[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

BINGO! like I said, first to market. Why does he flash other ECU's and not 335i's the arguments don't make sense that it is for the ability to add programs etc. It is for the ability to get a product to market quickly that works. Nothing wrong with that but more of a band aid then a real solution. If you wanted to offer different programs why not do what GIAC and others due for Audi they offer it through flash software and put it on the cruise stalk. If Vishnu had access to the DME he would be tuning it that way.

Maybe his program works with the adaptation on the DME but it is doing it through an outboard device that is fooling the DME that doesn't like to be fooled, and he is not controlling all the functions of that car or otherwise he would be using the stock DME. Much easier to program the computer to do what you want it to do than to fool it into doing what you want it to do, if you have access to the DME

Jim-- You still haven't explained why you believe the PROcede to a be "more of a band aid than a real solution." You keep reverting back to your previous unsubstantiated claims and offer no support to your argument.

Perhaps now you admit, after I asked you to validate your previous claim about adaptation, that "Maybe [the PROcede] does work with the adaption on the DME." Come on now, don't give in so easily. If you want to talk tech, let's do it.

Furthermore, if you want to make a statement, be prepared to back it up with facts, not conjecture like "but it is doing it through an outboard device that is fooling a DME that doesn't like to be fooled." In the case of inanimate objects like computers, I don't think feeding it the necessary inputs to get the desired outputs is going to make it bear a grudge.

shiv

PS. The reason we don't offer a PROcede for Evo and Subaru folks is because the PROcede is less than 1 year old. The 335i is the first PROcede application. With the EVO X looming around the corner, you can bet we'll have a PROcede application for that shortly after its release.

[mesier1111]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

When you say "no more problems than a stock car" are you referring to accelerated wear and tear from the heavier use? Or to actual component failure? Wear and tear items such as brakes, clutches, flywheels, etc,. will wear quicker in a 400bhp than they would in a 300bhp all other things being held equal. But that's just because they see more stress/harsh conditions. As for catastrophic failure of engine, diff, drivetrain, etc,., I don't see that being an issue at all. Perhaps the engine may start of soften up/consume oil at 80k miles instead of a stock car's 100k miles. Maybe the transmission will start to whine at 100k miles instead of 120k miles. I don't think anyone really knows for sure. But after seeing previous BMW models and how rubust they have proven to be at higher-than-stock power levels, I'm not very concerned. And then after seeing how the two PROcede'd 335s stood up to 12 hours of sustained racing at Bathhurts, the throught of mechanical failure doesn't even seem feasible during normal driving conditions. Sure, sheer abuse will get the best of anything. But that applies to a stock car as well.

Shiv

Thanks for the response shiv. I understand your points, and they are all good ones. Wear and tear items going faster doesn't bother me, its the catastrophic failure that I am worried about. I understand brakes and stuff will wear more. So if "normal driving", meaning not beating the shit out of my car all the time, won't kill my car, I will end my argument. Good point.

[Jerseystyle1]

There are like 3 posts all with the same arguments happening at the same time.

[mesier1111]

Originally Posted by Jerseystyle1

There are like 3 posts all with the same arguments happening at the same time.

Proving once again, I, like others, have WAY TOO MUCH FREE TIME

[Jerseystyle1]

Originally Posted by mesier1111

Proving once again, I, like others, have WAY TOO MUCH FREE TIME

I am right with you!

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Carnage

I've been looking through the white paper from Dinan and he appears to make some good points.

Without the typical crap, personal attacks and blind faith that goes on around here, I'd really like to hear someone knowledgable explain why Dinan is right or wrong about the following statement....

".....More faults and frankly compromised reliability will also result from these control units when compared to good software.

This is because it is more difficult to obtain correct sensor, fuel mixtures and ignition timing values without getting a fault. In addition, computer controlled turbos have safety features that lower boost and re-tune the mixture and timing based on heat exchanger efficiency, engine temperature and detonation. Often piggy-back control units will compromise these safety programs because they “fight” these corrections rather than implement them as would be the case with properly engineered software."

I'll take a crack at this having done both personally and no longer have the time or inclination to do undergo the process to get a proper tune. I’ll leave it, for the most part, to those who do this professionally.

First I will take aim at the above quotes. You have to look at what signals are being modified to determine this affects on safety systems (which are being blown out of proportion, IMO). Specifically, the statement

lower boost and re-tune the mixture and timing based on heat exchanger efficiency, engine temperature and detonation

should be dissected. The signals currently being modified are only an offset of the factory signals. If too high of a temperature or knock are registered, the DME will respond and things will change accordingly. Remember, the PROcede is not sending signals it wants, it is reading signals and providing a variable offset to them. In other words, as things change, the PROcede changes with it. Too high of an ECT value and the DME will reduce timing with or without the PROcede, etc.

There is a marked difference between trying to force the DME and to influence. The PROcede influences the DME to get the desired response. However, the safety margins are not fought with. They are still well intact.

Now, the benefit, as I see it, of direct tuning is when the factory components have been exceeded. If larger injectors are needed, for instance (not that I would know the limits of these DI units), the size increase is governed by what a piggyback can compensate for regarding the primary load adjustment. There will be a limit a piggyback hits which is sooner than a full tune.

But in the end, if the stock components are within their operating range and the DME is fine with the adjustment, a piggyback is just as good and in some ways, better. It is always nice to choose what you want to do without guessing at the correct memory register to change.

On a side note, I was tempted to wait to see what GIAC brought out but got tired of waiting. I can say that the V1.47 tune is significantly mother in its delivery than the GIAC code I had in my B5 S4 even in Stage 2 tune only. And I still had codes although I believe it was more to due with the engine than anything else. But I did have the well known throttle cut. With the PROcede, so far the boost control has been exceptional in comparison. I will be shocked to see an improvement but it is expected from what I gather.

[BzzzBom]

How come Steve Dinan doesn't get into this "discussion."

[Jim M3]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Jim-- You still haven't explained why you believe the PROcede to a be "more of a band aid than a real solution." You keep reverting back to your previous unsubstantiated claims and offer no support to your argument.

Perhaps now you admit, after I asked you to validate your previous claim about adaptation, that "Maybe [the PROcede] does work with the adaption on the DME." Come on now, don't give in so easily. If you want to talk tech, let's do it.

Furthermore, if you want to make a statement, be prepared to back it up with facts, not conjecture like "but it is doing it through an outboard device that is fooling a DME that doesn't like to be fooled." In the case of inanimate objects like computers, I don't think feeding it the necessary inputs to get the desired outputs is going to make it bear a grudge.

shiv

PS. The reason we don't offer a PROcede for Evo and Subaru folks is because the PROcede is less than 1 year old. The 335i is the first PROcede application. With the EVO X looming around the corner, you can bet we'll have a PROcede application for that shortly after its release.

So what I haven't heard from you is can you tune the stock DME? Then my next question would be why wouldn't you just use the stock DME rather than introducing a piggyback device with additional cost if you could flash a perfectly good DME that controls all the functions of the car and was designed for the car.

The people that are taking the time to reverse engineer this DME are doing it for a reason why wouldn't they just use a piggyback if it were a better option. They could remove a lot of their R&D costs and be on the market right away competing. Kudo's to you for being first to market with a product that many people are happy with. But nobody should discount the tuners who have extensive knowledge tuning BMW's and understand the DME and its functions.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

The people that are taking the time to reverse engineer this DME are doing it for a reason why wouldn't they just use a piggyback if it were a better option.

I do not think Shiv would say a piggyback is necessarily a better option, it is an option. The reason others may not want to go this route is possibly due to lack of experience with said devices or a desire to produce a tune which has no real material costs.

[Jim M3]

Originally Posted by BzzzBom

How come Steve Dinan doesn't get into this "discussion."

Dinan never gets into forums that I have seen. They briefly sponsored bimmerforums but got lambasted so hard that they dropped off quickly. Then Dinan started offering rebates after all the price issues got brought up. My guess is though Dinan could offer some pretty good arguments as to what you can and can't do when you have control of the DME.

[Jim M3]

Originally Posted by scalbert

I do not think Shiv would say a piggyback is necessarily a better option, it is an option. The reason others may not want to go this route is possibly due to lack of experience with said devices or a desire to produce a tune which has no real material costs.

Somebody who can reverse engineer and tune a BMW DME could tune a piggyback or quickly figure it out.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

Somebody who can reverse engineer and tune a BMW DME could tune a piggyback or quickly figure it out.

I would agree to a point. But would dedicating the resources to learning something which they may not be invested in the long run, make sense? If the idea was to bring out a DME tune in the long run, it may not make financial sense in the short run.

IMO, Dinan will come out a tune in the future (somewhat due to expectations) and they will sell it well. But I doubt they would gain much by a temporary investment in a piggyback.

[Jim M3]

It makes more sense to crack the DME because once you do that you can than tune subsequent models and then do advanced tuning when people go with larger turbo's built motors etc.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

It makes more sense to crack the DME because once you do that you can than tune subsequent models and then do advanced tuning when people go with larger turbo's built motors etc.

Perhaps and only time will tell. But for now, many are enjoying their PROcede. Once modifications start getting extreme, I do feel, and agree, direct DME programming will be nessesary. However, what that extreme limit is will be hard to guess at with this direct injection engine.

[Jim M3]

No doubt and no disrespect to any of the piggyback tuners. Kudo's to them to getting a product out quickly that people can enjoy their cars with immediatly. I too would consider one as well, waiting sucks when you know there is an option that works well.

I may get one while I wait for somebody to get a flash system that removes the speed limiter.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

I too would consider one as well, waiting sucks when you know there is an option that works well.

You have much greater patience than I. I intended on waiting but then reflected my experience with piggybacks and… I gave up on waiting.

[Dr_Dirt]

Originally Posted by Jim M3

It makes more sense to crack the DME because once you do that you can than tune subsequent models and then do advanced tuning when people go with larger turbo's built motors etc.

Why wouldn't you be able to tune larger turbos etc using a piggyback?
We did it all the time with the mitsu 3000's (there were some issues). I made the mistake of dropping the piggyback and went whole hog with the AEM ECU then it was years before my car idled correctly.

I can see that some peoples experience with the older piggybacks of years past have slanted their view of the Proceed.
However I think Shiv's new Proceed eliminates many issues by allowing the stock ECU to compensate and intervene when necessary.
In addition other benefits over flashes are:
1. You can remove all traces of it when needed, and not sacrifice an existing warranty unlike the ecu flashes.
2. You won't be without your car while it gets reflashed.
3. You can upgrade the program yourself.

[Rez90]

Originally Posted by Brisk

i think you are misunderstanding me.. are u saying that Piggyback will be as safe as a Flash from Dinan?

theoretically yes......

I would imagine that any mass produced flash will be generally tuned safer than one would tune on a dyno........

There is more room for error and problems when you're producing a tuned piggyback for a large number of cars and one has to take into account that every car is different.......

Hence, i would assume the Procede would be tuned Safer than any custom tune........

Granted a dyno tune can be tuned as safe or as aggressive as one wants.........but, in business.......i'm sure shiv is smart enough to come up with a tune for all the cars that stays within a safe set of parameters........

[Helix Wildebeest]

Originally Posted by Johnny3

""Often piggy-back control units will compromise these safety programs because they “fight” these corrections rather than implement them as would be the case with properly engineered software.""

How is that wrong shiv. Haven't you even bashed other piggyback units (turbo tuner, even the xede). The statement does not claim that it is impossible to have a proper functioning piggyback unit. Maybe you should create a regular account for all your bashing and bickering and leave your vendor account for professional posts like a big boy.

Piggy back are generally adjusting boost via the MAP sensor not the AIT or engine/oil temps, nor knock sensor. When the ECU sees parameters that are unfavorable, no matter what the piggyback is telling the ECU that the MAP, MAF, or O2s are seeing, it will pull the boost and retard the timing to the point that the car is in limp mode.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but didn't some of you complain that that car went into limp mode when you put on a piggy back for one reason or another. If so that this is proof that the ECU's ability to police the party still exist.

[mesier1111]

Originally Posted by scalbert

I do not think Shiv would say a piggyback is necessarily a better option, it is an option. The reason others may not want to go this route is possibly due to lack of experience with said devices or a desire to produce a tune which has no real material costs.

+1...........not sure if either is better. My only concern was how MUCH POWER Procede V2 is making, not HOW its making it. I think a FLASH that made 380/380 might be too much. Also, I keep seeing more threads of Proceded cars throwing codes, going into these weird limp modes when the half engine sign comes up but full power is still there. Something ain't right, so perhaps the ECU is sensing something. Who the fuck knows anymore......BUT THAT IS NOT A KNOCK ON SHIV, SO NO ONE TAKE IT THAT WAY

[bronco]

OMG....not again....

I think the OP question was answered already by Shiv - why are people still wasting my time?

[Revlis]

Originally Posted by bronco

OMG....not again....

I think the OP question was answered already by Shiv - why are people still wasting my time?

Cause Shiv is trying to make money too?

Call me crazy, hardly makes him impartial... The notion that Shiv is the Be all end all is comical when he's got multiple products he's trying to sell.

Not saying he's being scandalous but the lack of real research and testing is alarming when legions line up to suckle blindly at the proceed teat.

I dunno if Dinan is wrong, or Shiv is Right, I could give a shit. But I do know that one is supported by an OEM the other is not.