Cobb's street tuner release notes

[Kevin M]

Okay, apparently you don't understand the differences between an inertia-based dyno (like a DynoJet) and a load-based dyno (Mustang, Dynodynamics). Load based dynos DO replicate the wind and rolling resistance of road tuning. They use the same principles as a DeltaDash road dyno, except that the load is identical on each run, whereas that is quite impossible on the road. As you go faster on a load-based dyno, load INCREASES. Just like wind resistance. And nobody's putting words in your mouth; you keep saying "I don't need a dyno because I have a G-Tech and gauges and a streettuner." You continue to argue against the value of dynos.

[sybir]

While I'm hesitant to even jump in this thing, don't paint all dynos with the same paint, either.

The Mustang we use is not just weighted drums, it has complex processes that apply resistance to the rollers to emulate more "real-world" conditions. Sure, airflow is always contestable, but when the weight of the car is accounted for, the gearing is accounted for, the wind resistance and rolling resistance of the base car is accounted for (I concede that it's the base car we're using for specs) to some extent, by the HP @ 50 modifier; this value is vehicle-specific, and adds to the reality of the simulation by accounting for how mucht he car wants to decelerate at speed due to wind resistance, rolling resistance frictional losses through the gearbox if they're unusally high, etc.

We can run quarter-miles on the dyno, from a standing start, we can simulate hills and other high-load conditions, etc.

Anyways, stepping back out.

Nate was tuning with ECUtek long before we got a dyno. We got a dyno so we had repeatable results, much safer and more effective tuning, and less 3rd-gear romps behind Sunrise

and I'm done.

Scott, I don't think your analogy is tortured, I think it's a really good comparison. I'm not making value judgments here, just trying to add a bit of info.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by sperry

Dean, I guess the argument I'm trying to make is not that tuning w/o the dyno isn't a viable tuning method, it's just that it's lower tech than the way your car was already tuned...

I understand you analogy, but it is incomplete and makes some assumptions not in evidence. How did the professional calibrate his caliper? How many places on the pipe did he take his measurement? If he takes only one measurement, and I take 100, at different locations, and his tolerance is a nanometer, and mine is a millimter, my average has a higher probablity of being accurate than his single measurement.

Professionals have economic and tirme constraints that normally do not permit them to do a very thourough job. Technology has helped them do a good job in a short amount of time, but that is not the same thing.

I bet either you or I could do a better alignment in our garages with low tech tools like tape measures, and levels than most any garage could tunr out in there normal 30-60 minute alignment on a computer laser, digital whiz bang aligner. It might take us 4-8-12 hours, but we could do it. If they spent the same amount of time, they might be able to do better, but not by much.

If Nate spent 12 hours and 100 runs of different types on the Dyno tuning any of our cars, I would agree there probably wasn't much left I could get out of it, but he didn't. I can datalog hours on the street, autocross, track, etc. making miniscule changes over months of time in the actual conditions I may be competing in if possibe/needed. And along the whole process, I will be learning, or so I hope.

I also do not agree that a Dyno is higher tech than a G-tech. Dynos are so 1960s... Accelerometers etc. are the things of space travel, the 90s and beyond.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

Okay, apparently you don't understand the differences between an inertia-based dyno (like a DynoJet) and a load-based dyno (Mustang, Dynodynamics). Load based dynos DO replicate the wind and rolling resistance of road tuning. They use the same principles as a DeltaDash road dyno, except that the load is identical on each run, whereas that is quite impossible on the road. As you go faster on a load-based dyno, load INCREASES. Just like wind resistance. And nobody's putting words in your mouth; you keep saying "I don't need a dyno because I have a G-Tech and gauges and a streettuner." You continue to argue against the value of dynos.

No, you overestimate their abilities. The approximate load, they cannot accurately replicate it for any given car/tire/weather, etc.

And please reread my posts. I continue to state that Dynos are valuable tools.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

I don't think that Scott & Kevin's point about dyno tuning is necessarily wrong, because I think having access to a dyno is *far* better than not having access to one. They're great for WOT tuning, and to an extent, for part-throttle and other stuff. BUT, like Dean is saying, it's not everything either. We've spent hours with our racecar on a Mustang dyno at a local place here, but have still wound up making multiple changes once we're at the track to adjust/fix/optimize things. There's just usually not enough time to do everything at the dyno.

[MikeSTI]

Originally Posted by Dean

Professionals have economic and time constraints that normally do not permit them to do a very thourough job. Technology has helped them do a good job in a short amount of time, but that is not the same thing.

If Nate spent 12 hours and 100 runs of different types on the Dyno tuning any of our cars, I would agree there probably wasn't much left I could get out of it, but he didn't. I can datalog hours on the street, autocross, track, etc. making miniscule changes over months of time in the actual conditions I may be competing in if possibe/needed. And along the whole process, I will be learning, or so I hope.

I agree with Dean and would also like to understand the tuning side of things to know more about how it all works.

the funny thing is, who going to teach us? Its sad to say but I dont think Nate will do it, its already known that most tuners do not want to share thier secrets.(if there really is any secrets). I know Eric said the demo was real user friendly.

In the end I do fear what might happen as so called garage tuners start tuning in shops.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

I don't think that Scott & Kevin's point about dyno tuning is necessarily wrong, because I think having access to a dyno is *far* better than not having access to one. They're great for WOT tuning, and to an extent, for part-throttle and other stuff. BUT, like Dean is saying, it's not everything either. We've spent hours with our racecar on a Mustang dyno at a local place here, but have still wound up making multiple changes once we're at the track to adjust/fix/optimize things. There's just usually not enough time to do everything at the dyno.

I agree, that the dyno has great value, the impression I get though is that they don't feel anything additional can be gained off/after the dyno. That at least from my point of view is where I cannot agree with them.

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by Dean

No, you overestimate their abilities. They approximate load, they cannot accurately replicate it for any given car/tire/weather, etc.

Like you said before Dean, it's just math and physics, not magic. Explain why having the exact same resistance run after run is inferior to the varying resistance you get while road tuning.

Lastly, you're forgetting one important aspect here- reflashes and Cobb's AP don't need road tuning because that's already been done. You ONLY need to tweak the open loop maps, because when you don't have your foot to the fllor, who cares if you get 10 more horsepower? You aren't using it anyway at part throttle. for a car that isn't dedicated to track use, you wouldn't want to have to rebuild all that work from scratch. All you need be concerned with is the performance at high TPS values so you maximize power, and with the transitions in between. So, again- how do you get repeatable results using a road tune?

[MikeSTI]

Originally Posted by Dean

I agree, that the dyno has great value, the impression I get though is that they don't feel anything additional can be gained off/after the dyno. That at least from my point of view is where I cannot agree with them.

I understand

these are the little things that set me off too. It never fails that I get sucked in and feel I'm trying to defend the very point over and over again!

the dyno cant be the end all be all to tuning unless you have the money to spend 100's of hours on it !!!!!

[Dean]

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

Like you said before Dean, it's just math and physics, not magic. Explain why having the exact same resistance run after run is inferior to the varying resistance you get while road tuning.

It isn't, inferior damnit! It is only different. I have never claimed it was inferior!!!!

[sybir]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

I agree with Dean and would also like to understand the tuning side of things to know more about how it all works.

the funny thing is, who going to teach us? Its sad to say but I dont think Nate will do it, its already known that most tuners do not want to share thier secrets.(if there really is any secrets). I know Eric said the demo was real user friendly.

In the end I do fear what might happen as so called garage tuners start tuning in shops.

I don't think it's not wanting to share secrets, it's just good business sense. If we do everything for free, we're not going to make a living. That said, Nate will talk your ear off about nearly any subject, including tuning, we just like being the ones doing it. So are we biased, sure. But hey.

[Kevin M]

And the rest? Please enlighten me how you expect to get accurate results using non-repeatable conditions. You ever heard of the scientific method Dean? Because that's all tuning is- a series of experiments, where you base the next experiment on the results of the last. Now, before you say "I'm not saying the dyno sucks" again, I'd like to know what advantage road tuning gives over a dyno. don 't say "real world conditions" because that's hogwash.

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

Like you said before Dean, it's just math and physics, not magic. Explain why having the exact same resistance run after run is inferior to the varying resistance you get while road tuning.

Lastly, you're forgetting one important aspect here- reflashes and Cobb's AP don't need road tuning because that's already been done. You ONLY need to tweak the open loop maps, because when you don't have your foot to the fllor, who cares if you get 10 more horsepower? You aren't using it anyway at part throttle. for a car that isn't dedicated to track use, you wouldn't want to have to rebuild all that work from scratch. All you need be concerned with is the performance at high TPS values so you maximize power, and with the transitions in between. So, again- how do you get repeatable results using a road tune?

[Dean]

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

And the rest? Please enlighten me how you expect to get accurate results using non-repeatable conditions. You ever heard of the scientific method Dean? Because that's all tuning is- a series of experiments, where you base the next experiment on the results of the last. Now, before you say "I'm not saying the dyno sucks" again, I'd like to know what advantage road tuning gives over a dyno. don 't say "real world conditions" because that's hogwash.

Every single knock sensor input on the real road is real data. Every O2 reading on the road is real data. I can collect hours and hours of them for basically free! I can do them on my home track, with the rolling resistance of my tires at my pressures, on that surface at that temperature at that instant.... A Dyno can't do that!

They are different!

And did you even read my post about time, economics etc.

Aparently it will kill you to admit that any tuning other than dyno tuning has value. I'm sorry you feel that way, but respect your choice to do so.

[Kevin M]

There's no rolling resistance on a dyno? There's no knock sensor input? Basically, the only real argument I'm getting from you at this point is "I have to pay to use a dyno, and I don't want to." As usual.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

There's no rolling resistance on a dyno? There's no knock sensor input? Basically, the only real argument I'm getting from you at this point is "I have to pay to use a dyno, and I don't want to." As usual.

No, Kevin, a Dyno is a dyno, and road tuning is road tuning, they are dfferent. You can simulate some things on a dyno, but that is all it is, a simulation. The real world is the real world with all it's flaws an variations. I choose to embrace both.

Please descibe how on a dyno you would simulate a lap at Laguna Seca, Thunderhill, or even Fernley at 12PM tomorrow. Please incluide all data including track surface temperature at all points of contact, and tire temperature/pressure on each revolution at each point on each tire, air temperature, air speed, and direction, humidity, fuel load, conerweights on each tire throughout the lap, etc. Oh, and please explain how you will simulate cornering.

While you attempt to even provide a list of variables and equations involved in simulating the above, I can probably run a couple hundred real laps, or at least the the one at 12PM tomorrow if I could only get off work...

[sybir]

Originally Posted by Dean

Please descibe how on a dyno you would simulate a lap at Laguna Seca, Thunderhill, or even Fernley at 12PM tomorrow. Please incluide all data including track surface temperature at all points of contact, and tire temperature/pressure on each revolution at each point on each tire, air temperature, air speed, and direction, humidity, fuel load, conerweights on each tire throughout the lap, etc. Oh, and please explain how you will simulate cornering.

While you attempt to even provide a list of variables and equations involved in simulating the above, I can probably run a couple hundred real laps, or at least the the one at 12PM tomorrow if I could only get off work...

Devil's advocate, here, again. You're straying from the purpose of dyno tuning at this point, which is to modify the output of the car.
Track temperature and how it affects a topmount car is slightly relevant, but tire temperature/pressure, fuel load, corner weights and simulating cornering have very little to do with power output, and I'm hard-pressed to think of a situation where knowing maximum lateral load is going to make a lick of difference regarding the horsepower output of the car. It seems like you're bringing in some of the other functions the Gtech can approximate, in order to track handling, and that's a valid point for that purpose. Noone's claiming a dyno is going to be valid for that kind of data.

If you're trying to say that a Gtech is more valuable *as an engine tuning tool* because of those reasons, I'd be skeptical, because many of the variables you specified will have a negligible effect on power output. Varied rolling resistance due to tire pressure and tire temp is not going to affect horsepower/torque output appreciably.

Is it a cheaper solution, yes. Is it a more portable solution, yes.
What this whole discussion grew out of was a concern that too much user tunability can be a dangerous thing. I'm not pointing this at you, Dean, just in general. We've had way too many horror stories (and cars in the shop with major problems) from totally user-tuneable solutions, becuase they're a double-edged sword. They're powerful, but it's really easy to make a mistake in tuning that can have unanticipated results. We're not trying to say that tuning one's car themselves is a poor decision, we're just trying to offer advice based on what we've seen. Do we like reflashes? Of course. Given our experience, we feel confident that it's a safe solution, above all else. What we like even more is happy customers without engine problems, no matter how or where they're tuned, or with what software, or by who, etc..

Anyways. Let's all try to breathe a little and back off. We're all here to have fun with our cars, not bicker about semantics, right? This whole discussion has spun way off the original tack, and we're going back and forth over moot points.

[dknv]

Originally Posted by MikeK

Sorry, but this thread is about 50 times longer than my attention span

Really!

Please summarize as in 'The Dummy's Guide to Tuning'. What I think I got out of this is,
1. Dyno tuning produces mostly reproducible conditions.
1a. Dyno tuning is more expensive, and is generally performed by a professional.
2. Road tuning allows for mostly real-world conditions.
2a. Road tuning allows a user to perform their own tests, allows for their own knowledge to grow, and if not done properly can lead to engine failure.
3. There are good and bad things about either approach.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by Dean

By the way, I like it when Austin and I agree. He does this stuff for a living, just like Nate...

You're gonna inflate my ego saying stuff like this. Scott would probably agree that doesn't need to happen...

[MikeSTI]

Originally Posted by dknv

Really!

Please summarize as in 'The Dummy's Guide to Tuning'. What I think I got out of this is,
1. Dyno tuning produces mostly reproducible conditions.
1a. Dyno tuning is more expensive, and is generally performed by a professional.
2. Road tuning allows for mostly real-world conditions.
2a. Road tuning allows a user to perform their own tests, allows for their own knowledge to grow, and if not done properly can lead to engine failure.
3. There are good and bad things about either approach.

you forgot one.....

2b. Most tuners started as road tuners with no real equipment and turned out just fine

[Dean]

Good summary Debbie and Mike.

I almost wish I had never typed the words G-tech...

It was never the focus of my point, the Street Tuner was the original topic, the G-tech was just one of the accesories I wanted to go with it. Street tuning can and has been done without it for ages. If I end up with an AP ST, I will most likely start with a SS Dyno tune with as many pulls as I can afford, and Nate feels makes sense. I will then have a solid baseline from which to start. It may end up being perfect, but collecting way to much data and making small tweeks to it after that will be fun, and I hope to learn a thing or two.

One last note on this approach...

I would bet that most every race team, F1, NASCAR, etc. that have all the money in the world, Dynos, wind tunnels, etc. still tweek their "engine managment" if permitted, be it computer controlled, or a guy with a screwdriver or wrench messing with some adjstment, at the track.

[MikeK]

Originally Posted by Dean

I almost wish I had never typed the words G-tech...

It was never the focus of my point, the Street Tuner was the original topic

Yeah stop hijackz0ring my thread!

[tysonK]

I'm totally gonna have Dean tune my car. When all that shit comes out.

Unless I'm still racing against him.

BTW.

This was a really cool thread to read. I like hearing the road tuning vs dyno tuning debate. I do like the fact that road tuning is "cheap" compared to using a lot of dyno time if you have to pay for it. Having instant data is nice also in case you don't have time to go to Sac.

I'll likely never do any road tuning even if I knew what I was doing because I'm lazy and I'd rather "set it and forget it", have Nate flash my car for me. And look I didn't add and coals in teh fire with this post did I?

and.....done.

[Double Phister]

Sorry for the bump. I LOL'd at the way ST was perceived before it was released.

We can datalog ECU data and integrate the info from WB02 sensors. You could do the same with some other Innovate products like their 2 axis accelerometer bolted to the car.

Same thing with the open source stuff now (realtime/RAMtune changes are in the works).

Dynos are a nice tool to have when tuning max power. Until I get to that point I'll just average a whole bunch of 'runs' for repeatability sake.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by R4ND0M_AX3

Sorry for the bump. I LOL'd at the way ST was perceived before it was released.

We can datalog ECU data and integrate the info from WB02 sensors. You could do the same with some other Innovate products like their 2 axis accelerometer bolted to the car.

Same thing with the open source stuff now (realtime/RAMtune changes are in the works).

Dynos are a nice tool to have when tuning max power. Until I get to that point I'll just average a whole bunch of 'runs' for repeatability sake.

Man, that's some classic reading.

The best part is, now:

- S-Squared blew up my car (but not due to tuning... it was a missing fuel pump that did it) and has since gone out of business.
- I've got a user-tunable Hyrda (not that I'm tuning it on the street, but I could if I wanted).
- Dean's got a street tuner ECU, but I don't believe he's out on the freeway doing 4th gear pulls with a G-Tech, I think he's still running a dyno tuned map for the most part.

Funny how things change. Next thing you know I'll be running a MBC on the car! *snicker*

[cody]

Ha!