Wow, talk about an IDIOT....
12-30-2005, 11:03 AM
#101
I've had my fair share of problems with this guy also. If finally came down to me reporting his nasty post and PM's to me to get him removed from a site.
Heres my thought on tuning....
There are so many different ways people are tuning.. what makes someone right and someone wrong? All you can speak from is experence.. Until the engineers who pieced this system together for GM speak up I don't think anyone has the right to speak up and say with 100% certainly that one way is the right way to tune.
I've seen some pretty scary stuff in my experience.. from people tuning fuels with the injector constants (or tables in LS1) to people filling in 25 degrees of timing across the board from 0-7000RPM at .6 gm/cyc and higher. Now that stuff looks extremely scary kinda made me throw up a little in my mouth when I saw it
but at the same time I know people who have looked at my stuff and seen things that didn't make since to them.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is the only time I think someone is clearly wrong is when they preach that they are completely right. This guys hositility towards that obviously have clear advantages him a total douche while at the same time I can say the same for some people here, but mostly on other sites (one big one in particular). I think more people should value their own experience much more than how they value what they read on the internet. The things you read here should be ideas to get you moving in the right directions.. not bibles to live by.
Heres my thought on tuning....
There are so many different ways people are tuning.. what makes someone right and someone wrong? All you can speak from is experence.. Until the engineers who pieced this system together for GM speak up I don't think anyone has the right to speak up and say with 100% certainly that one way is the right way to tune.
I've seen some pretty scary stuff in my experience.. from people tuning fuels with the injector constants (or tables in LS1) to people filling in 25 degrees of timing across the board from 0-7000RPM at .6 gm/cyc and higher. Now that stuff looks extremely scary kinda made me throw up a little in my mouth when I saw it
but at the same time I know people who have looked at my stuff and seen things that didn't make since to them. I guess the point I'm trying to make is the only time I think someone is clearly wrong is when they preach that they are completely right. This guys hositility towards that obviously have clear advantages him a total douche while at the same time I can say the same for some people here, but mostly on other sites (one big one in particular). I think more people should value their own experience much more than how they value what they read on the internet. The things you read here should be ideas to get you moving in the right directions.. not bibles to live by.
Last edited by Alvin; 12-30-2005 at 11:23 AM.
12-30-2005, 11:25 AM
#102
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: sojourning....looking for my city whose builder and maker is God.
Posts: 2,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Alvin
I've had my fair share of problems with this guy also. If finally came down to me reporting his nasty post and PM's to me to get him removed from a site.
Heres my thought on tuning....
There are so many different ways people are tuning.. what makes someone right and someone wrong? All you can speak from is experence.. Until the engineers who pieced this system together for GM speak up I don't think anyone has the right to speak up and say with 100% certainly that one way is the right way to tune.
I've seen some pretty scary stuff in my experience.. from people tuning fuels with the injector constants (or tables in LS1) to people filling in 25 degrees of timing across the board from 0-7000RPM at .6 gm/cyc and higher. Now that stuff looks extremely scary kinda made me throw up a little in my mouth when I saw it but at the same time I know people who have looked at my stuff and seen things that didn't make since to them. I know that I spend alot of time tuning MAF tables in the TPI cars and it works really well for me yet I've read by some pro-claimed experts that it was the wrong way of doing things. I like to use directly what spits out of my VE calculators when tuning some of the older factory speeddensity cars and I've taken heat from that also.. It doesn't bother me because I know that its what I've found to work best.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is the only time I think someone is clearly wrong is when they preach that they are completely right. This guys hositility towards that obviously have clear advantages him a total douche while at the same time I can say the same for some people here, but mostly on other sites (one big one in particular). I think more people should value their own experience much more than how they value what they read on the internet. The things you read here should be ideas to get you moving in the right directions.. not bibles to live by.
Heres my thought on tuning....
There are so many different ways people are tuning.. what makes someone right and someone wrong? All you can speak from is experence.. Until the engineers who pieced this system together for GM speak up I don't think anyone has the right to speak up and say with 100% certainly that one way is the right way to tune.
I've seen some pretty scary stuff in my experience.. from people tuning fuels with the injector constants (or tables in LS1) to people filling in 25 degrees of timing across the board from 0-7000RPM at .6 gm/cyc and higher. Now that stuff looks extremely scary kinda made me throw up a little in my mouth when I saw it
but at the same time I know people who have looked at my stuff and seen things that didn't make since to them. I know that I spend alot of time tuning MAF tables in the TPI cars and it works really well for me yet I've read by some pro-claimed experts that it was the wrong way of doing things. I like to use directly what spits out of my VE calculators when tuning some of the older factory speeddensity cars and I've taken heat from that also.. It doesn't bother me because I know that its what I've found to work best. I guess the point I'm trying to make is the only time I think someone is clearly wrong is when they preach that they are completely right. This guys hositility towards that obviously have clear advantages him a total douche while at the same time I can say the same for some people here, but mostly on other sites (one big one in particular). I think more people should value their own experience much more than how they value what they read on the internet. The things you read here should be ideas to get you moving in the right directions.. not bibles to live by.
Last edited by Lady Redhawk; 12-31-2005 at 08:56 PM.
12-30-2005, 04:27 PM
#104
FormerVendor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW, having a MAF is not legislated by the EPA. There are many brand new cars out there that don't runs MAF's, heck in some of the newest PCM code there isn't even ANY code to detect or read the input from one...
01-03-2006, 07:19 AM
#105
Originally Posted by gameover
FWIW, having a MAF is not legislated by the EPA. There are many brand new cars out there that don't runs MAF's, heck in some of the newest PCM code there isn't even ANY code to detect or read the input from one...
as far as i know, the EPA does not require any specific equipment.
all they say is:
the output has to meet XYZ requirements
and
its illegal for anyone to change/modify the devices that make it meet thoes requirements, if operated on a public road.
01-03-2006, 07:46 AM
#106
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: sojourning....looking for my city whose builder and maker is God.
Posts: 2,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MrDude_1
i was going to point that out when i read it, but i was on vacation and feeling lazy.
as far as i know, the EPA does not require any specific equipment.
all they say is:
the output has to meet XYZ requirements
and
its illegal for anyone to change/modify the devices that make it meet thoes requirements, if operated on a public road.
as far as i know, the EPA does not require any specific equipment.
all they say is:
the output has to meet XYZ requirements
and
its illegal for anyone to change/modify the devices that make it meet thoes requirements, if operated on a public road.
True, but for those of us that live in states where they hook up to the OBDII, you will fail if there are any DTC setting. And as you know, you have to have one of the MAF failure codes to set or you are not in SD Mode.
01-03-2006, 08:04 AM
#107
Originally Posted by Lady Redhawk
True, but for those of us that live in states where they hook up to the OBDII, you will fail if there are any DTC setting. And as you know, you have to have one of the MAF failure codes to set or you are not in SD Mode.
01-03-2006, 04:25 PM
#110
Staging Lane
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Nortern Idaho
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WS6FirebirdTA00
i was in SD with teh failure codes set to no error reported. as long as you unplug the MAF it works (for me at least)
01-03-2006, 05:19 PM
#111
Originally Posted by jbuckweiser
Wouldn't you fail the visual inspection if the MAF was unplugged or removed?
a. you have a complete hack job car
b. the inspector actually knows what hes looking for on the thousands of cars they inspect every day
c. they do an underhood visual
they probably wouldnt fail you for not having it...Im sure there are some current american makes/models that dont run a maf so how are they going to know from one car to the next which one has and which one hasnt? If it passes the readiness & code checks it should pass most testing systems out there currently.
