[bmwzimmer]

Just set the high output map at 500 rpms since it's user defined. Now every time you start the car, you're set!!!

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Orb

Would you implement an unfinished solution into a product when it is not fully ready?

This map switch method is hardly an "unfinished solution" or a "workaround". I'd much rather have this method available than *have to* rig a switch through my firewall or waste a I/O line just to switch maps. However, I can see two downsides:
1) Driver presumably has no immediate feedback that maps were indeed switched.

2) Driver has to blip throttle on every startup for performance map, even though the valet map would be the rarer case. Why not write a flag to flash to keep the map switched?

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Panoz

IMO the reving swich is a good idea but completely useless and frustrating for me.

Ok you won't use it, so what is it doing causing you to care that it's useless? Only thing I can think of is a concern that you'd accidentally switch maps. However, since you can't accidentally switch maps, why are you frustrated?

[Orb]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

This map switch method is hardly an "unfinished solution" or a "workaround". I'd much rather have this method available than *have to* rig a switch through my firewall or waste a I/O line just to switch maps. However, I can see two downsides:
1) Driver presumably has no immediate feedback that maps were indeed switched.

2) Driver has to blip throttle on every startup for performance map, even though the valet map would be the rarer case. Why not write a flag to flash to keep the map switched?

It is absolutely an unfinished solution. There is no way to define the parameter or turn it off until 2.1; hence, not finished. When it is completed in 2.1 then none one will have issues with it since it can be disabled by setting the parameters.

Orb

[335iheLLraiseR]

Originally Posted by e36jakeo

I think revving the car to 1800 rpm is fine in any temp. This is just above idle and does not require much throttle or load on the engine.

Shiv said V2.1 will allow you to select how long you wait to rev the engine and to what RPM you rev it in order to switch to Procede power.

Every time I turn on the car and rev it I will say, "Procede power: activate!"

we could use the button on the steering wheel for voice commands.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Orb

It is absolutely an unfinished solution. There is no way to define the parameter or turn it off until 2.1; hence, not finished. When it is completed in 2.1 then none one will have issues with it since it can be disabled by setting the parameters.

Orb

So whenever Shiv announces a future improvement in the product, the current product functionality is automatically classified as a "workaround" or "unfinished"?

[bnj]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

So whenever Shiv announces a future improvement in the product, the current product functionality is automatically classified as a "workaround" or "unfinished"?

This is a bit of semantic, but I think Orb has a point calling the feature unfinished if they have not finished developing it to the finished, preferred status. However, don't feel bad about it. It is good that it is unfinished, since it means that it gets better in the future. And that is positive, isn't it?

[e.n335]

The only thing I would add to this solution is that the car is confirming that the PROcede is activated. This could be implemented by reving up the engine to 1800 rpm shortly twice ( executed from the PROcede ). The big success is that there is no need to wire any LED or switch into the cabin and not using any extra PROcede I/O ports for this.

Defaulting to stock is the only logical way to do it, since there is no way to detect or activate the PROcede by accident.

I think that Shiv really did a great job and don't expect that everything will be perfect from day one. There will be further releases providing improvements. But honestly there is no comparable product out there and I doubt there will be one soon. I'm very happy that I decided to go with the Vishnu product. Now let's see how it works and where there will be room for further development.

Cheers
Eugen

[sflgator]

Yes, I like the concept and implementation, but since I will almost never be using this valet mode (stock map), I certainly would prefer to have it set to 500rpm from the get-go (with v2.0, not v2.1) so I wouldn't have to do anything...just start her up and go with PRocede v2.0. If I need to wait for v2.1 to set it to my preference, then so be it; either way, I'm happy with another ~ 40WHP and more features and functionality...I commend Shiv and his team for improving the PROcede for all of us!!

[Orb]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

So whenever Shiv announces a future improvement in the product, the current product functionality is automatically classified as a "workaround" or "unfinished"?

No this option is a beta feature as it not fully completed. One never makes a beta feature primary option until it is completed and I really shouldn’t have to explain this protocol. It is certainly acceptable to allow for beta feature but they are not enabled by default.

You as a customer shouldn’t be exposed to such beta feature unless you willing to accept the risk with partial or incomplete functionality. If Shiv does include new functionality then I really don’t want to have anything to do with any beta features. As with most people, I want mature, complete and well tested software so this testing should be done behind the scene.

Orb

[bnj]

I would think there would be the easy solution to this by offering the 500 rmp (=no valet mode) version. How long would that take? Replace 1800 by 500, save the file and upload next to the 1800rpm version. Not too many minutes. That seems to be what customers want. I myself included.

[WilyB]

Originally Posted by bnj

I would think there would be the easy solution to this by offering the 500 rmp (=no valet mode) version. How long would that take? Replace 1800 by 500, save the file and upload next to the 1800rpm version. Not too many minutes. That seems to be what customers want. I myself included.

+1

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by bnj

I would think there would be the easy solution to this by offering the 500 rmp (=no valet mode) version. How long would that take? Replace 1800 by 500, save the file and upload next to the 1800rpm version. Not too many minutes. That seems to be what customers want. I myself included.

Those who don't need the valet mode ( as I do ) would be happy with this approach.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Orb

You as a customer shouldn’t be exposed to such beta feature unless you willing to accept the risk with partial or incomplete functionality.

Partial or incomplete functionality simply does not equal risk. I'll defer to Shiv's engineering judgment as far as what risks may or may not be involved. This particular feature just doesn't seem to be too risky which is why I was wondering the rationale for your emphasis on this being a workaround (in the context of a complaint). In fact, the consequences of not invoking this feature mean that the car runs lower boost which should mean less, not more risk.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Partial or incomplete functionality simply does not equal risk. I'll defer to Shiv's engineering judgment as far as what risks may or may not be involved. This particular feature just doesn't seem to be too risky which is why I was wondering the rationale for your emphasis on this being a workaround (in the context of a complaint). In fact, the consequences of not invoking this feature mean that the car runs lower boost which should mean less, not more risk.

Risk is always present until something is finished. The fact is we implement beta features so they can be fully tested by beta testers and general public. Risk is that many people may not like the new feature or it becomes an unexpected hindrance. Feedback from testing gives one a chance to look at the approach or problem before implementing into the final product. This is how one can achieve a good quality product. Honestly, if we need to run lower boost mode then we have bigger problem with the product so we are back to v1 which was really a large and very successful field trial which v2 is a directly built from.

Orb

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by Orb

Risk is always present until something is finished. The fact is we implement beta features so they can be fully tested by beta testers and general public. Risk is that many people may not like the new feature or it becomes an unexpected hindrance. Feedback from testing gives one a chance to look at the approach or problem before implementing into the final product. This is how one can achieve a good quality product. Honestly, if we need to run lower boost mode then we have bigger problem with the product so we are back to v1 which was really a large and very successful field trial which v2 is a directly built from.

Orb

I have the solution for you. Just wait some more months until you have enough feedback from all of us to trust the product. Problem solved .

[Orb]

Originally Posted by e.n335

I have the solution for you. Just wait some more months until you have enough feedback from all of us to trust the product. Problem solved .

Now why would I wait? The v2 product has been based on a major field trial is a huge accomplishment and achievement. I can’t think any tuner who has developed or put this much effort into a single product. I’m optimistic that the product is in line with anything BMW could dish out them selves never mind the other competitor.

The other issue is one of protocol and quality.

Orb

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by e.n335

The only thing I would add to this solution is that the car is confirming that the PROcede is activated. This could be implemented by reving up the engine to 1800 rpm shortly twice ( executed from the PROcede ).

Does the PROcede have throttle control? That would be scary.

[sambonator]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Does the PROcede have throttle control? That would be scary.

If its true then he should be able to program an automatic launch control for 1/4 mile runs! Just press a button, and off you go on your 1/4 mile run. All you have to do is steer! (and have steptronic!)

[stefano7171]

Originally Posted by Orb

Now why would I wait? The v2 product has been based on a major field trial is a huge accomplishment and achievement. I can’t think any tuner who has developed or put this much effort into a single product. I’m optimistic that the product is in line with anything BMW could dish out them selves never mind the other competitor.

The other issue is one of protocol and quality.

Orb

+1000

I think we are all excited about this fantastic product and those who complain about the price of V. 2.0 or the valet mode, would probably complain anyway....
Keep on the good job Shiv!

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by sambonator

If its true then he should be able to program an automatic launch control for 1/4 mile runs! Just press a button, and off you go on your 1/4 mile run. All you have to do is steer! (and have steptronic!)

[E90ice]

I like the concept of being able to switch to a stock map, but the PROcede activation by reving the engine to 1800 rpm during the first 2 seconds of start sounds a little weird. I don't know if we'll remember everytime we start the car (sometimes you are in a rush) to rev it over 1800rpms.

Oh well...I just hope to hit 12.8 sec 1/4 mile on average. I'm also hopping for a 110+ trap speed.