Ski Down It vs PCMFORLESS
03-22-2005, 07:10 AM
#1
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Ski Down It vs PCMFORLESS
In a nutshell I got 341.2 hp and 369.6 torque from Ski Down It’s chip. From PCMFORLESS, I got 362.1 hp and 379.6 torque. That’s a increase of 21hp and 10 lbs. Torque. Alvin (owner of PCMFORLESS) programmed the entire chip and not just the topend. My BLM’s are now much more in line, not like it was with the Ski Down It chip.
Now, for even more good news, Alvin charge was $150.00 for the tune and the dyno time worked out to $100.00 for a total of $250 for a dyno tune.
The charge for Ski Down It’s tune was $260.00 + an additional $45.00 to get a emissions tune done on a different chip. That’s a total of $305.00 + shipping to return it at least 2 additional times trying to get it to run correctly, which it never did.
With Jesse’s (aka Ski Down It) tune the AF ratio were very rich. I sent the dyno sheets to a couple of reputable tuners on this board and they agreed it was the tune causing the problem. Jesse insisted the tune was fine, it was a problem with my car. I then purchased data master and made some scans, as well as having the dyno charts, with AF ratios. Again I sent these out to the same tuners and again they believed my tune was the problem. Well by this time I pretty much figured I was wasting my time and money with Jesse so I decided to buy a prom burner, a few reburnable chips and a copy of tuner cat.
As most of you know there are 3 basic categories with tuner cat. Switches, constants, and tables. Also with tunercat you can load 2 bins in and compare them.
Well I loaded the stock bin and Jesse’s bin and found the standard changes IE Switch changes, constants such as changing the fan selection temp. Etc. had been changed, but the ONLY table changes were the following.
knock retard recovery factor Vs RPM is changed from >3600 to 6400 rpm by -0.777 >2. PE % change to fuel/air ratio Vs. RPM was changed >from 1200-2000 rpm by -0.8 and from 2400-7500 rpm by >0.8 >That seems to be it.
The VE tables were never touched and this is one of the most important things to be adjusted on a speed density car such as mine.
To make matters even worse, the additional $45.00 I paid for the emissions chip reads identical to his performance chip.
I am not mentioning the names of the 2 tuners I sent the dyno sheets and scans to as I really appreciate their input and I feel if they want to comment they can. One of them even sent me a bin file to try, which ran much better then the Ski Down It chip.
I am not posting this trying to get an argument going, but rather to accurately report my findings so others can benefit. I do not believe in smashing other members when there is nothing to back up accusations. I have received emails form other members complaining about Jesse’s tunes. IMO we owe it to each other to post bad deals as well as good deals. But they should be backed with facts to support our claims.
If I had it to do all over I would use Alvin to dyno tune my car and saved hundreds of dollars in equipment and mail order tunes. His service has been first rate and quite a bargain.
Now, for even more good news, Alvin charge was $150.00 for the tune and the dyno time worked out to $100.00 for a total of $250 for a dyno tune.
The charge for Ski Down It’s tune was $260.00 + an additional $45.00 to get a emissions tune done on a different chip. That’s a total of $305.00 + shipping to return it at least 2 additional times trying to get it to run correctly, which it never did.
With Jesse’s (aka Ski Down It) tune the AF ratio were very rich. I sent the dyno sheets to a couple of reputable tuners on this board and they agreed it was the tune causing the problem. Jesse insisted the tune was fine, it was a problem with my car. I then purchased data master and made some scans, as well as having the dyno charts, with AF ratios. Again I sent these out to the same tuners and again they believed my tune was the problem. Well by this time I pretty much figured I was wasting my time and money with Jesse so I decided to buy a prom burner, a few reburnable chips and a copy of tuner cat.
As most of you know there are 3 basic categories with tuner cat. Switches, constants, and tables. Also with tunercat you can load 2 bins in and compare them.
Well I loaded the stock bin and Jesse’s bin and found the standard changes IE Switch changes, constants such as changing the fan selection temp. Etc. had been changed, but the ONLY table changes were the following.
knock retard recovery factor Vs RPM is changed from >3600 to 6400 rpm by -0.777 >2. PE % change to fuel/air ratio Vs. RPM was changed >from 1200-2000 rpm by -0.8 and from 2400-7500 rpm by >0.8 >That seems to be it.
The VE tables were never touched and this is one of the most important things to be adjusted on a speed density car such as mine.
To make matters even worse, the additional $45.00 I paid for the emissions chip reads identical to his performance chip.
I am not mentioning the names of the 2 tuners I sent the dyno sheets and scans to as I really appreciate their input and I feel if they want to comment they can. One of them even sent me a bin file to try, which ran much better then the Ski Down It chip.
I am not posting this trying to get an argument going, but rather to accurately report my findings so others can benefit. I do not believe in smashing other members when there is nothing to back up accusations. I have received emails form other members complaining about Jesse’s tunes. IMO we owe it to each other to post bad deals as well as good deals. But they should be backed with facts to support our claims.
If I had it to do all over I would use Alvin to dyno tune my car and saved hundreds of dollars in equipment and mail order tunes. His service has been first rate and quite a bargain.
03-22-2005, 08:24 AM
#3
Drifting
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Patchogue NY
Posts: 1,976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an interesting post. Clearly, you have dispelled the notion that you have an ax to grind, and that the reason your posting this is in the spirit of providing information based on your findings, and analysis of PCmforless, and Jesse. I for one appreciate your findings, and will give them careful consideration. Nice job.
Joe B.
Joe B.
03-22-2005, 08:25 AM
#4
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: OBAMA IS HITLER
Posts: 22,209
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
i have no data to back me up, at the moment anyway. however, all indications from piston mfrs, to AFR, to my machine shop tell me my build was mechanically sound enough NOT to have 2 hypereutectic pistons partially destruct due to heavy detonation......which still leaves the tune on the table.
mine is speed density as well.
at this moment i really don't know what to say, as i'm not fully knowledgeable to make an experienced claim.....but still my gut is wrenching.....a couple more thousand $$ to fix all this mess doesn't make for a great month.
mine is speed density as well.
at this moment i really don't know what to say, as i'm not fully knowledgeable to make an experienced claim.....but still my gut is wrenching.....a couple more thousand $$ to fix all this mess doesn't make for a great month.
03-22-2005, 08:32 AM
#5
Race Director
Sounds like PCMforless got you squared away. 
I have always said and believed that tuning long distance is tough at best.
My effort to get a chip/tune long distance yielded me nothing but a waste of time, money and unreturned emails. There is a big difference in "tweaking" a chip and tuning a new & radical package.
I do have the utmost respect for Ski's knowledge and that he could tune in person, 100%
I thank my lucky stars that a local guy took time to help me out!
I have always said and believed that tuning long distance is tough at best.
My effort to get a chip/tune long distance yielded me nothing but a waste of time, money and unreturned emails. There is a big difference in "tweaking" a chip and tuning a new & radical package.
I do have the utmost respect for Ski's knowledge and that he could tune in person, 100%
I thank my lucky stars that a local guy took time to help me out!
03-22-2005, 08:35 AM
#6
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Apr 2002
Location: Cleveland OH
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not going to touch on some of the aspects of your post, but I will say one thing. You'll never match a dyno tune with any mail order tune. There's simply too many variables to account for.
Glad you got the power that you were looking for.
Take care,
Ron
Glad you got the power that you were looking for.
Take care,
Ron
03-22-2005, 08:54 AM
#7
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: OBAMA IS HITLER
Posts: 22,209
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
Ron, you're exactly right. There are problems when there isn't a local guy in sight to who tunes/flashes for GM/OBD-1 cars. Makes for a tough situation, so one must make do with whatever resources are available.
03-22-2005, 08:58 AM
#8
Racer
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Vienna VA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the above comment...mail order chips are not likely to be as good as chips done on a dyno.
Taking it one step further...I believe that a chip prepared through several iterations at the drag strip will outperform a chip done on the dyno. You actually may see a decrease in dyno numbers, but the car will run faster.
Taking it one step further...I believe that a chip prepared through several iterations at the drag strip will outperform a chip done on the dyno. You actually may see a decrease in dyno numbers, but the car will run faster.
03-22-2005, 09:00 AM
#9
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Castro Valley Calif.
Posts: 5,884
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-'20-'21-'22
'23-'24
93 ragtop, I applaud you for such an objectively written post on what must have been a very difficult subject to deal with!
I too have had a less than sterling experience ranging from an initial 6 week delay getting my chip back; to unreturned e-mails and IMs these 3 months aferward. I think Ski's probably a pretty decent guy and there's no doubt he's a valuable contributor on this board, but once you take somebody's money to perform a service you become a vendor and have an obligation to respond in a professional manner. I'm very disappointed in his lack of response and have finally taken my car in to a local guy to get tuned.
If I had it back, Id've gone in a different direction to begin with.
I too have had a less than sterling experience ranging from an initial 6 week delay getting my chip back; to unreturned e-mails and IMs these 3 months aferward. I think Ski's probably a pretty decent guy and there's no doubt he's a valuable contributor on this board, but once you take somebody's money to perform a service you become a vendor and have an obligation to respond in a professional manner. I'm very disappointed in his lack of response and have finally taken my car in to a local guy to get tuned.
If I had it back, Id've gone in a different direction to begin with.
03-22-2005, 09:28 AM
#11
Former Vendor
93Ragtop.
I do not doubt one bit that tuning on a dyno in person could yield a 20hp peak gain. I am also assuming that your talking peak values....what about the rest of the curve? Sometimes a compromise of a peak value to gain 10 or more HP across the entire lower range is better. Can you elaborate on when and how each chip was compared?
I have always explained that its nearly impossible to get things 100% perfect from a distance. I also always encourage individuals to do a little "tuning" on their own by playing with the base timing values and also the fuel pressure. The curves of these parameters are more important than the values themselves - by moving the base timing and the fuel pressure you can dial in exactly what your car wants.
In addition, you should realize that there are MANY other parameters, patches and other methods to change parameters than what tunercat can offer and will NOT show. So while you think your making an accurate comparison, you are merely comparing the parameters as tunercat sees them. Anyone that knows will tell you that tunercat is constantly adding these newer parameters as they become aware, for example: the location that triggers the upshift light was just added to their menues. We are contunially learning new location that control different parameters and interact differentially with other parameters.
In addition, moving back to the in person tuning vs. distance tuning, a 20 hp gain is pretty minimal in comparison given everything else is dead even. Your talking perhaps a .05sec gain at the track, or the difference between a warm drivetrain and cold one, or a simple change in weather. Also realize as I explain to everyone, that my tunes are not on the ragged edge as it might be now. If they were your knock sensor would be disabled and many other enhancements that would surely gain HP - but since I am not there in person to tune your car, I do not feel confortable nearing that edge.
I have tuned from a distance nearly EVERY fast C4 car on this forum. Corky's 10.27, Jims 11.2 , Ralphs 10.93, Insanities 11.1s, Hooked up 10.0X, and many others with great success. Your car I believe went 11s with the chip. I am curious to see what it will yield with the extra 20hp.
I give each tune my best, and I if someone can eek a 20 hp gain in person while tuning to a dyno outputs, then I am not going to be disapointed in my attempts. If you would be reporting a 40-50hp gain, then I would feel I had failed or missed something.
Also many of us that do race on a regular basis realize how fragile a 20 hp gain or loss can be had. While many here might think that is a HUGE difference, my guess is you will not see one difference at the track, and might even slow a little if your talking peak values alone and not paying attention to the whole curve.
I do not doubt one bit that tuning on a dyno in person could yield a 20hp peak gain. I am also assuming that your talking peak values....what about the rest of the curve? Sometimes a compromise of a peak value to gain 10 or more HP across the entire lower range is better. Can you elaborate on when and how each chip was compared?
I have always explained that its nearly impossible to get things 100% perfect from a distance. I also always encourage individuals to do a little "tuning" on their own by playing with the base timing values and also the fuel pressure. The curves of these parameters are more important than the values themselves - by moving the base timing and the fuel pressure you can dial in exactly what your car wants.
In addition, you should realize that there are MANY other parameters, patches and other methods to change parameters than what tunercat can offer and will NOT show. So while you think your making an accurate comparison, you are merely comparing the parameters as tunercat sees them. Anyone that knows will tell you that tunercat is constantly adding these newer parameters as they become aware, for example: the location that triggers the upshift light was just added to their menues. We are contunially learning new location that control different parameters and interact differentially with other parameters.
In addition, moving back to the in person tuning vs. distance tuning, a 20 hp gain is pretty minimal in comparison given everything else is dead even. Your talking perhaps a .05sec gain at the track, or the difference between a warm drivetrain and cold one, or a simple change in weather. Also realize as I explain to everyone, that my tunes are not on the ragged edge as it might be now. If they were your knock sensor would be disabled and many other enhancements that would surely gain HP - but since I am not there in person to tune your car, I do not feel confortable nearing that edge.
I have tuned from a distance nearly EVERY fast C4 car on this forum. Corky's 10.27, Jims 11.2 , Ralphs 10.93, Insanities 11.1s, Hooked up 10.0X, and many others with great success. Your car I believe went 11s with the chip. I am curious to see what it will yield with the extra 20hp.
I give each tune my best, and I if someone can eek a 20 hp gain in person while tuning to a dyno outputs, then I am not going to be disapointed in my attempts. If you would be reporting a 40-50hp gain, then I would feel I had failed or missed something.
Also many of us that do race on a regular basis realize how fragile a 20 hp gain or loss can be had. While many here might think that is a HUGE difference, my guess is you will not see one difference at the track, and might even slow a little if your talking peak values alone and not paying attention to the whole curve.
03-22-2005, 09:31 AM
#12
Former Vendor
I have always explained that its nearly impossible to get things 100% perfect from a distance. I also always encourage individuals to do a little "tuning" on their own by playing with the base timing values and also the fuel pressure. The curves of these parameters are more important than the values themselves - by moving the base timing and the fuel pressure you can dial in exactly what your car wants.
In addition, you should realize that there are MANY other parameters, patches and other methods to change parameters than what tunercat can offer and will NOT show. So while you think your making an accurate comparison, you are merely comparing the parameters as tunercat sees them. Anyone that knows will tell you that tunercat is constantly adding these newer parameters as they become aware, for example: the location that triggers the upshift light was just added to their menues. We are contunially learning new location that control different parameters and interact differentially with other parameters.
In addition, moving back to the in person tuning vs. distance tuning, a 20 hp gain is pretty minimal in comparison given everything else is dead even. Your talking perhaps a .05sec gain at the track, or the difference between a warm drivetrain and cold one, or a simple change in weather. Also realize as I explain to everyone, that my tunes are not on the ragged edge as it might be now. If they were your knock sensor would be disabled and many other enhancements that would surely gain HP - but since I am not there in person to tune your car, I do not feel confortable nearing that edge.
I have tuned from a distance nearly EVERY fast C4 car on this forum. Corky's 10.27, Jims 11.2 , Ralphs 10.93, Insanities 11.1s, Hooked up 10.0X, and many others with great success. Your car I believe went 11s with the chip. I am curious to see what it will yield with the extra 20hp.
I give each tune my best, and I if someone can eek a 20 hp gain in person while tuning to a dyno outputs, then I am not going to be disapointed in my attempts. If you would be reporting a 40-50hp gain, then I would feel I had failed or missed something. Also many of us that do race on a regular basis realize how fragile a 20 hp gain or loss can be had. While many here might think that is a HUGE difference, my guess is you will not see one difference at the track, and might even slow a little if your talking peak values alone and not paying attention to the whole curve.
In addition, you should realize that there are MANY other parameters, patches and other methods to change parameters than what tunercat can offer and will NOT show. So while you think your making an accurate comparison, you are merely comparing the parameters as tunercat sees them. Anyone that knows will tell you that tunercat is constantly adding these newer parameters as they become aware, for example: the location that triggers the upshift light was just added to their menues. We are contunially learning new location that control different parameters and interact differentially with other parameters.
In addition, moving back to the in person tuning vs. distance tuning, a 20 hp gain is pretty minimal in comparison given everything else is dead even. Your talking perhaps a .05sec gain at the track, or the difference between a warm drivetrain and cold one, or a simple change in weather. Also realize as I explain to everyone, that my tunes are not on the ragged edge as it might be now. If they were your knock sensor would be disabled and many other enhancements that would surely gain HP - but since I am not there in person to tune your car, I do not feel confortable nearing that edge.
I have tuned from a distance nearly EVERY fast C4 car on this forum. Corky's 10.27, Jims 11.2 , Ralphs 10.93, Insanities 11.1s, Hooked up 10.0X, and many others with great success. Your car I believe went 11s with the chip. I am curious to see what it will yield with the extra 20hp.
I give each tune my best, and I if someone can eek a 20 hp gain in person while tuning to a dyno outputs, then I am not going to be disapointed in my attempts. If you would be reporting a 40-50hp gain, then I would feel I had failed or missed something.
Also many of us that do race on a regular basis realize how fragile a 20 hp gain or loss can be had. While many here might think that is a HUGE difference, my guess is you will not see one difference at the track, and might even slow a little if your talking peak values alone and not paying attention to the whole curve.
03-22-2005, 10:01 AM
#13
Safety Car
Great Post and I like the fact you tried not to flame anyone. As mentioned in an earlier post you can not compare a dyno tune to a mail order tune. I always use a mail order tune for my base line and then get the thing dyno tuned. The person I use for my $50 mail order is Ion Sulton, if anyone cares to know. He has tuned every LT1 platform I have ever done with great drivability and the motors always start and idle perfect from the moment they are started. With all that said a dyno tune will always make more power. I picked up 31 peak HP and 5-7 across the board when I dyno tuned the car at Carolina Auto Masters (CAM). Now the interesting part of your post is the fact you got a dyno tune for $250. By far that is the best price I have ever seen for a tune and dyno time together. Just curious how many pull where made and if he burnt multiple chips? I am not about to change tuners because I am very please with Ion and Jeff but for anyone close enough to get PCM for less to tune $250 is as good of a deal as you will find.
http://www.madz28.com/ Ion’s web site
http://www.carolinaautomasters.com Jeff at CAM
http://www.madz28.com/ Ion’s web site
http://www.carolinaautomasters.com Jeff at CAM
03-22-2005, 10:38 AM
#15
Drifting
Member Since: Oct 2003
Location: CALGARY ab
Posts: 1,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 93 ragtop
In a nutshell I got 341.2 hp and 369.6 torque from Ski Down It’s chip. From PCMFORLESS, I got 362.1 hp and 379.6 torque. That’s a increase of 21hp and 10 lbs. Torque. Alvin (owner of PCMFORLESS) programmed the entire chip and not just the topend. My BLM’s are now much more in line, not like it was with the Ski Down It chip. Now, for even more good news, Alvin charge was $150.00 for the tune and the dyno time worked out to $100.00 for a total of $250 for a dyno tune.
The charge for Ski Down It’s tune was $260.00 + an additional $45.00 to get a emissions tune done on a different chip. That’s a total of $305.00 + shipping to return it at least 2 additional times trying to get it to run correctly, which it never did.
With Jesse’s (aka Ski Down It) tune the AF ratio were very rich. I sent the dyno sheets to a couple of reputable tuners on this board and they agreed it was the tune causing the problem. Jesse insisted the tune was fine, it was a problem with my car. I then purchased data master and made some scans, as well as having the dyno charts, with AF ratios. Again I sent these out to the same tuners and again they believed my tune was the problem.
Well by this time I pretty much figured I was wasting my time and money with Jesse so I decided to buy a prom burner, a few reburnable chips and a copy of tuner cat.
As most of you know there are 3 basic categories with tuner cat. Switches, constants, and tables. Also with tunercat you can load 2 bins in and compare them.
Well I loaded the stock bin and Jesse’s bin and found the standard changes IE Switch changes, constants such as changing the fan selection temp. Etc. had been changed, but the ONLY table changes were the following.
knock retard recovery factor Vs RPM is changed from >3600 to 6400 rpm by -0.777 >2. PE % change to fuel/air ratio Vs. RPM was changed >from 1200-2000 rpm by -0.8 and from 2400-7500 rpm by >0.8 >That seems to be it.
The VE tables were never touched and this is one of the most important things to be adjusted on a speed density car such as mine.
To make matters even worse, the additional $45.00 I paid for the emissions chip reads identical to his performance chip.
I .
One of them even sent me a bin file to try, which ran much better then the Ski Down It chip.
I am not posting this trying to get an argument going
If I had it to do all over I would use Alvin to dyno tune my car and saved hundreds of dollars in equipment and mail order tunes. His service has been first rate and quite a bargain.
The charge for Ski Down It’s tune was $260.00 + an additional $45.00 to get a emissions tune done on a different chip. That’s a total of $305.00 + shipping to return it at least 2 additional times trying to get it to run correctly, which it never did.
With Jesse’s (aka Ski Down It) tune the AF ratio were very rich. I sent the dyno sheets to a couple of reputable tuners on this board and they agreed it was the tune causing the problem. Jesse insisted the tune was fine, it was a problem with my car. I then purchased data master and made some scans, as well as having the dyno charts, with AF ratios. Again I sent these out to the same tuners and again they believed my tune was the problem.
Well by this time I pretty much figured I was wasting my time and money with Jesse so I decided to buy a prom burner, a few reburnable chips and a copy of tuner cat.
As most of you know there are 3 basic categories with tuner cat. Switches, constants, and tables. Also with tunercat you can load 2 bins in and compare them.
Well I loaded the stock bin and Jesse’s bin and found the standard changes IE Switch changes, constants such as changing the fan selection temp. Etc. had been changed, but the ONLY table changes were the following.
knock retard recovery factor Vs RPM is changed from >3600 to 6400 rpm by -0.777 >2. PE % change to fuel/air ratio Vs. RPM was changed >from 1200-2000 rpm by -0.8 and from 2400-7500 rpm by >0.8 >That seems to be it.
The VE tables were never touched and this is one of the most important things to be adjusted on a speed density car such as mine.
To make matters even worse, the additional $45.00 I paid for the emissions chip reads identical to his performance chip.
I .
One of them even sent me a bin file to try, which ran much better then the Ski Down It chip.
I am not posting this trying to get an argument going
If I had it to do all over I would use Alvin to dyno tune my car and saved hundreds of dollars in equipment and mail order tunes. His service has been first rate and quite a bargain.
now a days, money well spent is worth more in the long run, with all the hardware available to the corvette owner it pretty easy to diagnose any technical short comings very quickly!
03-22-2005, 10:45 AM
#16
Drifting
Member Since: Oct 2003
Location: CALGARY ab
Posts: 1,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bradvette
i have no data to back me up, at the moment anyway. however, all indications from piston mfrs, to AFR, to my machine shop tell me my build was mechanically sound enough NOT to have 2 hypereutectic pistons partially destruct due to heavy detonation......which still leaves the tune on the table.
mine is speed density as well.
at this moment i really don't know what to say, as i'm not fully knowledgeable to make an experienced claim.....but still my gut is wrenching.....a couple more thousand $$ to fix all this mess doesn't make for a great month.
mine is speed density as well.
at this moment i really don't know what to say, as i'm not fully knowledgeable to make an experienced claim.....but still my gut is wrenching.....a couple more thousand $$ to fix all this mess doesn't make for a great month.
03-22-2005, 10:57 AM
#18
Melting Slicks
There is a Drag day at Capitol on April 24 this year. Bring it out and let's see if you can get to 11.8. It's the same Corvette clubs as put on Tony's Corvette Drag day in September, but doing it twice yearly.
We should get better air than in September.
Drag Racing at Capitol
We should get better air than in September.
Drag Racing at Capitol
03-22-2005, 11:17 AM
#20
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Jesse, You and I have been back and forth on this tuning issue in the past. I consistantly ran quicker and faster with a generic Fastchip stage 2 then I did with your tune to the advrage of .1 second and 1-2 mph in the 1/8. My blms were in the 108 range and you kept telling me there is something wrong with my car. All of this has already been relayed to you. Your answer is I have something else wrong with the car. I dont believe that fuel pressure needs to be adjusted to get a proper tune. The timing is not field adjustable on a LT1.
I dont know what software you use to tune but I do know that tunercat does not show any changes in the VE tables which is were a big part of the speed density cars need help after a cam change.
Again I paid an extra $45.00 for a second chip for emissions testing and it reads identical to your performance chip.
Jesse, from the very beginnnng we had problems such as you leaving the rev. limiter set at 5800 rpm on a car with reworked heads, hotcam and headers. I sent it back to get that corrected and you didnt and also you raised the fans on temp. back to the stock setting. At this time I told you the emissions chip would not even start the car and so I returned everything to you telling you to remove the rev limiter and I would use the MSD6al to control the revs. On this third attempt you did get the rev limiter removed and you set the fans back to the proper setting for a 160 t-stat.
Jesse, my complaint with you is the tune is nowere close to what it should be. I paid for a emissions chip which is no different then the performance chip. I have close to $400.00 in this. 250 for initial tune, 10 shipping, 45 for the emissions tune, 55 for the chip adapter and paying for shipping both ways at least 2 additional times.
Every tuner I have spoke to tells me that there has to be changes made in the tables exspecially with the VE tables. You did none of these.
It is my opinion that you just dont understand or have the ability to tune a speed density car and I feel it is my obligation to warn other forum members.
I dont know what software you use to tune but I do know that tunercat does not show any changes in the VE tables which is were a big part of the speed density cars need help after a cam change.
Again I paid an extra $45.00 for a second chip for emissions testing and it reads identical to your performance chip.
Jesse, from the very beginnnng we had problems such as you leaving the rev. limiter set at 5800 rpm on a car with reworked heads, hotcam and headers. I sent it back to get that corrected and you didnt and also you raised the fans on temp. back to the stock setting. At this time I told you the emissions chip would not even start the car and so I returned everything to you telling you to remove the rev limiter and I would use the MSD6al to control the revs. On this third attempt you did get the rev limiter removed and you set the fans back to the proper setting for a 160 t-stat.
Jesse, my complaint with you is the tune is nowere close to what it should be. I paid for a emissions chip which is no different then the performance chip. I have close to $400.00 in this. 250 for initial tune, 10 shipping, 45 for the emissions tune, 55 for the chip adapter and paying for shipping both ways at least 2 additional times.
Every tuner I have spoke to tells me that there has to be changes made in the tables exspecially with the VE tables. You did none of these.
It is my opinion that you just dont understand or have the ability to tune a speed density car and I feel it is my obligation to warn other forum members.
