: What is an Aj tune?



Nakoa
08-26-08, 12:46 AM
title says it all, haha. i keep reading about this, but im not sure exactly what it is/does.

Submariner409
08-27-08, 09:59 AM
:alchi:
"Northstar Tuning" (AJ Tunes) has been enjoying a long off-Broadway run uptown in Northstar Performance for quite some time now. It is the ongoing musical soap opera of a lonely Cadillac Technician's quest to successfully hack and alter the GM operating parameter codes in the later OBD-II unitized PCM used in the FWD series from around 1997 through 2003.

Because the PCM is not modular, chips cannot be swapped to change different engine operating conditions: the entire ROM must be analyzed, changed and reflashed, oft-times with weird results. As in: changing the timing curves slightly to improve (?) overall performance and actually losing 1/10 in the quarter. :eek:

It's one of those Catch 22 automotive electronic situations: A lot of reverse engineering has to be done to find the Holy Grail, and it ain't been found yet. :rolleyes:

gothicaleigh
08-28-08, 08:20 PM
Could it possibly be that GM actually knew what it was doing with the Northstar and there isn't much to be gained in this way? :noidea:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
08-30-08, 02:44 PM
I've seen the AJ tune in action, and it works!

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
08-31-08, 10:01 PM
I've seen the AJ tune in action, and it works!

Me too! High 14 second (if I remember right) FWD DeVille.

codewize
09-06-08, 03:14 PM
That's the problem. Yes, The Northstar system is very well tuned and analyzed from the factory. But you know how gearheads are. We insist there's more to be had.

So far I haven't seen any proof that any bolt on or add on item has produced gain. As a matter of fact I've seen a lot of evidence showing losses with all sorts of aftermarket bolt on 'Power Adders"

I have faith that there's something to be had hear but I'm not sure what.

Now on this topic of high 14's. I keep seeing this posted. So if we can take a stock DeVille, throw in an AJ PCM and run 14's don't you think I'd be doing that? The only DeVille on this forum that I know of, who's run those numbers also has a custom exhaust, Volant intake, Hi-Stall converter, NO2 and a few other things.

If you can show me a totally stock 00 - 05 DeVille running 14's with nothing more than a tune from AJ, I'll eat my hat. A Hi-Stall converter alone is good for about .5 sec at best so that brings a stock DeVille from 15.4 to 14.9 at best.


Could it possibly be that GM actually knew what it was doing with the Northstar and there isn't much to be gained in this way? :noidea:

Ur7x
01-24-09, 02:51 PM
I've seen the AJ tune in action, and it works!

I have too and it makes SLS cars almost as fast as an STS and it makes speed limited STS's as fast as a unlimited STS... but it has NEVER made any stock car faster then a top of the line STS.


That's the problem. Yes, The Northstar system is very well tuned and analyzed from the factory. But you know how gearheads are. We insist there's more to be had.

So far I haven't seen any proof that any bolt on or add on item has produced gain. As a matter of fact I've seen a lot of evidence showing losses with all sorts of aftermarket bolt on 'Power Adders"

If you can show me a totally stock 00 - 05 DeVille running 14's with nothing more than a tune from AJ, I'll eat my hat. A Hi-Stall converter alone is good for about .5 sec at best so that brings a stock DeVille from 15.4 to 14.9 at best.

That says it ALL, Codewise is/was a AJ customer, he was one of the rare few who actually did a few back to back tests and now he runs a Stock PCM... and his car is FASTER.

AJ did share with me that ALL his tune does is take the fuel/spark map and cut off limit from a W rated STS and swap in into the customer supplied PCM...

The :worship: AJ tune is just a Stock tune... and it produces stock like results.

AJxtcman
01-25-09, 07:45 PM
I have too and it makes SLS cars almost as fast as an STS and it makes speed limited STS's as fast as a unlimited STS... but it has NEVER made any stock car faster then a top of the line STS.



That says it ALL, Codewise is/was a AJ customer, he was one of the rare few who actually did a few back to back tests and now he runs a Stock PCM... and his car is FASTER.

AJ did share with me that ALL his tune does is take the fuel/spark map and cut off limit from a W rated STS and swap in into the customer supplied PCM...

The :worship: AJ tune is just a Stock tune... and it produces stock like results.

I would say 75% are with in stock specs. That is what people asked for.
Now Codewize's was not and several others aren't

Again about 75% were straight segment swaps. Everyone was worried that the tune would blow the engine and ASKED for exactly what they got!

Ur7x
01-25-09, 11:47 PM
I would say 75% are with in stock specs. That is what people asked for.
Now Codewize's was not and several others aren't

Again about 75% were straight segment swaps. Everyone was worried that the tune would blow the engine and ASKED for exactly what they got!

There ya go... It produces stock like times 'cause it is (at least) 75% stock and that's what you all want. :bonkers:

It seems to carry more weight in a big bold font. :nono:

97EldoCoupe
01-26-09, 10:53 PM
I've personally spoken on the phone with AJ and while I have not tried one of his tunes yet, he is well capable of doing what he claims. He knows the Northstar engine better than probably anyone else on these Forums. The day is coming where I'll be having a PCM tuned by him.

He knows what he's doing with the fuel trim and timing curves. He has given me a bit of inside info on how he alters these tables and what he can do within the PCM. I cannot let out any of this info because I won't reveal his trade secrets. But let me tell you it's nothing short of amazing. To go from a 15 second VIN 9 to a 14 second VIN 9 should not be all that difficult if the factory left some room for tuning (timing advance, fuel trim, knock retard, torque management, etc).

I've stood by AJ and I will continue to do so because if he was beating a dead horse he would have given up a long time ago. He continues to argue his point because he can do what he claims. Unlike D3 AJ has let out some of his info on what he does. I wish we could rent a track for the Northstar meet and have his tuned VIN 9 car run the 1/4.

I'm not saying everyone's wrong for having their own opinion. Not at all. Just give the guy some credit. I do believe GM left the room to gain some performance and AJ's the one that can unleash it.

Ur7x
01-26-09, 11:36 PM
I wish what you posted is true...

In every back to back test of stock cars running AJ's "tuned" chips..
The cars RAN SLOWER...

Code's car LOST A FULL 10th... in the quarter... It was slower to 60' slower to the 8th and slower in the quarter..
Code switched back and now runs FASTER on the stock chip... and THAT says it all.

The "magic" Deville that runs 14's is running nitrous, a LSD, a loose converter, and a hole bag of tricks (including having the drivers headlight removed.)

Do NOT kid yourself...

You can NOT plug in a AJ tune into a stock car and suddenly it runs a second faster in the quarter...

AJ's trade secrets are not at all secret... he has been very open with what he is doing... He is taking the STOCK spark curve and fuel cutoff parameters from a STOCK unlimited Vin9 (W/Z Rated) PCM and replacing that portion of the code in the customer's PCM... Its call segment swapping...

It yields a stock like PCM that works fine on a stock like motor and produces stock like results.

NorthStarGXP
01-30-09, 11:12 AM
After datalogging ignition advance and target AFR on my 2005 GXP, I feel there is a large potential benefit if we can get the PCM properly tuned. It would require premium fuel though, with 87, I don't think there would be whole lot to gain. Admittedly, I'm just guessing, but I'd say a .5 second 1/4 improvement ought to be quite possible with just a tune. Look at the ignition timing at WOT on a cold day:

RPM / Degrees
3500 / 12.0
4000 / 13.0
4500 / 13.5
5000 / 14.0
5500 / 19.0
6000 / 24.0
6300 / 24.0

14 degrees of total advance at 5000 rpm on premium fuel? That is leaving a LOT on the table.

There are a lot of GM V8s out there that are gaining 20 - 30 horses at the wheels and a large increase in mid-range torque and 1 - 2 mpg improvement by running an aggressive custom tune that requires premium fuel.

Ur7x
01-30-09, 07:30 PM
After datalogging ignition advance and target AFR on my 2005 GXP, I feel there is a large potential benefit if we can get the PCM properly tuned. It would require premium fuel though, with 87, I don't think there would be whole lot to gain. Admittedly, I'm just guessing, but I'd say a .5 second 1/4 improvement ought to be quite possible with just a tune. Look at the ignition timing at WOT on a cold day:

RPM / Degrees
3500 / 12.0
4000 / 13.0
4500 / 13.5
5000 / 14.0
5500 / 19.0
6000 / 24.0
6300 / 24.0

14 degrees of total advance at 5000 rpm on premium fuel? That is leaving a LOT on the table.

There are a lot of GM V8s out there that are gaining 20 - 30 horses at the wheels and a large increase in mid-range torque and 1 - 2 mpg improvement by running an aggressive custom tune that requires premium fuel.


Ignition timing was/is/and will aways be a bit of a black science. But one thing that most can agree on is that there is no perfect timing number that you can apply broad brush across all engines and have it yield positive results.

On old school, slow burn, 2 Valve, long stroke, cast iron headed engines a good starting point was 34 degrees of total mechanical timing with most of the timing "all in" by 3500 RPM. On a NorthStar that would likely cause a "kaboom" situation.

The point is, the timing needs to match the motor... A long stroke old dinosaur motor like an Olds 455 will need at least 36 degrees of timing to get max performance, whereas on a fast burn LS1 in a short stroke 5.3 most tuners will start (and finish) around 28 degrees of timing...

Is the combustion chamber of the NorthStar more efficient then the LSx's? Does it have a shorter stroke? Cam timing, etc etc... All of these things contribute to "optimal" timing.

Or simply, just because it looks like there is lots of timing left on the table doesn't mean there really is... and worse, even if you add a bunch of additional timing to the base table doesn't mean that once all of the calculation are complete that the computer will actually apply all of that additional timing to the final curve.

The old school POV that you should just add timing until an engine detonates and then back off two or three degrees has now been proven to cost more power then it gains.

And as AJ and others have posted the NorthStar PCM is a freaking Monster with dozens and dozens of tables that it uses to add, subtract, truncate, maximize and minimize the timing...

There is a reason that on all of the turbo and S/C work AJ has abandoned the NorthStar PCM and is focused his effort on the LS1 and aftermarket LS1 PCMs...

AJxtcman
01-31-09, 09:58 AM
This is from a 4.6L 3 Valve FORD and it has a BLOWER!

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Bert/GT500/HP%20Tuners/Marvs/MarvsSparkMBT.jpg

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Bert/GT500/HP%20Tuners/Marvs/MarnsSparkBorderline.jpg


FWD Northstar
Different X & Y for the chart, but you get the picture.
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/PCM%20Stuff/Tables/Noname.jpg

N0DIH
01-31-09, 01:05 PM
Timing isn't really a black art, but without the sophisticated test equipment like in cyl pressure sensors and a load bearing dyno. It is actually simple with a start of modeling software to model the chamber design, burn rates, etc, to get a good base map. Once that is done, in cyl pressure testing on a load bearing (and likely temp controlled) dyno. Then the optimal timing mapping begins to determine actual MBT, Minimum Timing for Best Torque. Being the average joe tuner doesn't have all the GM goodies, we have rely on other things to detmine what is best. Controlled acceleration runs, keeping all conditions as close as possible, show the changes. Datalogging is cruical to that. Do one pass, say 10-100 mph. Note the acceleration rates in 5 mph increments. Now, change something, go back, do it again. See what changes. You can see it much better that way.

The more efficient the cyl, the lower the ignition timing is for MBT. Which is why we used 38 degrees on a Camel Hump Small Block head and only 30-32 on a 10:1 LT1 iron head on 87 octane. Careful measurement of EGT's is also helpful in determining MBT, as when timing is lower than most efficient, EGT's will climb, which if left uncontrolled can lead to cracked heads, burned seats and damaged cats. O2's and WBO2's are helpful, but use it really very limited.

GM shoots for MBT and then puts in some buffer, or headroom as we call it to ensure it isn't too close to the "other side" or where it is too far advanced. MAF tables (read by LTFT's and or AFR with WB) will even show the changes in the timing. As the more complete combustion, less is left to go out tailpipe. So removing the headroom is where the power lies. When engines are modified, things need to be changed. HOW you change it to get the desired result is irrelevant. If you need more timing, fine, there are several places that it can be added at. But the right one is key. GM characterizes about everything, and is adding more as time progresses. You have base maps for low octane, high octane, you have coolant temp scalers, intake air temp scalers, PE Mode timing vs commanded AFR adders, the list goes on. My 1994 LT1 has 17 spark tables. My 2000 Park Ave Ultra has 33. This isn't even covering constants or diagnostic settings. Just tables. Being the NorthStar is a premium engine, I would not be surprised if there was more, it is after all a 4 valve engine (granted, mine is supercharged) and at the time, one of the most advanced engines out of GM, if not THE most advanced.

http://www.freshpatents.com/Method-and-system-of-estimating-mbt-timing-using-in-cylinder-ionization-signal-dt20060302ptan20060042355.php
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10210
http://www.ecutek.com/tuning/ignition/

I highly recommend anyone who is questioning what tuning is or wanting to learn more, grab Greg Banish's book on Advanced Engine Tuning (http://www.amazon.com/Engine-Management-Advanced-Greg-Banish/dp/1932494421). This I feel is required reading for everyone on the list. I have read it 2-3 times and need to read it again.

AJxtcman
01-31-09, 02:02 PM
I highly recommend anyone who is questioning what tuning is or wanting to learn more, grab Greg Banish's book on Advanced Engine Tuning (http://www.amazon.com/Engine-Management-Advanced-Greg-Banish/dp/1932494421). This I feel is required reading for everyone on the list. I have read it 2-3 times and need to read it again.

Ur7x (Greg) has been Banished? :histeric:

Ur7x
01-31-09, 08:22 PM
Ur7x (Greg) has been Banished? :histeric:

You know, if you want me to STFU... or even better sing your praises to all who will listen...

All you need to do it PROVE YOUR TUNE...

In almost 2 years and over 3000 posts we STILL have ZERO proof that your tune makes cars faster.

The only real test that was done made the car SLOWER...
And now it turns out that tune was flawed and set LEAN DTCs...

Hmmm... Are you considering a partnership with D3?

AJxtcman
01-31-09, 08:32 PM
You know, if you want me to STFU... or even better sing your praises to all who will listen...

All you need to do it PROVE YOUR TUNE...

In almost 2 years and over 3000 posts we STILL have ZERO proof that your tune makes cars faster.

The only real test that was done made the car SLOWER...
And now it turns out that tune was flawed and set LEAN DTCs...

Hmmm... Are you considering a partnership with D3?

Wrong Partnership. :histeric: Way off.
Take a Guess

Highline Cady
02-03-09, 07:34 AM
Mines faster. Prove it again at whatever summer Cady meet that happens.

Submariner409
02-03-09, 11:37 AM
Yo !!!! Where you been ???

Ur7x
02-03-09, 11:53 AM
Mines faster. Prove it again at whatever summer Cady meet that happens.

Cool, as we can see you car has had Numerous changes... To prove the tune you unplug the AJ tune PCM... plug in the stock PCM take a pass... and then make a second pass ONLY switching back to the AJ PCM...

Simple as that.. That will eliminate any gains that are attributed to the better converter, the better gears, the better exhuast and the better intake on your car.

AJxtcman
02-03-09, 03:01 PM
Cool, as we can see you car has had Numerous changes... To prove the tune you unplug the AJ tune PCM... plug in the stock PCM take a pass... and then make a second pass ONLY switching back to the AJ PCM...

Simple as that.. That will eliminate any gains that are attributed to the better converter, the better gears, the better exhuast and the better intake on your car.

You are toooooooooo Funny:histeric:

We have done that, but you didn't like that because the car had all the mods done to it. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WTF? :hmm:

N0DIH
02-03-09, 05:07 PM
He's alive!

Welcome back!


Mines faster. Prove it again at whatever summer Cady meet that happens.

Highline Cady
02-03-09, 10:16 PM
We did do that, but then my car had to many mods, remember!?:bouncy:


Awww and thanks, it's nice to be missed. :rant2:This fu**ing blown Mustang is really pissing me off and taking up allot of everybodies time (thanks AJ, again) But you'd all be happy to know that the nitrous burning AJ tuned Cady is running strong but only on days where it doesn't look like snow, we have a few more mods for it before this years meet:shhh:. Bye the way: Snow = dodge weather!!! And yes it's not capitalized for a reason.:cool:

GizmoQ
02-04-09, 04:16 AM
We did do that, but then my car had to many mods, remember!?:bouncy:


Awww and thanks, it's nice to be missed. :rant2:This fu**ing blown Mustang is really pissing me off and taking up allot of everybodies time (thanks AJ, again) But you'd all be happy to know that the nitrous burning AJ tuned Cady is running strong but only on days where it doesn't look like snow, we have a few more mods for it before this years meet:shhh:. Bye the way: Snow = dodge weather!!! And yes it's not capitalized for a reason.:cool:

Welcome back! Hope you're feeling better - snow's almost done!

Highline Cady
02-04-09, 05:10 PM
Thanks again, lost 27 pounds in 2 weeks and wasn't trying. I think I have some variation of the plague, hope it's gone by spring.

N0DIH
02-04-09, 05:49 PM
Can't wait to hook up with you and AJ at the track sometimes, maybe have to pair up my Park Ave Ultra and the DHS!

AJxtcman
02-04-09, 07:03 PM
Can't wait to hook up with you and AJ at the track sometimes, maybe have to pair up my Park Ave Ultra and the DHS!

:histeric: :yawn: :histeric:
How about Friday at your work. In the parking lot. :cool:

N0DIH
02-04-09, 07:27 PM
Security would have a ball with that.....:thepan:


:histeric: :yawn: :histeric:
How about Friday at your work. In the parking lot. :cool:

AJxtcman
02-05-09, 02:30 PM
Everyone
I see a throw down in N0DIH's work parking lot after work on Friday. http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/smilies/Fight2-1.gif

kevinscaddy01STS
02-05-09, 08:31 PM
i have met AJ in person and know that he knows his shit..100% confident in his tuning ability...

AJ i shot u a PM hopefully we can meet up soon..

AJxtcman
02-05-09, 09:00 PM
are you still looking for the N2O tune?

N0DIH
02-07-09, 11:50 AM
The results were interesting!

How does my little V6 with a ton of junk in the trunk do? Fair for a V6?

I have to admit, I loved how Highlines car runs and drives. I would LOVE to duplicate that combo. I haven't driven too may N*'s, but that one for sure is a far cry above the ones I have driven.

Kudos to AJ for a very refined and very quick combo!

Highline, NOW to look for a M112 for it.... :)


Everyone
I see a throw down in N0DIH's work parking lot after work on Friday. http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/smilies/Fight2-1.gif

Ur7x
02-08-09, 01:49 AM
You are toooooooooo Funny:histeric:

We have done that, but you didn't like that because the car had all the mods done to it. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WTF? :hmm:

You guys NEVER did that.. You started with a stock car... made a base line run... made dozens of changes, ran that and then said the tune made it faster... We don't know if the tune made it faster, or if it was the torque converter, the missing headlight, the LSD, etc etc etc...

The ONLY person who made ONE change per PASS was Codewise...

And since then no-one is laughing.

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 09:37 AM
You guys NEVER did that.. You started with a stock car... made a base line run... made dozens of changes, ran that and then said the tune made it faster... We don't know if the tune made it faster, or if it was the torque converter, the missing headlight, the LSD, etc etc etc...

The ONLY person who made ONE change per PASS was Codewise...

And since then no-one is laughing.

I am sorry I will restate the facts.
The first time I performed any mods to the car other than the tune was 12-07.
I installed a higher stall converter.
The stall = 2600 on the freeway under a hard load. I think the max stall is rated at 3200 to 3500. I have never seen this. I even called the manufacturer to have this explained to me. N0DIH even stated the converter felt just loose, but not 3500 loose. :yup:


All the testing before 12-07 is invalid because why?

Ur7x
02-08-09, 10:57 AM
I am sorry I will restate the facts.
The first time I performed any mods to the car other than the tune was 12-07.
I installed a higher stall converter.

All the testing before 12-07 is invalid because why?

Because it doesn't exist...
wasn't done at a dyno/track...
Shows stock like times..

Take your pick.

Why is it so hard for you'all to admit that PROPER testing has not been done.

We have gone over this over and over... Proper testing has never been done..
THE FIRST person to do a PROPER test was Codewise... All we had before that were "aborted" dyno runs and data loggers that made no sense. (and look stock)

I suspect he did the test mostly to get me to STFU...but all his PROPER TEST did was show that THE tune produces STOCK LIKE results and STOCK LIKE times (and even that's been a little generous)

What does Codewise say now?
"I'm faster with the Stock PCM" and
"There are no quick fixes with this car"

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 11:58 AM
It was on the street. The same starting spot and the same day.
Several time we data-logger one tune after another. :hmm:

We had one Stock Tune that consistently ran .8 sec slower than another vin (9) stock tune from the same year car with the same engine and trans combo from 0 to 90. :hmm: I guess you car doesn't have that one.

I would say we have well over 100 Data-logs with the Tech II stored, another 25 or so with the Wide-Band Data-Logger, another 25 or so with PCMScan (http://www.palmerperformance.com/products/pcmscan/index.php) (linked) and another 10 stored with the VDR, but we can watch live data and not record it with the VDR. You can't do both with the VDR. The VDR is by far the best Data-logger I have used. I just pulled up one week. Just from Monday June 30th to Friday July 4th of 2008 we had 10 Data-Logs on the VDR that I stored. We would have been Data-logging the Wide-band at the same time to verify that the PCM was reading correctly. I can only guess we had to toss a few recordings for some human error. Like not hitting the button at the right time.

I dialed the AFR in for the BIG shot of Nitrous back at the end of June.

I would have to guess that I have dumped over 100 more of the Tech II data-logs off my PC. Why have duplicate runs? I would make a change and then rune the car several times to verify the results. If they all come up the same I would just keep one or if we had traction issue I would dump that one.

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 12:11 PM
Just say a guy with a 2003 STS asks me for a STOCK hot tune. He has the .8 sec slower 0-90 stock tune and I give him what he asks for and the car is faster. What is the issue with that? Most people asked me not to go over stock.

Now as far as Codewise goes he did some testing for me on some segment swapped tunes. He DID NOT like the 2002 & 2003 OSID Cal's. Not sure why. Cams? I spent all my time on a 2003 OSID cal. That is what I sent him. I can't see what the issue is with his car because he NEVER Data-logged it. Maybe he has some type of engine noise that the knock sensor picks up. Maybe the 2002 isn't as sensitive to KR? :rolleyes:
We just don't know and he hasn't helped. :nono:
We don't even know why he had a lean code with his PCM yet. :cool:

If I had the answers I could adjust for them.

All I know is I spent a ton of time on a 2003 tune and it works.

Ask N0DIH

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 12:20 PM
And as AJ and others have posted the NorthStar PCM is a freaking Monster with dozens and dozens of tables that it uses to add, subtract, truncate, maximize and minimize the timing...

The Northstar is NO different from an LS! for tables. Just think of a Vette or even a Z06 vs a base Deville. Hmmmmm the Z06 has more controllers :histeric: and it uses ClassII just like the Northstar's. As a matter of fact you have to isolate a controller to program it on a Vette. On a 2003 Deville you only need to isolate the PCM. Wat too much data on the Vette to even program the radio :histeric:





There is a reason that on all of the turbo and S/C work AJ has abandoned the NorthStar PCM and is focused his effort on the LS1 and aftermarket LS1 PCMs...


My main focus has been that 2003 DHS. The LS1 setup is 100% GM factory :histeric: Nothing aftermarket at all. :devil:

Ur7x
02-08-09, 12:23 PM
It was on the street. The same starting spot and the same day.
Several time we data-logger one tune after another. :hmm:

We had one Stock Tune that consistently ran .8 sec slower than another vin (9) stock tune from the same year car with the same engine and trans combo from 0 to 90. :hmm: I guess you car doesn't have that one.



Lets review

"on the street" with a stop watch or datalogger is NOT accurate enough. You and I both know that alone will and 0.5-1.5 seconds of error to your test. Almost exactly your reported gains... :hmm:

"data logger" on the street also is meaningless since you are relying on the very systems that you are monkeying with to tell you what is going on. Of course it will show changes...

When you can buy a Terabyte hard drive for less than $200 now there is NO reason for data to be dumped... lost... no longer available...

Scientific, provable tests are NOT hard to do... Codewise showed that.
You just need to ACTAULLY do them...
and untill they are done we all sit around :hmm: scratching..

Highline knows what to do, and I think he agreed to test your tune at the next Caddy meet.

Proof is only months away. (but then again.. it alway is, isn't it :helpless: )

You know there is another way... a way that CAN be done on the street (sort-of anyway)... Top speed runs... TOP speed is a direct measurement of max power. Show that your car picks up 5 MPH on a top speed run and YOU KNOW that you are making more horses... (notice that Tim Allen "pulled" the testing of his car BEFORE the top speed run was done.. after it did stock 0-60 and stock 1/4 mile runs :helpless:)

We have a nice data base from Car and Driver and others that has the top speed of most cars for most years (stock)

Of course as always... A Top Speed run on a significantly Modified car (like Highlines) needs a "one change" run before and after.

I have said over and over... Produce a scientific "proof" test and I will be telling all that you have achieved the imposible and that your tune is for REAL... The only test we have is Code's car and your tune made it slower in to 60' slower the 1/8th and slower in the quarter. Turns out his car was broken... But it also turns out that he runs the STOCK PCM now.

Thats a FACT.

It seems that you would rather argue then actually document your work.

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 03:46 PM
Lets review

"on the street" with a stop watch or data-logger is NOT accurate enough. You and I both know that alone will and 0.5-1.5 seconds of error to your test. Almost exactly your reported gains... :hmm:

"data logger" on the street also is meaningless since you are relying on the very systems that you are monkeying with to tell you what is going on. Of course it will show changes...
The Data-Logger won't display a change in Spark or Fuel why? If I back that up with a secondary data-logger it is no good why?

Lets get this correct. I use a GM Data-Logger that states I have 12.6 to 1 AFR and a secondary Wide-band not hooked to the PCM Data-Logging the same and they are both wrong. You also would have to rule out a Data-Log for just the time it takes to run through 2nd gear with that statement. Let me understand this better. Hmmmmmm
The VDR or Tech II records the RPM drops from 6886 to 4550 as it shifts into 2nd and from 6400 to 4776 in say .0412 second on BOTH the VDR and the Wide-Band Data-Logger because I changed the target AFR :thumbsup:

I understand :alchi: YOU are Limited




When you can buy a Terabyte hard drive for less than $200 now there is NO reason for data to be dumped... lost... no longer available...
I don't need 500 data-logs from 1 car. I have atleast 150 now on my PC I woulod guess that the laptop has a lot more



Scientific, provable tests are NOT hard to do... Codewise showed that.

You can't use a car with know issues as a test car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :thehand:

N0DIH
02-08-09, 04:08 PM
Datalogger runs are the most accurate. The datalogger counts the speed sensor output, which has a large amount of accuracy. So as long as no wheelspin launch, 100% accurate for speed and time. Wheelspin launch will throw in a lot of error for the speeds, but the speed and time will still be accurate, but the distance/times like 60 foot etc will be off.

This is my LT1 with 250K miles on it..... Flat ground zero wheelspin (hence the slow 60 foot time).
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t142/mompower/Tom/TTS-QuarterMile.png
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t142/mompower/Tom/TTS-Dyno.png

Yes, there are environmental conditions that exist. But their influence on the 60 mph and lower speeds is pretty small. So you can with high confidence show differences in acceleration. All you need is a datalogger and work with some acceleration ranges, say 20-60 that you have 0 wheelspin, same gear. This will show a lot.

Ur7x
02-08-09, 06:43 PM
The datalogger counts the speed sensor output, which has a large amount of accuracy. So as long as no wheelspin launch, 100% accurate for speed and time. Wheelspin launch will throw in a lot of error for the speeds, but the speed and time will still be accurate, but the distance/times like 60 foot etc will be off.


Your post nicely documents the problem... Your run needs to be PERFECT with no wheel slippage. As we all know the GM system is DESIGNED to let the wheels slip a little before the TC system kicks in... If the speed variable is in error and the distance variable is in error, you are now measuring ERRORS... not REALITY. As long as the wheel is slipping the vehicle speed IS NOT ACCURATE... they are not even CLOSE. This is exactly the time when maximum acceleration occurs... EXACTLY what we are trying to measure.

Another problem on the "street" The "street" isn't flat.. more error...
Lets be VERY CLEAR...

TESTING needs to be done on the DYNO or at the TRACK. PERIOD.

Using tools like this generates all kinds of goofy excuses... Remember the responses we got when it was proven that Codewise ran slower on the Tune...

"You can't drive the car like that":hmm:
"You have to just stomp on it":hmm:
"You can't reload the torque converter" :hmm:
"It will produce better times if you you don't launch on the brake, just press the gas":hmm:
"The tune is designed to make the cars fun... not more power" :hmm:
"Codes tune was not the latest tune" :hmm:

Hmm... All of those comments say the same thing..
"I get the best data logs when there is no slippage"... As my wife says "Well Duh!"

If you are relying on a zero slippage run to get your data you are now putting the driver right in the middle of this... You want to take the driver out of the equation... Drive the car "SLOW" with "ZERO" slippage and the logger will look completely different then one with lots of slip...

That's why the dyno is best... and a 1/4 mile run in an automatic where you load the Torque converter to 2000 and then peg the throttle at the green light also takes the driver out it...

Worse then that you tend to build a tune that REDUCES power until there is zero slippage... 'cause that gets you the best number...

I don't know of a single vendor or recognized media outlet that uses a data logging as a tool to verify a cars performance...

Ur7x
02-08-09, 06:58 PM
The Data-Logger won't display a change in Spark or Fuel why? If I back that up with a secondary data-logger it is no good why?

Lets get this correct. I use a GM Data-Logger that states I have 12.6 to 1 AFR and a secondary Wide-band not hooked to the PCM Data-Logging the same and they are both wrong. You also would have to rule out a Data-Log for just the time it takes to run through 2nd gear with that statement. Let me understand this better. Hmmmmmm
The VDR or Tech II records the RPM drops from 6886 to 4550 as it shifts into 2nd and from 6400 to 4776 in say .0412 second on BOTH the VDR and the Wide-Band Data-Logger because I changed the target AFR :thumbsup:

I understand YOU are Limited


Understand that we don't give a rat a$$ what the car is doing with the AFR, wide band, narrow band, what gear we are in etc etc etc... Post like the above a just designed to avoid the obvious and confuse everyone...

Again lets BE VERY CLEAR...

We want to KNOW IF THE CAR IS FASTER ON THE TUNE... THAT'S ALL...
Simple Eh?

Do a run on the stock tune, swap in the AJ tune and do a back to back run... on the dyno or at the track... Simple.

Why is that so hard to do? :hmm:

I might be limited... But my car isn't... its a "Z/W" car...

AJxtcman
02-08-09, 09:39 PM
That's why the dyno is best... and a 1/4 mile run in an automatic where you load the Torque converter to 2000 and then peg the throttle at the green light also takes the driver out it......

I wish that Codewize would have you the Data-Logger to show you that the STOCK cal kills 4 cylinders off at 1600 rpm's when loading the converter, but no he didn't do that. :eek:



I don't know of a single vendor or recognized media outlet that uses a data logging as a tool to verify a cars performance...

You need to check again :thumbsup: Most of the time I don't know why you type. The stuff that flows from you is garbage. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, How much HP did Code's car put down on the dyno??????????????

Ur7x
02-09-09, 12:36 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, How much HP did Code's car put down on the dyno??????????????

Like all of your tuned cars... Stock like numbers. :hmm:



Do a run on the stock tune, swap in the AJ tune and do a back to back run... on the dyno or at the track... Simple.

Why is that so hard to do?

Why is that so hard to do? Why do you constantly "dodge" this very simple question?

Am I the only one who notices that you NEVER answer any questions... You just ask new and confusing ones...


Ya Codewise's car is slower on my tune but it shuts off cylinders on the stock tune at 1600 RPM

OK... Hands up, who cares if my car no longer shuts off cylinders, but now it is slower to 60', slower to the 8th, and slower in the quarter.... When you lose against a car running the stock tune you can say "Ya but your car shuts off four cylinders at 1600 RPM"

If it makes the car slower, no one cares.

Ur7x
02-09-09, 12:51 AM
You need to check again :thumbsup:

Ok who does use in car loggers?

Car and Driver... Nope
Road and Track... Nope
Motor Trend... Nope
Car Craft ... Nope
Hot Rod... Nope
Automobile... Nope
Top Gear... Nope
AutoWeek... Nope

All of these go into guesome detail how they test cars with "third wheels" and independant test gear.

Ok who does?

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 07:40 AM
Like all of your tuned cars... Stock like numbers. :hmm:



Why is that so hard to do? Why do you constantly "dodge" this very simple question?

Am I the only one who notices that you NEVER answer any questions... You just ask new and confusing ones...



OK... Hands up, who cares if my car no longer shuts off cylinders, but now it is slower to 60', slower to the 8th, and slower in the quarter.... When you lose against a car running the stock tune you can say "Ya but your car shuts off four cylinders at 1600 RPM"

If it makes the car slower, no one cares.

My point is you DON'T Know what you are talking about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We have done several back to back runs!!!! You don't like them
It is very important to Know exactly how much Code's car put down on the Dyno with the stock PCM!!!!
All Northstar's have Cylinder Deactivation from the Factory!!!!

You act like my tunes kill 4 cylinders, but the stock ones don't. They all do, but you for some odd reason don't understand that!!!!!!!!!

I am tuning the cylinder deactivation way up now. That has been one of my goals. Remember?

You keep focusing on a broken car why?????????

Ur7x
02-09-09, 10:44 AM
My point is you DON'T Know what you are talking about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We have done several back to back runs!!!! You don't like them
It is very important to Know exactly how much Code's car put down on the Dyno with the stock PCM !!!!
All Northstar's have Cylinder Deactivation from the Factory!!!!

You act like my tunes kill 4 cylinders, but the stock ones don't. They all do, but you for some odd reason don't understand that!!!!!!!!!

I am tuning the cylinder deactivation way up now. That has been one of my goals. Remember?

You keep focusing on a broken car why?????????

You have NEVER done a back to back "change ONLY the PCM" run. at a track or at a dyno

NEVER...

The reason we focus on Codewise's car is 'cause it is the ONLY one that actually HAS done a back to back run at a dyno or at a track. PERIOD.

You keep saying they exist... and you have for almost 2 years now... but they don't, they were done on the street, with questionable data loggers or they show stock like numbers on the dyno.

You know its funny, Highline comes back to the forum after a few months absence... He says he is going to run his car at the track soon... Cool!

All I suggest is that he does a back to back test one run on the Stock PCM and one run on your Tuned PCM and YOU get all defensive...

Why does this simple and yet scientific test concern you so much?
Why don't you want to prove your tune the best way posible?
Why do you seem actually determined to not have a test like this happen?
What do you know?

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 11:57 AM
You have NEVER done a back to back "change ONLY the PCM" run. at a track or at a dyno

NEVER...

The reason we focus on Codewise's car is 'cause it is the ONLY one that actually HAS done a back to back run at a dyno or at a track. PERIOD.

You keep saying they exist... and you have for almost 2 years now... but they don't, they were done on the street, with questionable data loggers or they show stock like numbers on the dyno.

You know its funny, Highline comes back to the forum after a few months absence... He says he is going to run his car at the track soon... Cool!

All I suggest is that he does a back to back test one run on the Stock PCM and one run on your Tuned PCM and YOU get all defensive...

Why does this simple and yet scientific test concern you so much?
Why don't you want to prove your tune the best way posible?
Why do you seem actually determined to not have a test like this happen?
What do you know?

I don't have a car to do the back to back test that meets your standards. :histeric:

Destroyer
02-09-09, 08:56 PM
Understand that we don't give a rat a$$ what the car is doing with the AFR, wide band, narrow band, what gear we are in etc etc etc... Post like the above a just designed to avoid the obvious and confuse everyone...

That is EXACTLY what I was saying all along. Let's cut out the graphs, the tables, the pictures of modified N*'s and the talk (tech talk that is). Lets see some real world, back to back runs stock vs "tuned". It's the only way. :suspense:

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 10:43 PM
That is EXACTLY what I was saying all along. Let's cut out the graphs, the tables, the pictures of modified N*'s and the talk (tech talk that is). Lets see some real world, back to back runs stock vs "tuned". It's the only way. :suspense:


OK the result are in, after a long wait due to some import driver blowing up and spewing oil all over the track.

Vehicle Stats:
Volant intake, 1/2 tank of fuel (8 gals)?
80.6 deg F, 81% humidity


Pass # 1
AJ tune with TQ defeat system
reaction time .300 <<Not so hot but I haven't raced in 20 years
1/8 mile 10.2 seconds @ 72.57 MPH
1/4 mile 15.61 @ 90.17 MPH

Pass # 2
reaction time .094 <<Much better
1/8 mile 10.1 seconds @ 73.35 MPH
1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH


This is Highhline's time with NO stall converter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! back in 2007
That would make this about as stock as Codewize's car correct?????????
Just my tune and the corsa exh was the only difference correct?
1/8th mile 9.842 @74.08
1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph

Now what is wrong with the picture?

If you don't remember the 2nd pass was on the stock PCM.

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 10:49 PM
This is Highhline's time with NO stall converter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! back in 2007
That would make this about as stock as Codewize's car correct?????????
Just my tune and the corsa exh was the only difference correct?
1/8th mile 9.842 @74.08
1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph

Now what is wrong with the picture?

If you don't remember the 2nd pass was on the stock PCM.

My PCM in Codewize's car that had an unresolved issue
Pass # 1
AJ tune with TQ defeat system
1/8 mile 10.2 seconds @ 72.57 MPH
1/4 mile 15.61 @ 90.17 MPH

Highlines car AGAIN
1/8th mile 9.842 @74.08
1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph

:eek:

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 10:53 PM
Does the last post show a broken car? :bonkers:

Wait another run from 2007 Hmmmmm 15.1 again :histeric: @ over 93 mph OMG
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Bert/timeslip.jpg

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 10:56 PM
Wow 3 mph gain? :mad2:

oh no it was a different car, but they were done both in July. Oh no. Different years. That can't be good. :hide:

N0DIH
02-09-09, 11:12 PM
Last time my calculator looked at it:

First run
Using the ET method, I come up with 208 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 229 horsepower

Second run
Using the ET method, I come up with 228 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 250 horsepower

The ACTUAL numbers are meaningless, the DELTA of the numbers show the real deal. The car was faster and quicker down the quarter mile. I used a default figure of 4000 lbs. If I used a higher number, it would be higher hp numbers, lower, lower hp numbers. The weight is a constant in this calculation.

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 11:21 PM
The torque defeat device came into play about January of 08. Hmmmmm
I think that added to Code's run. Hmmmmm
That again proves Code's car didn't like my tune and his car ran slower than Highline's car and he had the button :eek:

I am not sure what that means. hmmmmmmmmmmm :yawn: Why don't you tell us?

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 11:22 PM
Last time my calculator looked at it:

First run
Using the ET method, I come up with 208 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 229 horsepower

Second run
Using the ET method, I come up with 228 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 250 horsepower

The ACTUAL numbers are meaningless, the DELTA of the numbers show the real deal. The car was faster and quicker down the quarter mile. I used a default figure of 4000 lbs. If I used a higher number, it would be higher hp numbers, lower, lower hp numbers. The weight is a constant in this calculation.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Bert/HPIM0352.jpg

N0DIH
02-09-09, 11:32 PM
Ok, this should be a tad closer....

Using the ET method, I come up with 232 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 256 horsepower

Using the ET method, I come up with 254 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 279 horsepower

AJxtcman
02-09-09, 11:47 PM
Is that both runs for Code's car or one from Highline's and one from Code's?

Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH on the stock PCM
Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.61 @ 90.17 MPH on my PCM. This is OK for me. This is not what I am debating
Highline ran a 1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph & 15.169 @ 93.21 mph on my tune. This is my point!!!!!!!!!!!!

How ever you look at it a car with out any DTC's setting ran quicker and faster than a that a car setting DTC's and a STOCK TUNE. Is that is a fact Correct? :alchi:



6/12/08 to 7/30/08

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-deville-1985-2005-including-1985/142622-tech-help-please-more-codes-p0171.html


7/18/08 new thread 8/2/08

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-deville-1985-2005-including-1985/145382-i-need-figure-out-lean-thing.html

Started 7/30/08
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/146217-going-track-4.html#post1593057

N0DIH
02-10-09, 01:55 AM
Ignore my post, I think I got Highlines and CodeWise's times mixed....


Ok, this should be a tad closer....

Using the ET method, I come up with 232 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 256 horsepower

Using the ET method, I come up with 254 horsepower
Using the Speed method, I come up with 279 horsepower

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 07:25 AM
Is that both runs for Code's car or one from Highline's and one from Code's?

Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH on the stock PCM
Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.61 @ 90.17 MPH on my PCM. This is OK for me. This is not what I am debating
Highline ran a 1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph & 15.169 @ 93.21 mph on my tune. This is my point!!!!!!!!!!!!

How ever you look at it a car with out any DTC's setting ran quicker and faster than a that a car setting DTC's and a STOCK TUNE. Is that is a fact Correct? :alchi:

6/12/08 to 7/30/08
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-deville-1985-2005-including-1985/142622-tech-help-please-more-codes-p0171.html

7/18/08 new thread 8/2/08
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-deville-1985-2005-including-1985/145382-i-need-figure-out-lean-thing.html

Started 7/30/08
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/146217-going-track-4.html#post1593057

The reason I spent so much time on these facts (Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH on the stock PCM vs Highline ran a 1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph & 15.169 @ 93.21 mph on my tune) is because we were getting similar result changes when we swapped Tunes in Highline's car.

Highlines car with a stock VIN 9 3.71 gear tune 15.551 on the GM Data-Logger. Hmmmm That is about what Code ran CORRECT?
I have another Run that was 15.8 on the stock tune in Highlines car with the GM Data-Logger. (it looks like some tire spin on the graph)

Can we agree on a stock VIN 9 car will run about 15.5?

Ur7x
02-10-09, 10:33 AM
oh no it was a different car, but they were done both in July. Oh no. Different years. That can't be good. :hide:

After almost 2 years... You are FINALLY getting it! :histeric:

If you have no base line run... you CAN'T PROCLAIM anything...:rant2:

Just like D3 based their power generation number on a years old test on a very tired 1994 Eldorado... that they didn't test (the test was done by Hot Rod magazine on a Junk yard car that they were collecting the engine from)... you CAN'T compare the times of two completely different cars on two different tracks, different wind, different weather, different tires, different drivers, different elevations, different timing system, different fuel, different cars... and claim you have proof... You have proven NOTHING with this.

Why not compare your car to that same 1994 Eldorado that Hot Rod ran... a 16.2 quarter with.. Google it, it is easy to find... Now you are making over 100 extra HP on your Tune :helpless:... Wow! :rolleyes:

The more you make all of these goofy Apples to Oranges Comparisons the more we go :hmm: and the more you confuse every one...

This doesn't need to be confusing... or difficult.

1 Car
1 Day
1 Driver
1 Track
2 PCMs
2 Runs (one for each PCM)

ZERO ARGUMENTS.

The ONLY person who has done this so far was CODEWISE... your tune made his car slower and he runs the Stock PCM now with better results and better performance... and THATS A FACT.

Ur7x
02-10-09, 10:42 AM
Can we agree on a stock VIN 9 car will run about 15.5?

No, most stock Vin 9 Devilles that were tested over the years by Car and Driver and others consistantly run in the 15.1-15.2 range...

hmmm sound familular...

NOW DO YOU SEE WHY YOU NEED A BASELINE RUN?

If we are guessing about what the stock car will do...we are guessing about the tune...

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 02:45 PM
The reason I spent so much time on these facts (Code ran a 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH on the stock PCM vs Highline ran a 1/4th mile 15.143 @ 92.84 mph & 15.169 @ 93.21 mph on my tune) is because we were getting similar result changes when we swapped Tunes in Highline's car.

Highlines car with a stock VIN 9 3.71 gear tune 15.551 on the GM Data-Logger. Hmmmm That is about what Code ran CORRECT?
I have another Run that was 15.8 on the stock tune in Highlines car with the GM Data-Logger. (it looks like some tire spin on the graph)

Can we agree on a stock VIN 9 car will run about 15.5?

Is 15.5 about a stock time for a DTS or was Code's car having issuses?

N0DIH
02-10-09, 02:53 PM
So this would be accurate then?

http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-De-Ville-Timeslip-15979.html
http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-De-Ville-Timeslip-12172.html

1994 Cadillac DeVille Concours 7.8 15.8
1995 Cadillac DeVille Concours 6.9 15.2
1996 Cadillac DeVille Concours 7.2 15.4
1998 Cadillac DeVille Concours 6.9 15.1


Or a 50 shot of Nitrous and a tuned PCM...
http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-DTS-Timeslip-15016.html

Ur7x
02-10-09, 03:21 PM
More Apples to Oranges... more confusion

Here is a link to a Car and Driver test of a
BONE STOCK 2001 Vin 9 300 HP DTS..
In the quarter it goes... 15.0

Download the PDF here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/layout/set/email_popup/content/download/114272/1551238/version/2/file

Why not just compare AJ's tune to Tim Allen's 2000 DTS?

That car was reported to make almost 400HP...
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/specialty_files_tuner_cars/tim_allen_design_cadillac_deville_dtsi_specialty_f ile+t-specs+page-4.html

To bad it is slower in the quarter (15.1) then the BONE STOCK car documented above... Lord knows why Tim is smiling in that picture.. He just got taken to the cleaners on that car!

Can we at least agree that if we constantly compare two different cars, on different days, at different tracks, with different drivers, on different tires, of different model years, with different miles on the clock... our comparisons ARE MEANINGLESS...

N0DIH
02-10-09, 03:54 PM
Actual timeslips on dragtimes don't show anyone in a 00-05 hitting 15.0 in the quarter.

Magazines are notorious for funny times or prepared cars, often from GM itself. I wouldn't base jack on them unless I had the car and could duplicate the results myself.

Ur7x
02-10-09, 05:44 PM
Magazines are notorious for funny times or prepared cars, often from GM itself. I wouldn't base jack on them unless I had the car and could duplicate the results myself.

Which is EXACTLY my point...

We keep throwing around numbers like 15.5, 15.4, 15.3 like they are gospel...
Except THEY AREN'T.
We keep saying there is no report of a Stock DTS going faster then 15.2...
Except THERE ARE.

We keep picking and choosing times, almost at random to prove a tune, when what you should do is a controlled scientific run... Remember from High School Chemistry? Remember the control sample... You try to make the conditions as CLOSE AS POSSIBLE to the sample that you have changed so you can measure JUST THE CHANGE...

Around and around we go... This is not hard to do... We just don't want to do it.

1 Car
1 Day
1 Driver
1 Track
2 PCMs
2 Runs (one for each PCM)

BTW Car and Driver is Notorious for being STICKLERS when it comes to their performance numbers.. They normally ONLY publish numbers that they have collected with there OWN certified and calibrated "third wheel" test equipment. If they publish manufactures numbers (which is rare) they include a footnote documenting this. The collect test cars from local dealerships and OEM engineers and techs are not allowed to "fiddle" with them.

While Car and Driver editorials and comparison pieces have become "fluff" over the years. Their performance numbers are consider to be beyond reproach by most.

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 07:38 PM
Which is EXACTLY my point...

We keep throwing around numbers like 15.5, 15.4, 15.3 like they are gospel...
Except THEY AREN'T.
We keep saying there is no report of a Stock DTS going faster then 15.2...
Except THERE ARE.

We keep picking and choosing times, almost at random to prove a tune, when what you should do is a controlled scientific run... Remember from High School Chemistry? Remember the control sample... You try to make the conditions as CLOSE AS POSSIBLE to the sample that you have changed so you can measure JUST THE CHANGE...

Around and around we go... This is not hard to do... We just don't want to do it.

1 Car
1 Day
1 Driver
1 Track
2 PCMs
2 Runs (one for each PCM)

BTW Car and Driver is Notorious for being STICKLERS when it comes to their performance numbers.. They normally ONLY publish numbers that they have collected with there OWN certified and calibrated "third wheel" test equipment. If they publish manufactures numbers (which is rare) they include a footnote documenting this. The collect test cars from local dealerships and OEM engineers and techs are not allowed to "fiddle" with them.

While Car and Driver editorials and comparison pieces have become "fluff" over the years. Their performance numbers are consider to be beyond reproach by most.


So all I got from you other that REFUSING to answer my questions AGAIN is that this car at this track and this car at the same track on the same day making the runs at the same time won't work CORRECT?


Car #1 http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-De-Ville-Timeslip-15979.html

Car #2 Codewize's Pass # 2 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH

You are 100% Limited :banghead:

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 07:49 PM
I have a quick question for your limited mind.

In a performance application on a CCC car what would you set the M/C Dwell to?

Very simple. Hey my next question will be WHY, but we can wait.

Ur7x
02-10-09, 07:57 PM
Is 15.5 about a stock time for a DTS or was Code's car having issuses?

I have answered this question over and over... NO 15.5 is NOT a stock time for a DTS. Stock times for a DTS range in the 15.0-15.2 range.


So all I got from you other that REFUSING to answer my questions AGAIN is that this car at this track and this car at the same track on the same day making the runs at the same time won't work CORRECT?


Car #1 http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-De-Ville-Timeslip-15979.html

Car #2 Codewize's Pass # 2 1/4 mile 15.49 @ 90.28 MPH



Your post makes no sense...

So we are comparing Code's tuned car with another tuned car and they produce the same number... which is slower then a stock car...

Which is my point

Is that what you are posting?

If so, then, Yes you are CORRECT, this doesn't work, and proves nothing...

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 08:02 PM
I have answered this question over and over... NO 15.5 is NOT a stock time for a DTS. Stock times for a DTS range in the 15.0-15.2 range.



Your post makes no sense...

So we are comparing Code's tuned car with another tuned car and they produce the same number... which is slower then a stock car...

Which is my point

Is that what you are posting?

If so, then, Yes you are CORRECT, this doesn't work, and proves nothing...

:histeric::histeric:
It is the same car :histeric: :histeric:
Argue some more D0md A$$

Ur7x
02-10-09, 08:07 PM
I have a quick question for your limited mind.

In a performance application on a CCC car what would you set the M/C Dwell to?

Very simple. Hey my next question will be WHY, but we can wait.

If you are now installing Quadrajets Carburetors on NorthStars we are moving backwards... how does this help?

Oh that's right, our job here it to confuse everyone... rather then answer very simple questions.

But the answer is that at WOT the CCC system basically deactivates the primary mixture solenoid and it goes to 10 degrees dwell, full rich, and the car runs on the secondary (mechanical) fuel delivery circuit.

If you are tuning the fuel mixture system on a CCC system looking for power you are wasting your time... The system at full load is just an Old School Mechanical Quadra jet. Most (all) CCC tuners are only working with the spark table.

AJxtcman
02-10-09, 08:16 PM
If you are now installing Quadrajets Carburetors on NorthStars we are moving backwards... how does this help?

Oh that's right, our job here it to confuse everyone... rather then answer very simple questions.

But the answer is that at WOT the CCC system basically deactivates the primary mixture solenoid and it goes to 10 degrees dwell, full rich, and the car runs on the secondary (mechanical) fuel delivery circuit.

If you are tuning the fuel mixture system on a CCC system looking for power you are wasting your time... The system at full load is just an Old School Mechanical Quadra jet. Most (all) CCC tuners are only working with the spark table.
That is funny. I thought you knew a little more on Theory. Guess not :D

That was my point. Your lack of Knowledge

Highline Cady
02-11-09, 07:42 AM
Stock I ran 16.1 at 87-88 mph
After the tune it was well into the 15's in the low 90's
a bunch of other little things quicker
a bunch more led to a best non NX run of 14.6 at 95.23

That's mine. I'm sure their were faster factory freaks out there. But knocking off 1.5 seconds and adding 8 mph without any power adders, pretty impressive, period. The NX knocks off about another second a little more and added another 9 mph 13.528 @ 104.72, we'll go with bigger jets this summer, just for the record.

That's enough for me, the fact the rev limiter/speed limiter/fuel cutoff doesn't appear anymore at 112 or 135 for that matter, along with better shifts, and a much higher redline (in my case DHS) up to 6500, is all just icing.

Thanks again AJ

AJxtcman
02-11-09, 08:07 AM
Stock I ran 16.1 at 87-88 mph
After the tune it was well into the 15's in the low 90's
a bunch of other little things quicker
a bunch more led to a best non NX run of 14.6 at 95.23

That's mine. I'm sure their were faster factory freaks out there. But knocking off 1.5 seconds and adding 8 mph without any power adders, pretty impressive, period. The NX knocks off about another second a little more and added another 9 mph 13.528 @ 104.72, we'll go with bigger jets this summer, just for the record.

That's enough for me, the fact the rev limiter/speed limiter/fuel cutoff doesn't appear anymore at 112 or 135 for that matter, along with better shifts, and a much higher redline (in my case DHS) up to 6500, is all just icing.

Thanks again AJ

It doesn't matter he just wants to argue. You can't have it both ways. Code's car was either Broken (setting a Lean DTC) or the time he ran of 15.4 was a stock time for a DTS.

Your Consistent 15.1 at the track on a 80 to 90 day was faster. On those good Data-log runs of 14.8 or 14.9 that is a great improvement over the 15.49.

That is the bottom line.

He argues his own argument. Why?

I have even gave in to his arguments and said I am the idiot. Facts are facts.
I am taking a break from this and letting his just bad mouth me and trash me for sometime before I return.

This isn't good for me and the Company.

below is a Dyno Graph. Nice to see how you can off set them. skew the results
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=139&pictureid=2119

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/160945-photo-shop-help.html

Submariner409
02-11-09, 10:54 AM
AJ.....Go up to Northstar Performance and talk to the guy from Germany who wants to tune a '94 Northstar to run in a Kellison(?) coupe. I think those PCM's are more workable than later units ????? Your ballpark, not mine.

C0RSA1R
04-14-09, 03:51 AM
I'm on Page 3 of this thread, and I refuse to go any farther. I knew when I saw the thread title . . . OP just had to go mention the most controversial thing on the board since IDKW.

I actually believe the AJ Tune works, and perhaps the first few attempts were a bit off. I have no proof to back that up except for the confidence some show in his technique, and I refuse to scour through 3 quintillion posts to find proof. But the fact that there are in fact 3000+ posts about this in another thread tells me three things:

1) This is a controversial issue.
2) Each side holds to their views strongly.
3) The issue has not been proven or disproven to the satisfaction of the majority.

Once a few skeptics are convinced, the issue may be settled. Or, it may end up timeless.