[Bimmer This]

Originally Posted by forza1976

I've drven the car. It's 100% legit and I was impressed by it's power!

I too have driven his car. Its no flake.

Originally Posted by 335iPSI

Why don't they hook up with Shiv and slap a damn V4 on it and let it ride! The wheel has been invented and perfected by Shiv... why bother?

Seriously? I can see that you are one of Shiv's entourage. Shiv is a great tuner BUT he's not the best. The V4 is not the answer to everything.

[Bimmer This]

Originally Posted by cn555ic

Standback is for the extreme enthusiast and if you dont know how to tune it, alot can go wrong...Alot of members here are enthusiast to some point but going with a tune like the standback is asking for trouble.

+1. If you know what your doing or know a great tuner, The CP-E standback can benifit anyone better then the V4 can.

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by Bimmer This

+1. If you know what your doing or know a great tuner, The CP-E standback can benifit anyone better then the V4 can.

I agree because you can actually be the next Shiv, but in reality how many people on this board has the common knowledge to understand the intricate details thats needed to make maps or firmware...There are many that THINK they can be Shiv, but when it comes down to it, I beg to differ....I bet maybe 3 people on this forum would be able to handle and understand the CPE standback tune....Some things are better off letting the real experts to do instead of someone thinking they are experts and fucking up the car..

[ajsalida]

Great discussion here guys. I live at 8k ft and do most of my driving above that so I'm very interested. Also considering a tune and have not found much detailed info on what goes on at these altitudes WRT tunes. Q:

1) When the turbo system ECU measures a boost target, is that over ambient or off of absolute? In other words when whatever is measuing air in the engine targets 10 PSI of boost, is it on top of ambient or is it ALWAYS 14.7 + 10 PSI absolute? [e.g. is it an absolute air mass target?] If it is the former that (clearly) is one reason why altitude power is down, since ambient is already 25% less dense, so total air mass even at 10 PSI boost over is way less than at sea level. If is the latter then the turbos are working MUCH harder to produce the delta over the ambient (up to 14.7) in addition to a boost target into thinner air.

2) It is not often recognized, but up here heat exchangers of any type tend to not work so well. The air is less dense so it simply cannot absorb as much heat off of a radiator per unit of surface area. So intercoolers aren't as efficient either. So would you require a bigger intercooler, even for the milder maps, at this elevation (8k ft-over 12k) to be safe? We only get 91 octane up here too.

[CanadianTSi]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

if pipe diameter at MAP sensor is equal and PSI is equal then CFM is equal correct?

Is this were correct then why would anyone upgrade there Turbo?

[ScaredOnce]

Shiv, are you an SAE member and if so, do you participate in any of the standards' development? From my brief involvement here and following your activities, you should be both. It'd be great to have your input into new standards development.

[blubyu]

I'm past my years in these internet arguments, but nothing annoys me more than guys that try and get in conversations when they have no clue what the hell they are talking about. Their are a lot of fanboys that ride coat tails here, but their are also ones that are pretty knowledgeable about tuning etc as a whole, not just this platform. You know who you are without having to ask.

I actually popped in this thread as I saw an SAE to STD question. Usually SAE is the standard on other forums for tuning comparisons. For those that don't know the difference it seems 95% of the time STD is 1.026% higher than SAE. I have seen some cases in Texas when its not, but given the factors that are changed are always consistent between the two I think it should be 100% when the dynos weather station isn't fudged with.

[jake@ardesign]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

on the standback... i think the flexibility is great and many options, BUT you would need to continually tune depending on environment conditions. Not sure how it works with timing... alters CPS like v4? but I know you have to adjust tables. it would be like the old days tuning conservatively for hot weather and not being able to take full advantage of the cooler weather, better gas, etc.

they shouldn't poopoo Shiv. The ability to autotune (based on revised maps for more top end torque of course) would be great. I'm sure they have just modified the factory wastegate concept to one turbo. And I'm sure Shiv could offer an option, apart from AR, if this kit takes off.

Originally Posted by cn555ic

Standback is for the extreme enthusiast and if you dont know how to tune it, alot can go wrong...Alot of members here are enthusiast to some point but going with a tune like the standback is asking for trouble.

Shiv - I hope you don't mind if I post up - if so let me know. I don't want to step on any toes.

For the two guys quoted above - as for your comments here - I am not going to start a tuner war so I will keep this vague. Please do not make comments on issues / topics you do not understand. It spreads misinformation and people may think you know what you're talking about when you don't (not trying to be rude). The standback is used on MANY other platforms and 16year olds and 70 year olds do the tuning themselves. All the "intricate" coding and firmware is done by the guys at cp-e. Their head programmer made the end user side of things idiot proof. All that I ask is that if you don't know what your talking about (experienced things first hands) please don't make comments like that. Weather conditions don't require changes either.

Josh specifically - you really should try emailing cp-e or PM'ing us. You are extremely off with your conceptualization. The standback does standalone boost control. Please stop making incorrect statements. You are simply uninformed. I'd love to have a conversation with you if you would like to actually know how things work. But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop with the incorrect spreading of misinformation. It's not fair to AR nor to the guys at cp-e.

Josh - no where have I "poopoo'd" Shiv. I've actually stated how much I respect him and his product. The AR turbo kit will come with multiple tunes for you to switch between and won't need any fixing up unless you decide you want it to be fine tuned. Autotuning is a really cool feature but you have to understand more before you make completely incorrect blanket statements like that. Just as Shiv would be bothered if you publically made incorrect statements about his product that could mislead people, other vendors like us (and any around) get upset as well...thanks

As for this elevation debate - I will only say one thing. In my original post in the updated thread I mentioned all the math behind calculating ACTUAL corrections. We never claimed the corrected numbers were not inflated - we simply explained how to interpret them for what they were.

We have talked with Shiv via PM and all is well. Everyone is happy. Its a great thing when vendors can get a long...good peoples over there behind the keyboard. Shiv just want to say thank you for being so rational with me I rarely find forum vendors that stay calm and rational with me when things get touchy so thank you!!

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by jake@ardesign

Shiv - I hope you don't mind if I post up - if so let me know. I don't want to step on any toes.

For the two guys quoted above - as for your comments here - I am not going to start a tuner war so I will keep this vague. Please do not make comments on issues / topics you do not understand. It spreads misinformation and people may think you know what you're talking about when you don't (not trying to be rude). The standback is used on MANY other platforms and 16year olds and 70 year olds do the tuning themselves. All the "intricate" coding and firmware is done by the guys at cp-e. Their head programmer made the end user side of things idiot proof. All that I ask is that if you don't know what your talking about (experienced things first hands) please don't make comments like that. Weather conditions don't require changes either.

Josh specifically - you really should try emailing cp-e or PM'ing us. You are extremely off with your conceptualization. The standback does standalone boost control. Please stop making incorrect statements. You are simply uninformed. I'd love to have a conversation with you if you would like to actually know how things work. But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop with the incorrect spreading of misinformation. It's not fair to AR nor to the guys at cp-e.

Josh - no where have I "poopoo'd" Shiv. I've actually stated how much I respect him and his product. The AR turbo kit will come with multiple tunes for you to switch between and won't need any fixing up unless you decide you want it to be fine tuned. Autotuning is a really cool feature but you have to understand more before you make completely incorrect blanket statements like that. Just as Shiv would be bothered if you publically made incorrect statements about his product that could mislead people, other vendors like us (and any around) get upset as well...thanks

As for this elevation debate - I will only say one thing. In my original post in the updated thread I mentioned all the math behind calculating ACTUAL corrections. We never claimed the corrected numbers were not inflated - we simply explained how to interpret them for what they were.

We have talked with Shiv via PM and all is well. Everyone is happy. Its a great thing when vendors can get a long...good peoples over there behind the keyboard. Shiv just want to say thank you for being so rational with me I rarely find forum vendors that stay calm and rational with me when things get touchy so thank you!!

No where in my post did I bash the CPE standback tune, all I stated was the tune was more advanced for the average user on this forum which 99% of the people here are not adequate enough to really take advantage of the standback tune...Nothing misinformed here...

[enrita]

jake:

[jake@ardesign]

Originally Posted by cn555ic

No where in my post did I bash the CPE standback tune, all I stated was the tune was more advanced for the average user on this forum which 99% of the people here are not adequate enough to really take advantage of the standback tune...Nothing misinformed here...

Re-read your post. I am not going to argue with you about these things. I didn't say you bashed so please don't take offense. I was simply correcting statements you made about something being difficult to do when in fact it is actually something very simple that takes about 3 minutes to understand.

Originally Posted by maxnix

Seems like all this kowtowing could be avoided by just posting the raw data, perhaps with the mathematical (or more likely arithmetic) calculations posted separately for public consumption as per each consumer's need to speculate?

Kind of makes you wonder though who was deleting Shiv's posts off the AR thread?

All the uncorrected numbers were already posted.

[lm1z]

Another Shiv thread bashing a new tune for the 335i?
This has been going on for years. Give it a rest, bud.

If you believe that another tuner's data is unrepresentative of factual information, contact them yourself. It is not your place to start a war in a thread created solely to promote another vendor's product, let alone create a new thread to gather a backing to help support your stance.

Bad form.

Just my $02.

Props to AR for the new kit. Looking forward to it's progress.

[JoeyFiasco]

Originally Posted by lm1z

Another Shiv thread bashing a new tune for the 335i?
This has been going on for years. Give it a rest, bud.

If you believe that another tuner's data is unrepresentative of factual information, contact them yourself. It is not your place to start a war in a thread created solely to promote another vendor's product, let alone create a new thread to gather a backing to help support your stance.

Bad form.

Just my $02.

Props to AR for the new kit. Looking forward to it's progress.

?

[Sniz]

Originally Posted by lm1z

Another Shiv thread bashing a new tune for the 335i?
This has been going on for years. Give it a rest, bud.

If you believe that another tuner's data is unrepresentative of factual information, contact them yourself. It is not your place to start a war in a thread created solely to promote another vendor's product, let alone create a new thread to gather a backing to help support your stance.

Bad form.

Just my $02.

Props to AR for the new kit. Looking forward to it's progress.

he's not bashing a new tune...bud

he's also no creating a war.....bud

[jake@ardesign]

Shiv wasn't bashing here. I was only posting to correct misinformation put out by forum members. No one was actually bashing - they just didnt understand something and spoke without getting true information...no biggy

[Sniz]

Originally Posted by jake@ardesign

Shiv wasn't bashing here. I was only posting to correct misinformation put out by forum members. No one was actually bashing - they just didnt understand something and spoke without getting true information...no biggy

if all posts w the above criteria were eliminated, this forum would sound like crickets most of the time.

[cn555ic]

Crickets......(birds chirping.....crickets.......)

[Brey335i]

Originally Posted by lm1z

Another Shiv thread bashing a new tune for the 335i?
This has been going on for years. Give it a rest, bud.

If you believe that another tuner's data is unrepresentative of factual information, contact them yourself. It is not your place to start a war in a thread created solely to promote another vendor's product, let alone create a new thread to gather a backing to help support your stance.

Bad form.

Just my $02.

Props to AR for the new kit. Looking forward to it's progress.

It wasn't the tune... it was the result of the dyno...

What was that we were saying earlier about posting without having actually read the pertinent information?

.... crickets .....

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu

With a large turbo, the increase in back pressure at higher altitude is probably lower than the reduction in back pressure due to the exhaust outlet being at lower pressure. Therefore there is no loss in performance due to increase in exhaust back pressure, because it is probably actually reduced (depending on the turbo size).

Most people only concentrate on the atmospheric pressure effects on the intake, but engines have two openings to atmospheric pressure.... the intake and ALSO the exhaust.

Ah, the old TIP and TOP; turbine inlet and outlet pressures. I have some piezzo based pressure sensors that can handle the heat. Seeing that differential is often nice.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by ajsalida

Great discussion here guys. I live at 8k ft and do most of my driving above that so I'm very interested. Also considering a tune and have not found much detailed info on what goes on at these altitudes WRT tunes. Q:

1) When the turbo system ECU measures a boost target, is that over ambient or off of absolute? In other words when whatever is measuing air in the engine targets 10 PSI of boost, is it on top of ambient or is it ALWAYS 14.7 + 10 PSI absolute? [e.g. is it an absolute air mass target?] If it is the former that (clearly) is one reason why altitude power is down, since ambient is already 25% less dense, so total air mass even at 10 PSI boost over is way less than at sea level. If is the latter then the turbos are working MUCH harder to produce the delta over the ambient (up to 14.7) in addition to a boost target into thinner air.

2) It is not often recognized, but up here heat exchangers of any type tend to not work so well. The air is less dense so it simply cannot absorb as much heat off of a radiator per unit of surface area. So intercoolers aren't as efficient either. So would you require a bigger intercooler, even for the milder maps, at this elevation (8k ft-over 12k) to be safe? We only get 91 octane up here too.

Most, if not all, engine management systems use sensors which measure absolute pressure. Concurrently, they also measure barometric pressure and know the delta. However, most do not target a certain pressure, they target a load/torque value in order to maintain a consistant power level regardless of conditions.

And you are correct, the less dense air does decrease IC efficiency.

[lm1z]

Sigh.

I fully understand what is being debated, and I fully understand why this thread was created. It is my fault for not making that clear. I was simply arguing the underlying point I was trying to make. This is an INDIRECT response which ultimately is demoting ARs kit and data.

Don't mean to stir shit, here, so im taking a seat.

Enjoy your calculating.

Originally Posted by Sniz

if all posts w the above criteria were eliminated, this forum would sound like crickets most of the time.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by jake@ardesign

Shiv - I hope you don't mind if I post up - if so let me know. I don't want to step on any toes.

For the two guys quoted above - as for your comments here - I am not going to start a tuner war so I will keep this vague. Please do not make comments on issues / topics you do not understand. It spreads misinformation and people may think you know what you're talking about when you don't (not trying to be rude). The standback is used on MANY other platforms and 16year olds and 70 year olds do the tuning themselves. All the "intricate" coding and firmware is done by the guys at cp-e. Their head programmer made the end user side of things idiot proof. All that I ask is that if you don't know what your talking about (experienced things first hands) please don't make comments like that. Weather conditions don't require changes either.

Josh specifically - you really should try emailing cp-e or PM'ing us. You are extremely off with your conceptualization. The standback does standalone boost control. Please stop making incorrect statements. You are simply uninformed. I'd love to have a conversation with you if you would like to actually know how things work. But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop with the incorrect spreading of misinformation. It's not fair to AR nor to the guys at cp-e.

Josh - no where have I "poopoo'd" Shiv. I've actually stated how much I respect him and his product. The AR turbo kit will come with multiple tunes for you to switch between and won't need any fixing up unless you decide you want it to be fine tuned. Autotuning is a really cool feature but you have to understand more before you make completely incorrect blanket statements like that. Just as Shiv would be bothered if you publically made incorrect statements about his product that could mislead people, other vendors like us (and any around) get upset as well...thanks

As for this elevation debate - I will only say one thing. In my original post in the updated thread I mentioned all the math behind calculating ACTUAL corrections. We never claimed the corrected numbers were not inflated - we simply explained how to interpret them for what they were.

We have talked with Shiv via PM and all is well. Everyone is happy. Its a great thing when vendors can get a long...good peoples over there behind the keyboard. Shiv just want to say thank you for being so rational with me I rarely find forum vendors that stay calm and rational with me when things get touchy so thank you!!

I don't know what is so incorrect with my statement about the standback. I understand that there's much flexibility and options. You adjust tables inputting desired values and the cpe responds accordingly. I think this is basically how v3 works, although v3 is very general input compared to cpe detailed interface. The problem, which all users have until v4, is that you are limited to those tables with some dme correction in timing if needed. say you tuned for 100deg and temps are 60deg... maybe you can change maps, but if you don't then you are stuck with 100deg tables. most likely this would mean lower boost, and/or excessive retarded timing. the reverse situation would not be good.

my statement on poopooing shiv came from some comments in the other thread and was an assumption only.... i am wrong, sorry.