When Mike made the challenge, certainly he knew that I would recommend using independant test vehicles, scientifically valid procedures, having the ECU data logged during the tests, and to publish all of the results. So I just don't envision a face-saving scenario where PC could possibly back down.

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. So I think this challenge is a win-win for the public.

i really really hope it does happen, i favor neither company... and havent worked with either so...i just remember RPI tried setting it up..didnt seem to follow thru...i just have a feeling that no one would come to agreement...on where, when, how....ect...

[TLud]

Originally Posted by m33

good find , lol thanks for respecting on not displaying the name
but now you know the end result , actually i have them to thank cause i would have never found ESS nor got supercharged

Even though I'm very, very happy with my Powerchip tune, I'm also considering the ESS supercharger.

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

This is an interesting idea. Here's how I think it should work.

• No custom tuning involved. Only a single, off-the-shelf tune would be allowed (not multiple tunes).
• Four cars should be run for the test: two bone stock cars, and two modified cars.
• Flash the vehicle and run the dyno. Then reflash the same vehicle with the competitor's tune, and run the dyno again.
• Repeat the same procedure on all four cars. See who wins.

In addition to running the dyno, very important AFR, spark, and VANOS data should be collected at the same time. This would mean hooking up an OBD tool -- such as Bavarian Technic -- to collect the actual AFR, spark advance, and VANOS cam timing at real-time during the dyno testing. In addition to horsepower readings, an independant engine tuner should look at the data, and analyze it and give his opinion as to whether or not one tune is safer than the other.

Mike, is this the type of test you had in mind? If it's not, then the results would be meaningless.

I don't think there is a point to recording any other data aside from AFR. And I don't see a point in involving four cars. I definitely do not have as much time as you think I have . I would prefer to use a DynoJet, but am open to using another kind of dyno. Robert, I'm not sure why you are hinting that there is something unsafe about our tune or that we have something to hide. (Reference Post #30)

That is certainly not the case. We've tuned well over 100 M3's and have never had a single customer with an engine problem. I've run the tune on my own car for over 15,000 miles. It still runs strong.

We have been focused on engine management tuning as a whole, since 1991, and are also very well known for producing leading performance software for Mercedes and Ferrari, Porsche, Audi and most other European manufacturers worth mentioning. We can make even more power than we do already on the M3's, but there is no point when safety, reliability, or drive-ability are compromised.

My idea of testing would be to take a stock car and perform the following procedure:

1) 3 Baseline runs stock
2) Have ESS tune it
3) 3 Runs ESS Tune
4) Flash ECU Back to Stock
5) 3 Runs with Stock Again
6) Powerchip Tune
7) 3 Runs with Powerchip

I think comparing the runs will give a fair and accurate assessment of the tunes and how they perform.

[PunjabiM3]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

There's a natural assumption that the challenger would be victorious over the challenged because the challenger is assuming themselves to be superior. Therefore, it customary for the challenger to come to the challenged and play by the challenged rules. That would mean PC would come to Arizona, use their dyno of choice, and play by their rules. Instead, I'd like to see them play by my rules. I think I can come up with a tougher test than either would come up with individually. That's why I proposed complete ECU data logging (for starters).



AFR only tells one picture of the puzzle; spark advance is equally as important, as is VANOS as well. Along with horsepower, AFR, spark advance, and cam timing tell the entire picture. Four cars are necessary so that one company does not have an advantage over the other. Stock Car-A would get ESS tune first, and stock Car-B would get PC tune first. Then they would swap. The same procedure should be followed for the bolt-on cars as well.



You're already losing a day to go to Arizona -- so what's this about not having much time? You've been on here long enough to know that I don't like these toy dyno's that basically guestimate horsepower. I prefer load bearing dyno's -- and Dynapack is my dyno of choice. Maha would be my second choice because it's what BMW uses.



I'm just thinking of reasons why you wouldn't want full ECU data logging. I'm sure the readers here would demand it too. It's not good enough to just provide dyno results because they don't tell the entire story. People have a right to know how you got those results -- and that only comes with full ECU data logging. I'll donate my Bavarian Technic ECU data logger to the challenge -- so neither side can say one isn't available.



How are you defining "Engine Problem?" By definition -- limp mode is an engine problem -- it occurs when the ECU detects values that it considers unsafe and entering the engine protection program. Many people on this forum -- most of them very silent about it -- only started experiencing limp mode, stalling, bad idling, and various cold start problems after getting tuned. By definition these are all "engine problems."



Thanks for reminding me. In addition to my previously recommended procedures, the process should also include the following:

• ECU tune will be submitted on a USB flash drive and given to the dyno operator or comparable 3rd party. This will ensure that the same flash will be used for all tests and can't be changed by either party.
• The dyno operator or a comparable 3rd party would do the flashing -- not either company. The flash operator will ensure that no adaptation values are cleared while flashing.
• Ten consecutive dyno runs should be run. 5-second cool-down between runs.
• The comparison runs will be measured on runs 9 and 10.

It would be great if the setup you have in mind is indeed the one both companies abide to. But I highly doubt this will be the case and I'm sure most people are already aware of this unfortunately.

[xxe92xx]

this is such good exposure and think of the business (being a business owner) you will get if you do a thorough test of both tunes...i would want to show as much data as possible the only reason i can think of as to why you wouldnt want to show the public "everything" is because you have something to hide and it should definitely be done PG's way

and i will myself for starting the thread

[sales@ESSTuning]

We have no problem recording and sharing any and all data during testing. I agree with Robert it is important that we record timing info also during a test such as this. I cant see why anyone would have a problem sharing this information.

AJ and myself are very interested to witness in person an NA tune on this car that makes the + 40 whp "safely" that PC advertises. Mike is more than welcome to run any custom map or stage 2 file needed during this test to make the most power he can. All we ask is that the data is recorded and shared so we can confirm timing and AFR's.

Mike when you have time email me and we will set up a date that works for you to come to AZ. There are a number of shops here that we can use for testing. We would be more than happy to take care of all the details.

[M3alpineE92]

lets do this cant wait to see results!!!

[RGuard250]

To me, this is actually ground breaking! Two well respected tuning companies willing to test each others tunes against each other in a civilized manner. I think this is the first we have seen on m3post!

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by Rom3n

We have no problem recording and sharing any and all data during testing. I agree with Robert it is important that we record timing info also during a test such as this. I cant see why anyone would have a problem sharing this information.

AJ and myself are very interested to witness in person an NA tune on this car that makes the + 40 whp "safely" that PC advertises. Mike is more than welcome to run any custom map or stage 2 file needed during this test to make the most power he can. All we ask is that the data is recorded and shared so we can confirm timing and AFR's.

Mike when you have time email me and we will set up a date that works for you to come to AZ. There are a number of shops here that we can use for testing. We would be more than happy to take care of all the details.

I'll email you when I have time. I'm extremely busy and it doesn't look like it's going to let up anytime soon. I'm certainly not flying to AZ unless it's an all expenses paid trip.

I'm cool with doing a test around here along the lines of what I described earlier. That will only take a couple hours to do. Anything that requires a serious time commitment will have to be scheduled far in advance.

We do not advertise 40hp with just a tune. That's with a tune and exhaust mods. We are working however on some new projects for the M3 that should change the game up when they are released to the public

Happy motoring everyone!