ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

I have my reasons for disliking them, no need to discuss here. But I do appreciate they have a business to run. Your situation was unfortunate and you initially bashed them pretty good. It ended up not being correct so fixing your posts is prudent, that's all.

Launch

A vid that was taken of a 2nd gear pull while i had the rpm limit issue, before i fixed it. (forgive my buddy i told him to keep it on the dash but he forgot and pans away for a moment. also the car is right hand drive you may notice)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/TCrxy3AUVzdn/

Also i've since fixed the afr. I was stuck on the open loop table. It's now a rock steady 12.8-13.0 at wot and with the 85mm maf fitted and the car pulls stronger than ever before. I forget the amount of times i went back/forth with two different stock ls1 mafs and tuned accordingly once i figured out that version 4.2 was changing parameters, and i had resistance checked all the wiring and checked the grounds, thinking it may have been the maf itself causing the rpm issue (even though it was throwing no codes and should just switched to SD anyway). The rpm limit issue was there with 3 different mafs and 2 different crank sensors, without fail at 6800rpm everytime, like a rev limiter. Listen to the vid how it revs clean everywhere else. I was fighting it for a whole week, it's not like i didn't drive it enough and it didn't show any sign whatsoever of stumbling or misfire anywhere else except at wot, as soon as i'd hit 6800rpm and it was acting exactly like bouncing the rpm limiter. Even my buddy was stumped and he's had his fair share of performance cars and ls's included. We'd both never experience this previously. It threw no misfire codes even though they're all turned on.

When HP Tuners confirmed that everything on their end was 100% good, i knew i had to go back to a fault with the car. After i pulled the covers and the valve springs were all intact and no bent pushrods or loose rockers i just knew the coils had to be the final culprit. There was nothing else remaining but a cam lobe or lifter could have chewed itself out, but i knew it hadn't because there's no bad noises or metal in the oil. And why i didn't think of the coils sooner was because of how there were no misfires anywhere else, the car just ran too properly like it always had, except for the rpm limit issue. And i searched the internet for hours trying to find anyone else with the same issue and couldn't. The one thing i did note was someone mentioned that the wideband will actually LEAN when a ls coil misfires, rather than richen. I found that info after i thought it was a bug with HP tuner new version.

From this point forward i'll always have 8 spare new coils lying around as i'm going to be progressing with the car. I think the heat must slowly deteriorate the coils and some or all of them just couldn't spark over a certain cylinder pressure, but were working fine at lesser cylinder pressures. These coils are taken from cars/engines that are pushing 18 years old now and have been driving around in the hot summer with stock thermostats with the a/c on. The coils absolutely bake in summer temps sitting on the valve covers like they do. Just like ignition wires deteriorate with heat and they don't always completely die but their resistance just increases to the point the spark gets weaker and weaker, i think the coils are doing similar thing.

cam

iTrader: (9)

Your right, but I think leaving the process speaks better. If someone is going to buy HP or not based on skim reading a couple of posts in a thread like this without following the story to its conclusion? They are never going to learn how to tune or be much of a wrench anyways. We have ALL blamed the computer for countless problems over the years when it turned out to be some other unrelated mechanical issue. This mans frustrations were valid, his direction for focus was incorrect, and he informed us all for it. It speaks louder and clearer by leaving the story as is imo.

Its not easy to do a lot of these things we do and finding a way to make it easier for tuners is a HUGE window of opportunity. Maybe these types of threads will help with that, one can hope at least.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Speaks to what process better? That the member didn't troubleshoot correctly? Making several posts bashing a vendor and then at the end saying "oops my bad" doesn't help ANYONE. This is ironic since, as I said, I don't like HPT....but geez nobody is getting helped by lengthy posts trashing them and then saying at the end "they're great at helping troubleshoot".

Launch

Dood where am I trashing hpt? Even when I was frustrated to hell I didn't trash them. I said their version 4.2 wasn't working, and yes I was wrong. I've deleted all I can and cleaned up the thread. I don't see the problem? I've explained to everyone that HP tuners wasn't causing my issue, and I've told people what was causing it. Enough with the bs already, I'm sure HPT themselves are happy with my explanation. If they want me to delete my initial post then they can ask me to and I will, and they can delete theirs also because they were the one who quoted me. They did help troubleshoot, in a big way. They could have just as easily not helped, but they went through all my stuff and told me their end is working 100%. That was enough for me to say their support was a massive help. Because if they hadn't done that, I'd probably be breaking out the msd ignition controller and carburetor right about now.

cam

iTrader: (9)

Precisely why I value it. I learned from it so I see it as beneficial. Due to our 180 degree differing viewpoints proves its worth. Theres also value to HP and other tuning suites in this information as well because the software itself did not aid the discovery of the guys problem and there is a way to develop that and improve etc etc etc.

I see the entire process of building and modification as discovery + solution. The more power we have to aid in discovery the more likely we are to create a better solution. Thats the precise value of forum communication on specific concepts. If no one had problems or had to think about what to do next? There would be no need to ever post up about anything.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

LOL I can see now that you've already edited the posts where you did. All good.

The viewpoint stating that something did NOT help in solving a problem is not particularly useful. Edison failed to make a light bulb a thousand times so let's all focus on what didn't work? No thanks. You're welcome to your opinion and talk in hypotheticals and "discovery + solution", I will stick to solving problems quickly with value added information.

cam

iTrader: (9)

Its in the eye of the beholder I guess.

BTW Edison never invented the lightbulb. He "acquired" the technology from the Canadian inventors Mathew Evans and Henry Woodward who patented incandescent light bulbs five years earlier. Maybe you can see how I value the whole story instead of coles notes that MOST people know. I like to know as much as possible, good bad all of it. To each their own

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Way to completely bypass the point and make a straw man argument. As is expected from you.

cam

iTrader: (9)

I see value in his posts. There is no straw man there. I tried to elaborate and you dont seem to like that. Not much else I can say about it other than I only suggest that the process of confusion that led to Launch suggesting HP was the problem when it was not is a common pattern with computers controllers and their systems and perhaps this thread could stand to serve as benefit to future software development ( that be EASIER for users to understand ) so I remarked towards that. None of what was suggested was meant to offend or create some sort of flame fest, merely to offer and opinion on the value I see in Launches process and how it adds to the thread

imo. If yours differs thats fine I do not get upset by such, its all ok to think differently. No harm, no foul to each their own

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Don't back pedal to Launches posts, which have already been edited. Being sarcastic and trying to give background on the light bulb is exactly a strawman argument when the point is doing something wrong 1000 times doesn't help anybody. You think it does, and I'm sure could reference inventions that were discovered by accident. I think we're talking about cars and don't think we'll discover unobtanium by troubleshooting a valve tick. Differing viewpoints, no harm no foul.

cam

iTrader: (9)

What do you want with this? If no one ever discussed the troubles or confusion they were having with anything no one could create a solution. Do you not like the lightbulb comment? I thought it relevant to show information value as an irony that you offered up. There was no sarcasm or straw position as you say your taking it personally sensitive or something like that. If you need help with that PM me I can discuss your issues if you like.

To be even more precise the only reason there was the assumption HP was too blame was because the software cannot perform telemetry with the components YET, to inform users that they have an issue to see to before tuning. This seems a quite sensible feature to me as we have this with some work related systems so why not HP? There is value in the confusion no matter what you want to think it is there

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

You are entirely missing the reason for bringing up the light bulb, or just want to pick and choose what to acknowledge. Again, you want to know all the reasons for something doesn't work, I don't find value in that. Good luck to you.

cam

iTrader: (9)

Thank you, to you as well