HP Tuners 2.25 BETA Release (2011+ Mustang supported + others)

[mebcop]

I never said that there weren't any differences. I said that the differences aren't as dramatic as you'd think. I've seen two diametrically opposed tunes (in terms of how the car ran) and the tunes were remarkably similar. One ran like utter dog shit and the other ran amazingly well. Just a heads/cam car, too. Nothing too insane. And the shitty tune came from the shop that actually put the package together (and knew the specs inside and out).

At the end of the day, transparency is a good thing. I don't see why anyone would want less transparency or even be OK with it. It hasn't hurt GM tuners and it won't hurt the Ford guys.

FWIW, some guys even find copying to be a form of flattery. The public forum has done a better job at weeding out shit tuners and thieves than anything else.

I know I said I'm out, but I cant leave this one alone....

OK, so lets say we have TUNER A, whos tune you said ran like utter dog shit... and TUNER B, whos tune was similar but ran amazingly well.

People will buy TUNER B's tunes, because they run better!

With the tunes all unlocked, TUNER A will just look at TUNER B's tune, see what's different, and fix his tunes. Stealing TUNER B's knowledge/experience.

Transparancy is awesome when you are the buyer.....

Sharing trade "secrets" is a whole different story.

I've personally seen people have to go through AED to get a tune that will pass emissions testing.... He sells them because he was smart enough, and took the time, to figure out how to make it work. You think he should be "transparent" with this knowledge so that all the tuners know how to do it. That's silly

 

[yngrshr]

I know I said I'm out, but I cant leave this one alone....

OK, so lets say we have TUNER A, whos tune you said ran like utter dog shit... and TUNER B, whos tune was similar but ran amazingly well.

People will buy TUNER B's tunes, because they run better!

With the tunes all unlocked, TUNER A will just look at TUNER B's tune, see what's different, and fix his tunes. Stealing TUNER B's knowledge/experience.

Transparancy is awesome when you are the buyer.....

Sharing trade "secrets" is a whole different story.

I've personally seen people have to go through AED to get a tune that will pass emissions testing.... He sells them because he was smart enough, and took the time, to figure out how to make it work. You think he should be "transparent" with this knowledge so that all the tuners know how to do it. That's silly

And guess what? That really hasn't been a problem. In theory it sounds like it would happen. In practice, it hasn't been that big of a deal. Now and then you see someone get put on blast for it and that usually ends it.

 

[GearsNBeers]

Interesting thread. Enjoyed reading it. You can see the argument of both sides. It's nice to see behind the curtain which could potentially embarrass some tuners who were pretty much scaming. Easier/cheaper access to a means to tune your own car is very appealing. On the other hand tuners that take pride in their work and put in the effort wouldn't like the idea much. Being able to unlock their locked tunes would feel like their intellectual property rights were violated. This has been a huge issue with China and the US for years on a far larger scale. Being an auto guy it would take a lot of hours/testing to nail down a titties lockup/ shift schedule. Would suck that someone could just copy and paste it.

 

[03Steve]

I've had some rum. I'll weigh in.

I understand Shaun's position fully. I'm intentionally low volume when it comes to vehicle calibration, but I take a lot of time to do things the way that I do them. In some instances that requires innovation. For example, logging beyond 2 bar with an EEC-V. I can produce a calibration that can accurately log boost beyond 15psi with the factory MAP input (not analog) on a 2003-2004 Cobra. It is very useful on some higher power setups. I spent the time doing the math, and understanding what needs to be done both outside and inside the calibration to get a datalog on a blower or turbo car to show beyond where others have quit with the factory MAP. It isn't a valuable feature universally, but it is something I did, and it is what I consider part of the "5%" that I would prefer not to share outside of the circle of other calibrators who are good enough to share their "5%" with me.

With uploading available at the commercial level, now anyone can have access to my work. And your work. At least on the calibration side. It's simple. Upload, compare against stock. Putting people "on blast" isn't a sufficient check/balance or deterrent, in my opinion. Uploading another man's work is without question looking over the shoulder of a test taker for the answers.

At the same time, there is a property question at hand. Who owns the PCM? Is it not the person who paid for the vehicle? Is the work for the calibration not compensated for? If you really think about it...all of us who provide calibrations are guilty in that aspect. We all start with "stealing" source code and a calibration from the OEM. It is not our source code that we are calibrating either. An argument could be made that the only true way to provide an aftermarket tune would be to start with your own source code, and calibrate it from scratch, which is what is done on the industrial level that I work in daily. Anything less is a ripoff of non-public proprietary work that an OEM feels they have a right to protect. I believe these were just some of the arguments made in the Chrysler vs. Wesley case.

 

[mebcop]

I've had some rum. I'll weigh in.

I understand Shaun's position fully. I'm intentionally low volume when it comes to vehicle calibration, but I take a lot of time to do things the way that I do them. In some instances that requires innovation. For example, logging beyond 2 bar with an EEC-V. I can produce a calibration that can accurately log boost beyond 15psi with the factory MAP input (not analog) on a 2003-2004 Cobra. It is very useful on some higher power setups. I spent the time doing the math, and understanding what needs to be done both outside and inside the calibration to get a datalog on a blower or turbo car to show beyond where others have quit with the factory MAP. It isn't a valuable feature universally, but it is something I did, and it is what I consider part of the "5%" that I would prefer not to share outside of the circle of other calibrators who are good enough to share their "5%" with me.

With uploading available at the commercial level, now anyone can have access to my work. And your work. At least on the calibration side. It's simple. Upload, compare against stock. Putting people "on blast" isn't a sufficient check/balance or deterrent, in my opinion. Uploading another man's work is without question looking over the shoulder of a test taker for the answers.

At the same time, there is a property question at hand. Who owns the PCM? Is it not the person who paid for the vehicle? Is the work for the calibration not compensated for? If you really think about it...all of us who provide calibrations are guilty in that aspect. We all start with "stealing" source code and a calibration from the OEM. It is not our source code that we are calibrating either. An argument could be made that the only true way to provide an aftermarket tune would be to start with your own source code, and calibrate it from scratch, which is what is done on the industrial level that I work in daily. Anything less is a ripoff of non-public proprietary work that an OEM feels they have a right to protect. I believe these were just some of the arguments made in the Chrysler vs. Wesley case.

Awesome post!!!

 

[blk00gtvert]

Well for whay its worth the software is working AMAZING. Thank you eric. I had a customers roush rs 3 that got a aluminator, injecyors,air kit,and pulley. Was able to read it out. Make changes and flash back in. Customer is more than happy and i didnt have to sit there and right a tune from scratch. Huge time saver.

 

[Dizzyscure1]

I've had some rum. I'll weigh in.

I understand Shaun's position fully. I'm intentionally low volume when it comes to vehicle calibration, but I take a lot of time to do things the way that I do them. In some instances that requires innovation. For example, logging beyond 2 bar with an EEC-V. I can produce a calibration that can accurately log boost beyond 15psi with the factory MAP input (not analog) on a 2003-2004 Cobra. It is very useful on some higher power setups. I spent the time doing the math, and understanding what needs to be done both outside and inside the calibration to get a datalog on a blower or turbo car to show beyond where others have quit with the factory MAP. It isn't a valuable feature universally, but it is something I did, and it is what I consider part of the "5%" that I would prefer not to share outside of the circle of other calibrators who are good enough to share their "5%" with me.

With uploading available at the commercial level, now anyone can have access to my work. And your work. At least on the calibration side. It's simple. Upload, compare against stock. Putting people "on blast" isn't a sufficient check/balance or deterrent, in my opinion. Uploading another man's work is without question looking over the shoulder of a test taker for the answers.

At the same time, there is a property question at hand. Who owns the PCM? Is it not the person who paid for the vehicle? Is the work for the calibration not compensated for? If you really think about it...all of us who provide calibrations are guilty in that aspect. We all start with "stealing" source code and a calibration from the OEM. It is not our source code that we are calibrating either. An argument could be made that the only true way to provide an aftermarket tune would be to start with your own source code, and calibrate it from scratch, which is what is done on the industrial level that I work in daily. Anything less is a ripoff of non-public proprietary work that an OEM feels they have a right to protect. I believe these were just some of the arguments made in the Chrysler vs. Wesley case.

+1, awesome post! I'm fine with MY tuner keeping HIS secrets hidden and locked away from the eyes of his competitors.

 

[gottoast]

Now, that I have gone back and found it, I will get it added.

Eric so does this mean that our cars can be programmed for Flex Fuel? I thought I read before that that couldn't happen?

 

[Monster5.0]

Eric so does this mean that our cars can be programmed for Flex Fuel? I thought I read before that that couldn't happen?

+10000. Please Eric say yes this is the case now.

 

[BLK93GT]

Interested to see how this works out! Looks promising...

 

[Eric@HPTuners]

Eric so does this mean that our cars can be programmed for Flex Fuel? I thought I read before that that couldn't happen?

It appears so. I'll be adding in the necessary parameters over the next few days

 

[yngrshr]

If that's the case, that's actually kind of wild.

 

[sleek98]

Would it be tied to a sensor or via the learning from the O2 readings?

 

[Eric@HPTuners]

Would it be tied to a sensor or via the learning from the O2 readings?

It learns from the O2 readings.

 

[mhyjek]

It learns from the O2 readings.

Will there be ability to to wire in a sensor and adjust the tune accordingly?

 

[Eric@HPTuners]

Will there be ability to to wire in a sensor and adjust the tune accordingly?

No, that would require a custom operating system, and that is not likely to happen for this.

 

[scholle]

I've had canned/emailed tunes from 3 separate*shops/tuners*. I bought my car used and it came with an SCT that had stored emailed/can tunes from a fairly well known shop. I have since tried 2 other shops just for comparing differences etc. Only one of the shops left user options open like the ability to adjust for tire size, axle ratio, shift pressure and points, idle, rev limiter, global timing etc. Nothing involved like fuel tables, but nice to have none the less.
I feel confident I could tune my own car but there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. I'll be gladly pay for well done tuning but I do want some adjustability on my end.
I really don’t care for some of SCT's practices. I won’t go into that here. I am looking hard at this option from HP tuners.
I know there are unethical people that will manipulate anything and everything if given an opportunity. However I don’t believe that they are the majority.
I have been witness to such practices of using other shops/people work and attempting to pass it off as their own. It was painfully obvious they had not done the research or work themselves. They couldn’t answer tough questions or rather couldn’t answer correctly. Once that became public knowledge.... what little business they had left.

 

[Eric@HPTuners]

I know there are unethical people that will manipulate anything and everything if given an opportunity. However I don’t believe that they are the majority.
I have been witness to such practices of using other shops/people work and attempting to pass it off as their own. It was painfully obvious they had not done the research or work themselves. They couldn’t answer tough questions or rather couldn’t answer correctly. Once that became public knowledge.... what little business they had left.

This is how I feel about it myself. Well put.

 

[SD_Stang]

Really guys the only copy cats I think you would see is on basic tunes (CAI/Exhaust) people like Lund and Shaun would always be sought after for custom projects and dyno tuning. Your backyard copy cat would not have the experience to do a custom tune and would likely end up hurting the car ending his run as a tuner. Anyone who cares about their car will research something before they take chances and spend money on it and those who don't often get bad results that cost them.

 

[me32]

Really guys the only copy cats I think you would see is on basic tunes (CAI/Exhaust) people like Lund and Shaun would always be sought after for custom projects and dyno tuning. Your backyard copy cat would not have the experience to do a custom tune and would likely end up hurting the car ending his run as a tuner. Anyone who cares about their car will research something before they take chances and spend money on it and those who don't often get bad results that cost them.

This is correct but its still a lose of business for those tuners.