Planet-9 Porsche Forum banner

61 - 80 of 102 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
548 Posts
I don't know why this got opened again, and if it's all that good of an idea. Frankly I just see one end result; people's toes will be stepped on and the thread discussion will end up in bickering between members/vendors/admins again because we simply do not want to share the same viewpoint. That's not good, regardless how you look at it. I also think that the members that have contributed already are quite stomped with some of the last posts (I know I am) and then finally closing of the thread. For no apparent reason other than frustration. I am still not clear of the rules: are we allowed to discuss this topic openly without braking them? What if findings continue to show that the canned tunes do not deliver compared to how they are advertised? Are we allowed to question mods/admins/vendors?

How come we were allowed to have a, sometimes heated, debate in the 981 forum of BJR's thread but not in this case? For me it's the same, regardless of the name of the vendor is TPC or Softronic. I am not convinced anyone is having a personal vendetta, and even so - don't you think the forum members would see that and ask that person kindly to leave or stop? We are not teens, most of us are grown up adults....even if we don't always behave like that. ;)

Data and math have been presented, and as such there is nothing wrong with them. Looking at isolated calculations etc they make sense. Put them into the big picture and you will see that they don't add up. That's called logic. As an example to guesstimate HP based on 1/4 mile ETs. The same goes for looking at dyno printouts and ONLY looking at the last 500 rpm's in the rev range (i.e peak power). I can understand that some have monetary interest of showing peak HP gains as a way to sell more product. I can understand if some are feeling "tricked" by a product not owning up to all of its claims. This is not the base for which I myself decided to buy a canned tune; I wanted the driveability. Peak HP is not what Porsches are about anyways, neither is dragracing. Why even use those two as a measure of a well performing Porsche is honestly beyond me.

I truly wish it would not be about comparing peak HP, because as BJR said and I think everyone can see for themselves, the curves are totally different. In the best of worlds I would have wanted FVD's curve in the beginning, stock in the middle and Softronic's in the top end. Which is basically achieveable with a custom tune for that particular car being measured. But is that the only way? Clearly not. That's not the discussion either. The only instance I would care if the car made 330hp or 360hp is if it was advertised as giving such PEAK gains. That might be what is causing such emotional reactions. But again - how is this any different from BJR's thread about the "350 HP" pack only delivering ~330HP ?



All that being said, if this thread continues and doesn't close again I will add my own data to aid the community. I've found a 4-wheel dyno that should work, I have a canned tune. Similar mods as mungee. No PDK though for me. If it will end up like the last couple of posts with personal attacks I will not post dyno sheets. Or anything at all for that matter. That type of community is not something I would want to be apart of. I realize I myself have been putting my foot in my mouth in some posts, I can only blame the language barrier and I am trying my best not to offend and be as clear as I can even though I am not as eloquent as some of you guys. I would think evolved human beings should be able to take critique and/or questions without being overly defensive or aggressive. Unless there are other motives that I don't understand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,301 Posts
Oh and one last FACTUAL thing: A stock Cayman R PDK is fully capable of 12.7 secs 1/4 mile @111MPH. Mungee's trap is only ~2mph higher. With a well prepped track, excellent launch and weather conditions it would be totally plausible to run low 12's as well. It's all about the first 60ft. Just sayin...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDP7Pty8Qnw (3:46)
So Hallonz, for your tune, which would you rather have, torque or horsepower?
John Deere Tractor vs. 1800s Steam Tractor. [VIDEO]

@ 850 bhp John Deere vs. @ 18 bhp 1900's Steam Tractor
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
548 Posts
So Hallonz, for your tune, which would you rather have, torque or horsepower?
John Deere Tractor vs. 1800s Steam Tractor. [VIDEO]

@ 850 bhp John Deere vs. @ 18 bhp 1900's Steam Tractor
If I was wanting to pull something I would want WEIGHT, TRACTION and then torque followed by HP. :)



So mlpor, what has that to do with a canned tune for a Porsche? And how in any way does that relate to my post you quoted about dragracing? Or do you want my opinion on what I would want when dragracing as well? I wouldn't want a Porsche to start with.... ;)

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,301 Posts
Nothing specific to any of the canned tune debate or drag racing for that matter. But after reading your lengthy frustrations post over the latest in the (other parties) peak to peak horsepower squabbles, I thought I'd just throw in the most extreme example of peak horsepower not always being the best measure of canned tuna . . . . fish or performance. I thought asking a torque vs. bhp question in the thread might help take others focus off peak values, and drive some of the discussion to the value of total area under the torque curve vs. a peak horsepower number.

On the fun side, a couple of more pulls, and I thought there was a chance the John Deere might end up buried in the trench they were creating.
Something to be said for weight too. :) Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #65 (Edited)
An update for all..FVD have reviewed their tune (in regards to what was supplied) and have offered me a full refund as the gains they would expect to see have not been realised. Considering the fact their tune it leaner than the standard Porsche tune was a concern to me for sure.

It took almost a week to hear back from them after I followed up but a good outcome potentially.

Softronic has supplied the new map which I loaded after some issues for some reason. Scott reset my cable and then it loaded first time. I have not driven it yet and will advise as soon as I drive and book in some dyno time.

I am in 2 minds though around how to manage this Dyno run. I know science says change one variable at a time but here is what I feel (and only a gut feel) with no proof or evidence to support potentially any other factors that may be working against me:-

1) Run next run with no air filter - Current one is clean but it can only help remove one potential hurdle
2) Remove IPD plenum and put back to standard...
3) Scott wants to use high octane fuel - But I only wasn't to use pump fuel. The max pump fuel we have is 100RON (90 MON) octane or that is about 95 US equiv. The extra octane comes from Ethanol which adds octane and oxygenates which increase the fuel to 3.5% oxygen, this is very high compared to normal 98RON (93US) equiv. but this would assist in latent heat transfer, giving natural supercharging effects based on increased oxygen etc.

Porsche allow us to use a fuel that is up to 10% but some have their opinions of ethanol I know. Clearly only issue is fuel consumption increase in theory...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
548 Posts
An update for all..FVD have reviewed their tune (in regards to what was supplied) and have offered me a full refund as the gains they would expect to see have not been realised. Considering the fact their tune it leaner than the standard Porsche tune was a concern to me for sure.

It took almost a week to hear back from them after I followed up but a good outcome potentially.

Softronic has supplied the new map which I loaded after some issues for some reason. Scott reset my cable and then it loaded first time. I have not driven it yet and will advise as soon as I drive and book in some dyno time.

I am in 2 minds though around how to manage this Dyno run. I know science says change one variable at a time but here is what I feel (and only a gut feel) with no proof or evidence to support potentially other factors that may be working against me:-

1) Run next run with no air filter - Current one is clean but it can only help remove one potential hurdle
2) Remove IPD plenum and put back to standard...
3) Scott want to use high octane fuel - But I only wasn't to use pump fuel. The max pump fuel we have is 100RON (90 MON) octane or that is about 95 US equiv. The extra octane comes from Ethanol which adds octane and oxgyenates increase to 3.5% oxygen, which is very high compared to normal 98ROn (93US) equiv. but would assist in latent heat transfer, natural supercharging effects based on increased oxygen etc.

Porsche allow us to use a fuel that is up to 10% but some have their opinions of ethanol I know. Clearly only issue is fuel consumption increase in theory...
First of all, glad to see some progress (slowly but steadily). I can't help but ask - are you still set on getting a working "canned tune", or was it that Softronic and FVD responded in different ways? Are you still set on getting something working? It seems that way, but just to be clear :).

What are your expectations with this revised tune? And what has been advertised to expect? I think that also needs to be clear before you spend your money on any more dyno runs. And not turn this into a soapbox again.

My response to your thoughts:

1. Why would you do that, and risk potential damage to the engine? There's no "real world" application that runs without an air-filter.
2. What are you expecting from doing this? Or rather - what caused you to come up with this idea?
3. Running a certain percentage of ethanol is a fact in almost every country nowadays. IN THEORY: With the higher octane rating of ethanol a properly tuned engine could actually benefit from a 5-10% mix. There are drawbacks for using a mix of ethanol, but not from a power making perspective. Regardless, I would want a tune that is adapted for the fuel I would use daily, nothing else. Otherwise the the tune needs to be sold with a bunch of disclaimers. I would need to be made aware of what to expect with "my" fuel type.

From a purely scientific perspective it would be quite interesting to do a couple of runs with different types of fuel, just to determine the effect. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
So Hallonz, for your tune, which would you rather have, torque or horsepower?
John Deere Tractor vs. 1800s Steam Tractor. [VIDEO]

@ 850 bhp John Deere vs. @ 18 bhp 1900's Steam Tractor
And that was a little one! Case made a few that went to 150 hp with steam for copper mines. Even kerosene tractors like two cylinder Rumley Oil Pulls can still out torque that JD...of course they have (2) 12" pistons
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
And that was a little one! Case made a few that went to 150 hp with steam for copper mines. Even kerosene tractors like two cylinder Rumley Oil Pulls can still out torque that JD...of course they have (2) 12" pistons
The JD didn't get out-torque'd, it got out-tractioned. In a pull-off like that if you want to test anything other than weight, you have to get the weights approximately equal, or the traction given won't even be close. Note the JD was just spinning its wheels while being pulled backwards. This had nothing to do with engine torque or power and everything to do with weight. And of course, literally nothing to do with a motorsports application unless you're envisioning doing a tractor pull with a Cayman.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
An update for all..FVD have reviewed their tune (in regards to what was supplied) and have offered me a full refund as the gains they would expect to see have not been realised. Considering the fact their tune it leaner than the standard Porsche tune was a concern to me for sure.

It took almost a week to hear back from them after I followed up but a good outcome potentially.

Softronic has supplied the new map which I loaded after some issues for some reason. Scott reset my cable and then it loaded first time. I have not driven it yet and will advise as soon as I drive and book in some dyno time.

I am in 2 minds though around how to manage this Dyno run. I know science says change one variable at a time but here is what I feel (and only a gut feel) with no proof or evidence to support potentially any other factors that may be working against me:-

1) Run next run with no air filter - Current one is clean but it can only help remove one potential hurdle
2) Remove IPD plenum and put back to standard...
3) Scott wants to use high octane fuel - But I only wasn't to use pump fuel. The max pump fuel we have is 100RON (90 MON) octane or that is about 95 US equiv. The extra octane comes from Ethanol which adds octane and oxygenates which increase the fuel to 3.5% oxygen, this is very high compared to normal 98RON (93US) equiv. but this would assist in latent heat transfer, giving natural supercharging effects based on increased oxygen etc.

Porsche allow us to use a fuel that is up to 10% but some have their opinions of ethanol I know. Clearly only issue is fuel consumption increase in theory...
Any impressions of the new softtronic tune yet?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #70
Any impressions of the new softtronic tune yet?
Answer is yes...But as they are only my feelings with no valid data to back it up (i.e..Dyno runs) and if I voice them I am sure certain factions will voice their opinions. Give me a few days to organise another dyno run to show findings as my "butt dyno" may be incorrect.

All I have changed is the new Softronic map and moved over to 100RON Octane fuel (as discussed today - 2nd tank filled today) so we will see. I will also put map back to standard after the dyno runs and run again to measure any potential "fuel difference" to see if that improves or hinders the results.

I require patience as this week is very busy...I am going overseas after Saturday so I need to make time this week other wise it will be 2-3 weeks down the track and none of us want that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Answer is yes...But as they are only my feelings with no valid data to back it up (i.e..Dyno runs) and if I voice them I am sure certain factions will voice their opinions. Give me a few days to organise another dyno run to show findings as my "butt dyno" may be incorrect.

All I have changed is the new Softronic map and moved over to 100RON Octane fuel (as discussed today - 2nd tank filled today) so we will see. I will also put map back to standard after the dyno runs and run again to measure any potential "fuel difference" to see if that improves or hinders the results.

I require patience as this week is very busy...I am going overseas after Saturday so I need to make time this week other wise it will be 2-3 weeks down the track and none of us want that.
Any progress?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #72
I have been ill for the last 4 weeks since my return from OS with Vertigo..Driving the car makes me very dizzy, as its too bumpy!! I have improved slightly in the last week but probabaly still a week or 2 away from driving. Its amazing how much the head is thrown around driving our cars vs a "normal" car, as with this condition it is very noticeable.

Car has the "latest tune" from Softronic installed weeks ago and has been driven around with the new fuel (2 tanks in).

Sorry for the delay but plan is to Dyno with latest tune installed with pump 100RON octane fuel as discussed above, return to standard run again (to see any fuel variance as this also was changed form orignal runs 98RON vs 100RON octane - 93US vs 95US). See what differences the new map and fuel will provide. Watch this space all..another $600 dyno investment - hopefully it will yield some results.

Any donations are greatly appreciated...lol.

Any progress?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Not to pester, hope you are feeling better, and wondered if any chance to dyno again? It is probably a stupid question as I'm sure you would have posted if you had.

i read the entire thread today and felt like it was worthwhile just as BJR's thread is. There was a little arguing and people stated their points and moved on, still feel that it was valuable to hear both sides. I'm glad the thread is still here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #74
Not to pester, hope you are feeling better, and wondered if any chance to dyno again? It is probably a stupid question as I'm sure you would have posted if you had.

Booked for 8am Thu 24th...BJR is trying to get himself booked in after me for the same day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #75 (Edited)
Ok here we go again...Lots of data and information so please bear with me

Let me start off by stating again these are my results from files supplied and runs witnessed by BJR this morning. To recap I originally measured Softronic, Standard and FVD tunes on top of all of my other modifications. We all know that the difference was minimal across the board for WHATEVER reason that it may be.

Since then FVD has provided a full refund (with thanks) to me as my results showed the power went backwards and Softronic provided its new updated map.

Where things became interesting was when another vendor who posts regularly on this site reached out to me (after reading the many posts for all involved) and offered one of their maps to try without any cost. His words were "money back guarantee" but don't pay me unless you are happy!! How could I refuse that offer.

Who is this Vendor - BGB Motorsports, thanks John for the unbelievable offer.

So I also updated the fuel to a new Pump fuel available in Australia - 100RON (US95) with 10% ethanol that has been discussed in detail in other posts above. Key reason is more octane and Softronic wanted as much octane as possible and I also agree it would not hurt, well it didn't.

I ran same principal as last time Run Softronic First, then the standard map then lastly to the BGB map. Softronic has been in the car already for a few days and full tank of 100 octane on the drive to the Dyno shop to ensure fresh fuel.

Headline numbers only -

Standard Map - 203rwkw
Softronic - 207 rwkw
BGB - 212rwkw

Let me start with Standard Map - Reason I start here in explanation (whilst it being the 2nd set of runs) is to see if the fuel changes anything, compare it to the last runs and yes Power across the board on the standard MAP is up a couple of kws. This used as a baseline then shows potentially the new fuel is adding a tiny bit. Overall timing seems to be up a touch which would explain the slight increase.

So how did Softronic fare - Well better than last time but by how much - Definite improvement over the map I originally had from them (graph attached), however some of that increase is due to the new fuel and its ability to take advantage of it. It also displayed a throttle % reduction in the 6k rpm range on each run, only one to do that, unsure why - whether that is a data inaccuracy but always in the same range each run and only one to do that. Run 3 seemed to deliver best overall under the curve result matching BGB all the way to 4.5k rpms then falling away. It struggled up top to a certain degree also

So over to BGB map - What can I say. Car had been on the dyno for 90 odd mins, run 8 odd times already. I loaded the map and bang this is what we got:-

1st run - 207rwkw, no adaptation required, load it and run. Straight to the top of the class - no sweat
2nd run - 209rwkw
3rd run - 210 rwkw
4th run - 212 rwkw (huge gains across the entire curve)

Finally 5th run came back to earth a little and I thought we have had enough.

I have run all of the the maps on the street at night (its cold and winter here - 6deg celsius nights) and I could feel the BGB map was going well.

Was not all roses though as BGB supplied a first map and running around it felt awful to me on the road, so they had another crack at it (within 24 hrs) and this is the one I dynoed.

So there are my findings - Remember that is what these are. Your results may well be different as after my original post many other quickly showed their results to refute mine.

One interesting point is the runs stopped at 7300 odd rpm, and my car keeps climbing at that point, if I continue to dyno to the limiter the headline figure gains from all may be larger as the plenum, exhaust, TB etc would all be giving their all in those last 200-300 rpms.

The graphs attached for easy comparison are the ones where the area under the graph deliver the largest benefit:-

1) Softronic - Run 3
2) BGB - Run 4
3) Standard - Run 2

All I can say is I have no hidden agenda, I do not make a living from "performance parts" all I wanted to do is see how MY car responds to the various ECU tunes and share that knowing it will get some noses out of joint. We all have different result's for a variety of reasons.....I now owe BGB some money (I am going to go and hide)
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
548 Posts
Glad to see you are finally making some power. :) As for these tunes, I think all that needs to be said has been said in this thread. No point arguing further with vendors/sponsors or admins on this site. I appreciate your effort to make an unbiased comparison. Are you gonna take it to the track to test 1/4 mile as well?

:cheers:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
Ok here we go again...Lots of data and information so please bear with me

Let me start off by stating again these are my results from files supplied and runs witnessed by BJR this morning. To recap I originally measured Softronic, Standard and FVD tunes on top of all of my other modifications. We all know that the difference was minimal across the board for WHATEVER reason that it may be.

Since then FVD has provided a full refund (with thanks) to me as my results showed the power went backwards and Softronic provided its new updated map.

Where things became interesting was when another vendor who posts regularly on this site reached out to me (after reading the many posts for all involved) and offered one of their maps to try without any cost. His words were "money back guarantee" but don't pay me unless you are happy!! How could I refuse that offer.

Who is this Vendor - BGB Motorsports, thanks John for the unbelievable offer.

So I also updated the fuel to a new Pump fuel available in Australia - 100RON (US95) with 10% ethanol that has been discussed in detail in other posts above. r\Key reason is more octane and Softronic wanted as much octane as possible and I also agree it would not hurt, well it didn't.

I ran same principal as last time Run Softronic First, then the standard map then lastly to the BGB map. Softronic has been in the car already for a few days and full tank of 100 octane on the drive to the Dyno shop to ensure fresh fuel.

Headline numbers only -

Standard Map - 203rwkw
Softronic - 207 rwkw
BGB - 212rwkw

Let me start with Standard Map - Reason I start here in explanation (whilst it being the 2nd set of runs) is to see if the fuel changes anything, compare it to the last runs and yes Power across the board on the standard MAP is up a couple of kws. This used as a baseline then shows potentially the new fuel is adding a tiny bit. Overall timing seems to be up a touch which would explain the slight increase.

So how did Softronic fare - Well better than last time but by how much - Definite improvement over the map I originally had from them (graph attached), however some of that increase is due to the new fuel and its ability to take advantage of it. It also displayed a throttle % reduction in the 6k rpm range on each run, only one to do that, unsure why - whether that is a data inaccuracy but always in the same range each run and only one to do that.

It also made the best power on the first run of 4, each subsequent run went backwards?

This goes against the theory of adaption (it was already in the car) & standard map improved with each of its 3 runs and BGB also improved over each of its 4 runs only to go backwards on run 5?

So over to BGB map - What can I say. Car had been on the dyno for 90 odd mins, run 8 odd times already. I loaded the map and bang this is what we got:-

1st run - 207rwkw, no adaptation required, load it and run. Straight to the top of the class - no sweat
2nd run - 209rwkw
3rd run - 210 rwkw
4th run - 212 rwkw (huge gains across the entire curve)

Finally 5th run came back to earth a little and I thought we have had enough.

I have run all of the the maps on the street at night (its cold and winter here - 6deg celsius nights) and I could feel the BGB map was going well.

Was not all roses though as BGB supplied a first map and running around it felt awful to me on the road, so they had another crack at it (within 24 hrs) and this is the one I dynoed.

So there are my findings - Remember that is what these are. Your results may well be different as after my original post many other quickly showed their results to refute mine.

One interesting point is the runs stopped at 7300 odd rpm, and my car keeps climbing at that point, if I continue to dyno to the limiter the headline figure gains from all may be larger as the plenum, exhaust, TB etc would all be giving their all in those last 200-300 rpms.

The graphs attached for easy comparison are:-

Standard Map on 100 octane

1) New Softronic Run vs Old Sofronic run - looks good in isolation
2) New Softronic run vs New Standrd Map - very slight gains through the curve but better up top.
3) Softronic Run with all data
4) BGB map - 212rwkw
5) BGB vs Standard (you can really see the improvements)

All I can say is I have no hidden agenda, I do not make a living from "performance parts" all I wanted to do is see how MY car responds to the various ECU tunes and share that knowing it will get some noses out of joint. We all have different result's for a variety of reasons.....I now owe BGB some money (I am going to go and hide)

I hope I'm not the only one seeing this, but when I look at the BGB graph what I see is that HP is slowly progressing upward near the RPM limit then right before the cut-off there is a "bounce" that bounces up 5hp which to me looks like an erroneous reading at the end of the curve, in other words a HP curve should not suddenly spike 5hp like that. I'll let others examine and comment.

Do you have a chart that overlays the Softronic 100 Octane and the BGB 100 Octane together? I think that would be interesting to see...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #78 (Edited)
I hope I'm not the only one seeing this, but when I look at the BGB graph what I see is that HP is slowly progressing upward near the RPM limit then right before the cut-off there is a "bounce" that bounces up 5hp which to me looks like an erroneous reading at the end of the curve, in other words a HP curve should not suddenly spike 5hp like that. I'll let others examine and comment.
I see what you mean about the big increase at the end, it shows like a little tick at the end of curve - but please see attached as a few of the other previous runs from FVD, Softronic & standard. It seems to happen to everyone some of the time. It may be as he lifts off the throttle but thats only an un-educated guess. In BGB's case it had delivered its maximum power already approaching 7k rpm and sort of flatened out as you allude too. I should have run all to limiter in hindsight which probabaly would have removed that potential flick at the end possibly???

Do you have a chart that overlays the Softronic 100 Octane and the BGB 100 Octane together? I think that would be interesting to see...
It seems I have found some intersting further information - Softronics headline number was acheievd on the first run and this is the graph I have used, - BUT their best under the curve result by a HUGE margin was Run 3..It seems when you analzye the data more closely in 100 rpm increments agains each run (12 runs all up) Run 3 of Softronic matches BGB all the way to 4.5krpm value for value but then it falls away up top. I will have this graphed and put up for all to see but it shows a better outcome than I first thought. So much data so little time, and none of it in excel.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #79
Thanks mate, that was always my intention, just show what my results are, as we are all aware others have had differing results. Didn't give that any thought about running it again down the qtr - It may be another option to see and not so much about the time but MPH at the end wil be the deciding factor.

Glad to see you are finally making some power. :) As for these tunes, I think all that needs to be said has been said in this thread. No point arguing further with vendors/sponsors or admins on this site. I appreciate your effort to make an unbiased comparison. Are you gonna take it to the track to test 1/4 mile as well?

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Discussion Starter #80 (Edited)
Here is a simple graph showing the best runs against each other - I looked at total wheel power area under curve to base which is the best run for each - not the headline figure which has lead me astray slightly above.

Overall BGB & Softronic go head to head up until about 4.5k rpms.....
 

Attachments

61 - 80 of 102 Posts
Top