[Clap135]

Originally Posted by ZTUNER

I know the piggies on the market are good - yes i got one (JB3 ) and yes most likely the other brand can cook you breakfast while giving you a BJ and control your meth but in the end YOU can't really tune it. Reason i switched to cobb - no screwing with the ecu case and once the ATR is out YOU can control it. I didn't go GIAC because i want to be able to tune it myself. I don't care about the invisibility because I do not believe in screwing the car manufacturer out of warranty money if it is legitimately my fault for the car screwing up.

That being said I have used the AP in different applications and it works as advertised. The Cobb crew are good to work with and are PROFESSIONAL in their communication even if you are at fault. They refrain from sniping other tuners and freely admit if they are wrong or don't know something. To me thats worth its weight in gold and thats where my money is going.

Cobb better release the ATR otherwise i will have to eat my words

Harry

amen, problem is that you represent about 1 percent of this community.

[ZTUNER]

Originally Posted by Clap135

amen, problem is that you represent about 1 percent of this community.

Thats is most likely correct. I must be too old or something. Anyhow good news - my Ap install went super smooth. Other than finding the "begin firmware update" button, everything was easy. That too was my kids asking a 100 questions a min.

Firmware update to laptop then to ap took 5 minutes.
Ap downloaded my stock rom in 8 min
AP uploaded its stuff to the ecu in 10 min

During the upload there wre all sorts of bells and whistles from the car and the fuel pump ran all the time it seems. After upload there was some clicking and i turned the ign off and on and had a cel whih is the usual one cobb said would be present. Cleared it and the cel went away but the actual code still remained when checked by cobb. Used my bt to check and had that 1 cel ONLY . Quick test drive showed no issues. Car feels the same off boost and spool up feels same but higher Calling it a night , logging to follow in the AM.

ty

Harry

[Jake@MOTIV]

Harry good to see you here. We know each other from the Mazda platform we just came from - shoot me a PM - chris i'll tell you who he is later - good people though.

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by FlyLow335i

Harry good to see you here. We know each other from the Mazda platform we just came from - shoot me a PM - chris i'll tell you who he is later - good people though.

I know who harry is lol.

[shifterboy45]

Originally Posted by BmwFanny

If sb45 has a point, would we see similar issues with giac / ess or other flashes? I know it is speculative for most of us here, but it is certainly conceivable that BMW squirrels a coding mismatch away. On the other hand, piggybacks have been around for years, you would think they would focus more in that area.

In spite of the theoretical feasibility, I'd also say that every tuner / warranty issue I've read about has physical issues, actual codes, etc. I do not recall hidden code issues after the proceed/bt cable etc learned to clear the non obd codes.

Of course, I don't claim to know all cases, and may have missed a few here.

Sb45, if you have a conflict of interest, either working for a tuner or BMW or siemens, etc, why not just say that. If you are sure others would react negatively to more info, don't you think they might pick up your allusions as equally bad when a forum member's aha moment finds the hidden secret (42)?
Are you claiming to have actual inside knowledge you won't share, or just an educated guess you feel strongly about?

i have experience in different areas which has given me a big picture view of what can and does happen when things are investigated. my comments do not reveal any type of information that is not generally known, or can be obtained from inquiry to the right people.
now if methods were discussed (which they will not be).... then id have some issues to deal with.

im not trying to snub anyones sales -- tune or otherwise, im interested in those that may face the consequences of uninformed decisions.

when i started out in this industry there was no warranty --
u break it you buy it! no lease programs - you were owners, and accepted the loss whatever happened. but all this invisiblity stuff -- skirtting the warranty .. what BMW can see and what they cant talk is as misleading as a pitch from a insurance salesman.

the car industry has evolved -- and so has technology -- so will the ability to circumvent some systems -- but i doubt all of them... since outside information of what goes on inside is scarce... just like everyone respects the vendors right to proprietary information -- why should a manufacturer be treated any different?

disclaimer:
these are personal views, and comments ---

[BmwFanFL]

Thanks - that does add color for me. You'd probably like "cryptonomicon by Neil Stephenson."

I agree - people need to be aware that "invisibility" can change, even retroactively.

With many disparate programmable computing devices throughout the vehicle, it is certainly possible BMW *does* have more info and insight than we've observed based on external actions (warranty/repair issues).

They would know that if they leverage a formerly secret coding means to determine tuning conclusively, they will send every tuner to the drawing board and start the next cycle in the arms race. They could make a decision to watch and wait and take a few hits.

I have experience with systems to detect and prevent certain types of online malicious behavior. We never reveal more than 10% of what we know forensically when we do discuss determinations. A significant factor in the reasoning is keeping the methods and signals secure. BMW could have a very similar thought process going on, such as: Well 1 major repair a week ... not worth exposing other data.

I say all of this purely speculatively as far as what BMW actually does. However, my direct experience with large scale organizations supports the possibility.

If you tune, you should at least beware and accept those risks. I think sb45 raises real risks (not certainties, IMO) for flash tuners. I suspect similar unknown risks are present for the piggy back users, as detecting the virtual reality mode into which the ECU is thereby placed wouldn't take much code either (BMW can and certainly has purchased 1 of each tune variant). In either case, tuner beware.

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

i have experience in different areas which has given me a big picture view of what can and does happen when things are investigated. my comments do not reveal any type of information that is not generally known, or can be obtained from inquiry to the right people.
now if methods were discussed (which they will not be).... then id have some issues to deal with.

im not trying to snub anyones sales -- tune or otherwise, im interested in those that may face the consequences of uninformed decisions.

when i started out in this industry there was no warranty --
u break it you buy it! no lease programs - you were owners, and accepted the loss whatever happened. but all this invisiblity stuff -- skirtting the warranty .. what BMW can see and what they cant talk is as misleading as a pitch from a insurance salesman.

the car industry has evolved -- and so has technology -- so will the ability to circumvent some systems -- but i doubt all of them... since outside information of what goes on inside is scarce... just like everyone respects the vendors right to proprietary information -- why should a manufacturer be treated any different?

disclaimer:
these are personal views, and comments ---

[shifterboy45]

its hard to be against something i love to do..

there are solutions out that are good, but a little restraint goes a long way... keeping money in your pocket that could be used elsewhere, rather than facing a huge repair bill.

there has been a paradym shift, from buying the car for the love of driving to creating the latest and greatest drag car. re-engineering the car, if you have the pink slip on it is sweet and no one should take that personalization out of the hand of the end consumer.. but the fact is a lot of these cars are going to be returned to the dealer, for the purpose of resale.

its legendary, that a well kept BMW is worth its resale price, yes the fuel pump issue has been evident on the car for some time, but still in all there are more and more E9xs on the road despite the problem. go figure

at the same time there is a tiny section of the market that is adventurous, and sometime the actions of the few affect the many...

for the record i get a chance to see a lot of cars -- yes some with stickers from the major forums.. and we treat those people just like any other -- and sometimes moreso -- making sure we return their cars in the condition as delivered to us... so this isnt a "oh look he mods!! trip" -- some sweet rides are out there, but if push comes to shove -- there is no laying down and tapping out..

thanks for hearing me out
Cheers!!

Originally Posted by BmwFanny

Thanks - that does add color for me. You'd probably like "cryptonomicon by Neil Stephenson."

I agree - people need to be aware that "invisibility" can change, even retroactively.

With many disparate programmable computing devices throughout the vehicle, it is certainly possible BMW *does* have more info and insight than we've observed based on external actions (warranty/repair issues).

They would know that if they leverage a formerly secret coding means to determine tuning conclusively, they will send every tuner to the drawing board and start the next cycle in the arms race. They could make a decision to watch and wait and take a few hits.

I have experience with systems to detect and prevent certain types of online malicious behavior. We never reveal more than 10% of what we know forensically when we do discuss determinations. A significant factor in the reasoning is keeping the methods and signals secure. BMW could have a very similar thought process going on, such as: Well 1 major repair a week ... not worth exposing other data.

I say all of this purely speculatively as far as what BMW actually does. However, my direct experience with large scale organizations supports the possibility.

If you tune, you should at least beware and accept those risks. I think sb45 raises real risks (not certainties, IMO) for flash tuners. I suspect similar unknown risks are present for the piggy back users, as detecting the virtual reality mode into which the ECU is thereby placed wouldn't take much code either (BMW can and certainly has purchased 1 of each tune variant). In either case, tuner beware.

[Hisam135i]

If theres anything Ive learned from reading this thread is that no tunes are safe to run on your car and if the dealer really wants to they can find a trace of the tune as in there is no 100% way you can clear ALL codes and make it as if there was nothing there, yes? or am i missing something very important? I have no background what so ever in tuning cars whats so ever btw...

[Enicinitas]

Like I said in another post... BMW found a booger on my dash and let me off lightly - thank the good lord - However, I was told if any booger ever presented itself on my dash or any other place in my car (bottom of the driver's seat is the first place that they check) - my car was gonna go straight to the BMW gestapo in Germany. Moreover, I was led to believe they get a huge bonus for voiding warranties. Think about stiffler looking for tail...

[BmwFanFL]

Aside from the assertion that a short flash cycle with optional stuff turned off and all but a dead battery should be fine, i think you summed it up fine.

Being moderate, avoiding engine and drive train risks, and being lucky can work out well. But don't bet dollars you don't have on invisibility, for both practical and ethical reasons.

If I tune, lightly, I don't want normal injector, hpfp type stuff rejected. Obviously half shafts go too ;-) under normal use. If I boost to 22psi and fry something, i will pay, but only want tunes that don't do such things.

Although I own the car, I also don't want to ever pass a time bomb to someone else.

If I tune, and I might jump with Cobb stage 1 ease of use, I would realistically be pushing the car only a few minutes a week.

Originally Posted by Hisam135i

If theres anything Ive learned from reading this thread is that no tunes are safe to run on your car and if the dealer really wants to they can find a trace of the tune as in there is no 100% way you can clear ALL codes and make it as if there was nothing there, yes? or am i missing something very important? I have no background what so ever in tuning cars whats so ever btw...

[boostm3]

I have a new N55 135i and have been getting in a tuning mood lately. I like the idea of the Cobb more than the piggybacks at this point, mainly because of its ease of installation and removal for dealer appointments, and its screen displayed data logging abilities. But with the problematic nature of our HPFPs, and the possibility of getting a long term warranty on it from bmw like the N54s have, the last thing I want to do is jeopardize that warranty in any way.

Is the reason the piggybacks dont write to this FASTA area that the ecu does not perceive these reported driving parameters that exceed stock as exceptional when done so with the Piggyback because the piggyback 'tricks' the ecu into 'thinking' everything is 'ok'? Whereas with a Flash, limits thats are exceeded are 'perceived' as such by the ecu and therefore, recorded in this FASTA area which is non flashable and therefore, the data persists for dealers to examine if theyre in an examining mood? I would imagine that they may very well get in that mood when the car is brought in in Limp mode as a result of a potential HPFP failure. According to the bmw bulletin posted by Shiv on page 8 of this thread, and comments about it, theres an increasing awareness fostered by bmw about the dealers becoming more savvy about detecting aftermarket tunes on cars in for certain kinds of service. So much so that in an earlier post it was reported that bmw headquarters downloads this data themselves for the soul purpose of checking for tunes.

This is all pretty scary stuff to someone who wants to acquire a tune, particularly because the likelihood of being in a code detecting situation due to failed HPFPs is, at some point, a virtual certainty! Does all this mean, bottom line, that the absolute only way to be undetected is with a piggyback? I need to find this out for sure before I take the bold step.

thanks for any info on this subject.

[BmwFanFL]

Boost,

I'm far from the most knowledgeable here in terms of actual tunes or even tuning, but I'll take a shot.

This thread has discussed potential detection risks that would be more applicable to a flash. There *may* be measures in place, and certainly *could* be, for BMW to detect flashing. These could exist now (less likely) or be added in a future DME update.

It is also known that certain piggyback behaviors, at times, throw codes that dealers/BMW would see. The common piggyback tunes have solved these known problems if you clear codes when directed. They also avoid most codes in the first place.

In my reading, there are no confirmed cases of BMW seeing the after-effects of a flash or the after-effects of a current generation piggyback, when properly used and subsequently removed. In all cases, codes must be checked and cleared as needed, though most endeavor to prevent codes in the first place (and some have built in check/clearing abilities, while other used separate tools).

Given that state of history, I don't think invisibility should drive your decision. *However*, at any time, even retroactively, we could find out that BMW can detect either or both types of tune. I'm not predicting that it will happen, but I am highly confident that it could happen, technologically speaking. Of course, it is an arms race, and the tunes may or may not find a way to defeat a new technique, should new information surface.

The lack of evidence of BMW detecting tunes does not imply the lack of ability or information on their part. They may have the ability and not view it as a priority or in their interests.

Originally Posted by boostm3

I have a new N55 135i and have been getting in a tuning mood lately. I like the idea of the Cobb more than the piggybacks at this point, mainly because of its ease of installation and removal for dealer appointments, and its screen displayed data logging abilities. But with the problematic nature of our HPFPs, and the possibility of getting a long term warranty on it from bmw like the N54s have, the last thing I want to do is jeopardize that warranty in any way.

Is the reason the piggybacks dont write to this FASTA area that the ecu does not perceive these reported driving parameters that exceed stock as exceptional when done so with the Piggyback because the piggyback 'tricks' the ecu into 'thinking' everything is 'ok'? Whereas with a Flash, limits thats are exceeded are 'perceived' as such by the ecu and therefore, recorded?

Does all this mean, bottom line, that the absolute only way to be undetected is with a piggyback? I need to find this out for sure before I take the bold step.

thanks for any info on this subject.

[boostm3]

Originally Posted by BmwFanny

Boost,

I'm far from the most knowledgeable here in terms of actual tunes or even tuning, but I'll take a shot.

This thread has discussed potential detection risks that would be more applicable to a flash. There *may* be measures in place, and certainly *could* be, for BMW to detect flashing. These could exist now (less likely) or be added in a future DME update.

It is also known that certain piggyback behaviors, at times, throw codes that dealers/BMW would see. The common piggyback tunes have solved these known problems if you clear codes when directed. They also avoid most codes in the first place.

In my reading, there are no confirmed cases of BMW seeing the after-effects of a flash or the after-effects of a current generation piggyback, when properly used and subsequently removed. In all cases, codes must be checked and cleared as needed, though most endeavor to prevent codes in the first place (and some have built in check/clearing abilities, while other used separate tools).

Given that state of history, I don't think invisibility should drive your decision. *However*, at any time, even retroactively, we could find out that BMW can detect either or both types of tune. I'm not predicting that it will happen, but I am highly confident that it could happen, technologically speaking. Of course, it is an arms race, and the tunes may or may not find a way to defeat a new technique, should new information surface.

The lack of evidence of BMW detecting tunes does not imply the lack of ability or information on their part. They may have the ability and not view it as a priority or in their interests.

Thanks Fanny (btw, gotta know how you got that name bmwfanny!). IOW, if i wanted to absolutely assure myself of not having to be out of pocket on a future HPFP failure, the best bet would be No Tunes! I dont know... My former car was a '99 E36 M3. My selling dealer happened to also be a Dinan dealer, hence, 4 mos after I bought her new, I had them install a Dinan Vortech supercharger and Dinan exhaust. Experience being what it is, Ive always been afraid of warranty issues, so my position was, since I didnt want to wait til 4 yrs was up and I was off warranty to enjoy the added power, I opted for the one choice which I knew would tide me over til I was off warranty and not negatively impact my warranty coverage. Like most plans, this one had a problem. Just a few K miles shy of my 50k mile warranty running out, my Dinan exhaust blew a weld about 8" long in the rear of the muffler.. The kicker is, Dinan refused to honor it.... Know why? One of the weaknesses of the stock dinan system was, with no intercooler, power dropoff was severe up top due to IATs that ran about ambient plus over 100 degrees, especially with my 10" crank pulley and 2 extra psi boost! At that time, about 2002, there were no good intercoolers for that system except the RMS water to air unit, which would have definitely blown the warranty ( subsequently bought it once warranty was up, along with sensational Nick G tune custom done on his Dyno in Fla ), however Active Autowerkes (AA) out of Fla along with Aquamist had a water injection kit hot off the press.. I bought it, and to my delight, data logging showed it lowered IATs by about 50 degrees at full boost near redline.

But I digress.. Back to Dinan not honoring his exhaust warranty. He claimed that because the car had water injection, and because I was running 2 xtra psi, he would refuse to support the exhaust. This boggled my mind... Magnuson Moss states that to deny warranty coverage, the mod in question must be shown to have directly had negative impact on the part in question. I maintained that the Water Injection cools the charge, and therefore could not be responsible for the muffler weld blowing.. Same for the 2 extra psi.. How could that blow a muffler weld? ... But my argument fell on deaf ears.

So, bottom line is, experience has taught me to be very wary of car and parts makers..... Ive found that occasionally, they will look for any opportunity to find ways to deny coverage. Certainly this is not true of all of them, but certainly was for Steve Dinan. BMW was much better.... Again, about 10k miles short of the end of my new car warranty, I discovered hairline crack in the driver side rear shock tower. Bmw, at no cost to me, took the car and gave it to a body shop of theirs, who welded in new shock tower tops, not just in the failed one, but in the other one as well, and gave me a loaner for the 5 days it took to complete the repair.. btw, that model had very weak shock towers, especially if running aftermarket suspension, which I was, courtesy of Mssr. Dinan. If the repair isnt done, eventually, the shocks wind up pushing right through the shock mount and into the trunk of the car.. So I was quite impressed with Bmw's repair, and their acceptance of the job for warranty coverage.

Im planning on waiting for the N55 Cobb tune.. As a product I think its perfect for me. And if we didnt have HPFPs that were so problematic, it would be a no brainer. But since this isnt the case, Im going to have to give this very careful thought, and, be prepared, if I decide to go ahead with the purchase, to absorb the entire cost of a new HPFP if and when the occasion dictates, and any other engine related problems.. That just seems to be the potential reality.

[jzchen]

I'm afraid I haven't read all the posts, but:

Decompiling something is a whole different ballgame. How fast do you think Siemens can spit out an ECU? It can be noted that decompilers in software are somewhat illegal. Anything is possible if you decompile. Cobb obviously has had practice with this, and this is different than connecting through protocol provided/limited by the manufacturer.

[BmwFanFL]

Originally Posted by boostm3

Thanks Fanny (btw, gotta know how you got that name bmwfanny!).

BmwFan was taken. So were the 3 or 4 things I tried next. I thought Fanny looked a little funny, so I grabbed it before someone else did. Life hasn't been the same since ;-)

True story, except for the life changing bit.

[BmwFanFL]

I'm not sure how you conclude "decompilers" are illegal. If used contrary to a license agreement with reverse engineering provisions, it would be a civil issue. If used to get around certain media protections (DMCA), you could be right. I'm sure there would be other cases as well. In general, though, they are just a tool.

I'd be surprised if flash vendors haven't decompiled at least portions of the DME code.

Of course, someone who learns the native instruction set of the DME doesn't even need a decompiler. They could potentially understand the DME from only a hex editor or dissassembler. This is unlikely these days, but possible.

Originally Posted by jzchen

I'm afraid I haven't read all the posts, but:

Decompiling something is a whole different ballgame. How fast do you think Siemens can spit out an ECU? It can be noted that decompilers in software are somewhat illegal. Anything is possible if you decompile. Cobb obviously has had practice with this, and this is different than connecting through protocol provided/limited by the manufacturer.

[jzchen]

Originally Posted by BmwFanny

I'm not sure how you conclude "decompilers" are illegal. If used contrary to a license agreement with reverse engineering provisions, it would be a civil issue. If used to get around certain media protections (DMCA), you could be right. I'm sure there would be other cases as well. In general, though, they are just a tool.

I'd be surprised if flash vendors haven't decompiled at least portions of the DME code.

Of course, someone who learns the native instruction set of the DME doesn't even need a decompiler. They could potentially understand the DME from only a hex editor or dissassembler. This is unlikely these days, but possible.

Okay.

I did say "somewhat." Should we go to a dictionary to see what that means? OJ Simpson lost a lot of money civilly, (please go ahead and correct my spelling if it is wrong...)

[shifterboy45]

I always wondered, does OJ drive a BMW ???

[shifterboy45]

and the point is ??

just because you doubt my veracity, doesnt dismiss what you dont see... so best thing is to live with it.

as for BS.... ive sat around for a couple of years -- not silently -- listening to all this invisiblity nonsense -- youre like a kid standing outside of a mansion and trying to guess whats inside, and pissed cuz no one will invite you in --

take a deep breath and think about it.

[RambleJ]

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

and the point is ??

just because you doubt my veracity, doesnt dismiss what you dont see... so best thing is to live with it.

as for BS.... ive sat around for a couple of years -- not silently -- listening to all this invisiblity nonsense -- youre like a kid standing outside of a mansion and trying to guess whats inside, and pissed cuz no one will invite you in --

take a deep breath and think about it.

Unless you add some substance to your comments, its nothing but hearsay. And thats what it is going to be taken for. We are not seeing any difference in warranty denials, and have not seen any changes in the BMW vs tuners aspect since they first updated the DME and added the tuner codes, which since have been easily avoidable.

[boostm3]

Originally Posted by RambleJ

Unless you add some substance to your comments, its nothing but hearsay. And thats what it is going to be taken for. We are not seeing any difference in warranty denials, and have not seen any changes in the BMW vs tuners aspect since they first updated the DME and added the tuner codes, which since have been easily avoidable.

Has there not been one report by or about an owner of a tuned N54/N55 of a denial of coverage incident by a dealer? Or are you just saying you havent seen any incidents since bmw added the 'tuner codes' ? Is this lack of reported incidents youre referring to nothing more than anecdotal? Do you doubt there's an unflashable FASTA area which may be read by bmw?

IOW, what specificially is the part you dont believe?

[bulldog_yyc]

is this FASTA for MSD80 and 81? If its just for 81, makes sense that they revised the hardware to accomadate it. Otherwise, the anti tuning codes would probably be a software upgrade only to the existing MSD80 unit. Anyone care to comment?