stock ecu vs. s-squared tune
05-03-2005, 04:26 PM
#76
Originally Posted by Aaron@S-S
I want to interject here a little bit.
First, thank you to the people that know how much we care about customer service and making sure our customers are happy.
We are not contesting the issue that there was a problem with Keegan's car, or tune. It seems very likely that there's something affecting that car in a way we haven't seen on similar setups.
What we are lamenting is that we were not given a proper chance to resolve the issue. Now, it's a customer's perogative to take his money and business where he'd like, when he likes. Because we're a busy shop, doing repair work as well as tuning, there's not always time to squeeze everybody in when they drop by; that's why we have an appointment book. The first time Keegan dropped by, on a busy day; he told us he was concerned about the tune based on Ed's logs, Nate grabbed his laptop, hopped in the car and took it around the block a few times (we're in downtown Sac, there aren't a whole lot of road-dyno-suitable thoroughfares.) Nate did not at that time see the knock correction parameters being way out of wack; believe me, there's no way he'd dismiss what Ed logged as a minor issue, but he couldn't replicate it. We told Keegan at that point that it may have been bad gas, etc; since we couldn't duplicate what had been shown in only one log, we requested that he keep an eye on it, log it, do whatever, and if he noticed any problems, then please let us know so we could get him scheduled for a retune, on us, to fix any issues.
The next time we heard from Keegan was yesterday morning, when he once again dropped by, this time requesting a refund, after Ed had logged his car again and seen the issue. We offered at that point, having some free time, to retune the car, which Keegan was not interested in.
Again, I'm not posting to call anyone out, and I'm certainly not harboring any ill will towards Ed or Keegan. If Keegan felt he had "given us our chance" and we'd failed him, that's his right. Having the issue dragged out and knocked down, and Ed effectively questioning Nate's legitimacy as a tuner is what I, as an employee and a friend, and many of our happy customers, are objecting to.
I don't really want to see this thread dragged down into a worse spectacle than it already is.
We regret that Keegan was unhappy, we made attempts to make things right, and wish him well in the future. Ed, we appreciate that you're looking out for the community, and I'm sure the local Davis guys appreciate having a resource who can tune and log their cars. Please let me know if you have an issue with the shop, so that we can address it and move on.
First, thank you to the people that know how much we care about customer service and making sure our customers are happy.
We are not contesting the issue that there was a problem with Keegan's car, or tune. It seems very likely that there's something affecting that car in a way we haven't seen on similar setups.
What we are lamenting is that we were not given a proper chance to resolve the issue. Now, it's a customer's perogative to take his money and business where he'd like, when he likes. Because we're a busy shop, doing repair work as well as tuning, there's not always time to squeeze everybody in when they drop by; that's why we have an appointment book. The first time Keegan dropped by, on a busy day; he told us he was concerned about the tune based on Ed's logs, Nate grabbed his laptop, hopped in the car and took it around the block a few times (we're in downtown Sac, there aren't a whole lot of road-dyno-suitable thoroughfares.) Nate did not at that time see the knock correction parameters being way out of wack; believe me, there's no way he'd dismiss what Ed logged as a minor issue, but he couldn't replicate it. We told Keegan at that point that it may have been bad gas, etc; since we couldn't duplicate what had been shown in only one log, we requested that he keep an eye on it, log it, do whatever, and if he noticed any problems, then please let us know so we could get him scheduled for a retune, on us, to fix any issues.
The next time we heard from Keegan was yesterday morning, when he once again dropped by, this time requesting a refund, after Ed had logged his car again and seen the issue. We offered at that point, having some free time, to retune the car, which Keegan was not interested in.
Again, I'm not posting to call anyone out, and I'm certainly not harboring any ill will towards Ed or Keegan. If Keegan felt he had "given us our chance" and we'd failed him, that's his right. Having the issue dragged out and knocked down, and Ed effectively questioning Nate's legitimacy as a tuner is what I, as an employee and a friend, and many of our happy customers, are objecting to.
I don't really want to see this thread dragged down into a worse spectacle than it already is.
We regret that Keegan was unhappy, we made attempts to make things right, and wish him well in the future. Ed, we appreciate that you're looking out for the community, and I'm sure the local Davis guys appreciate having a resource who can tune and log their cars. Please let me know if you have an issue with the shop, so that we can address it and move on.
Aaron,
From what Keegan had communicated to me, was that even when he came back the second time, Nate did not admit that there was an issue with the tune or the car. He said that the negative knock correction on the top end was very minor and did not signal a problem, and that the extremely negative numbers in the fine learning table were not a problem either. I'll let Keegan clarify the specifics of that conversation as I was not present. It was this response that shocked me as no competent tuner would consider these issues to be normal. Also, the first time Keegan came in, a simple glance at the fine ignition table would have been enough to see that there was an issue. There was no need for a test drive on an open road to see that there is a problem.
05-03-2005, 04:28 PM
#77
Troll
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Pimpin' tards
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by EQ Tuning
I don't care if I look shady to you, but I hate to see people taken advantage of when they don't know any better.
I've said this before many times... people always seem to follow their tuners with a blind faith based on very little fact or investigation on their own parts.
This is understandable because when you spend a lof of money on something, you really want to believe it works and works well and safely.
I've been through this before several times with different cars and different tuners. Only to later find out that if I had simply looked into the matter a bit further, I would have seen that my money didn't go to good use.
Its a very difficult thing to admit for most people as it was for myself, and a lot of people get taken advantage of for this reason. This is partly why I decided to start tuning...
I got sick of blindly following other tuners who have built up a "tuner ego" and refuse to take any constructive criticism and all of the poeple who get taken advantage of.
I'm here to be very up front. If I make a mistake, I'm honest about it and try my best to figure it out and fix it.
And if I see someone being taken advantage of, I'm not going to speak up so that others will be more careful.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't go to S^2, rather I urge people to find out for themselves that their cars are running properly instead of blindly following their tuner's word.
Thanks
Thanks
05-03-2005, 04:38 PM
#78
Ali,
The only way to notice if user tune is enabled on an ECU is to actually try to change user tune parameters and like I said, I did not want to touch those parameters because people like you could then accuse me of messing with the tune for my own gains.
As far as tuned cars putting down 185-195whp, please show me some example graphs of this, because from what I've seen so far, tuned cars with similar mods put down 205-215whp on mustangs.
And finally, I don't live in a dorm room, and I have more experience with EFI tuning than you can imagine. So please only make claims like that if you can back them up with evidence.
I'm done arguing with you as you're not bringing anything concrete to the table. You can accuse me of whatever you like, but that doesn't change the fact that S^2 claimed there was no problem on an obviously problematic car/tune.
The only way to notice if user tune is enabled on an ECU is to actually try to change user tune parameters and like I said, I did not want to touch those parameters because people like you could then accuse me of messing with the tune for my own gains.
As far as tuned cars putting down 185-195whp, please show me some example graphs of this, because from what I've seen so far, tuned cars with similar mods put down 205-215whp on mustangs.
And finally, I don't live in a dorm room, and I have more experience with EFI tuning than you can imagine. So please only make claims like that if you can back them up with evidence.
I'm done arguing with you as you're not bringing anything concrete to the table. You can accuse me of whatever you like, but that doesn't change the fact that S^2 claimed there was no problem on an obviously problematic car/tune.
Last edited by MethodBuilt; 05-03-2005 at 04:49 PM.
05-03-2005, 04:43 PM
#79
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: fresno, where there are NO Subies.
Posts: 165
Car Info: XCALABR
Originally Posted by EQ Tuning
Aaron,
From what Keegan had communicated to me, was that even when he came back the second time, Nate did not admit that there was an issue with the tune or the car. He said that the negative knock correction on the top end was very minor and did not signal a problem, and that the extremely negative numbers in the fine learning table were not a problem either. I'll let Keegan clarify the specifics of that conversation as I was not present. It was this response that shocked me as no competent tuner would consider these issues to be normal. Also, the first time Keegan came in, a simple glance at the fine ignition table would have been enough to see that there was an issue. There was no need for a test drive on an open road to see that there is a problem.
From what Keegan had communicated to me, was that even when he came back the second time, Nate did not admit that there was an issue with the tune or the car. He said that the negative knock correction on the top end was very minor and did not signal a problem, and that the extremely negative numbers in the fine learning table were not a problem either. I'll let Keegan clarify the specifics of that conversation as I was not present. It was this response that shocked me as no competent tuner would consider these issues to be normal. Also, the first time Keegan came in, a simple glance at the fine ignition table would have been enough to see that there was an issue. There was no need for a test drive on an open road to see that there is a problem.
this is all true except that when i showed him the fine learning table and i asked him about the negative numbers he said that those numbers change all the time and that it's possible to see numbers like that
05-03-2005, 04:47 PM
#80
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sac/Dublin CA
Posts: 4,017
Car Info: Silver 09 STI
Originally Posted by calibredwrx
this is all true except that when i showed him the fine learning table and i asked him about the negative numbers he said that those numbers change all the time and that it's possible to see numbers like that
so S-S offered to fix the problem at no charge to you and you refused?
05-03-2005, 04:50 PM
#81
Troll
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Pimpin' tards
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by EQ Tuning
Ali,
The only way to notice if user tune is enabled on an ECU is to actually try to change user tune parameters and like I said, I did not want to touch those parameters because people like you could then accuse me of messing with the tune for my own gains.
The only way to notice if user tune is enabled on an ECU is to actually try to change user tune parameters and like I said, I did not want to touch those parameters because people like you could then accuse me of messing with the tune for my own gains.
As far as tuned cars putting down 185-195whp, please show me some example graphs of this, because from what I've seen so far, tuned cars with similar mods put down 205-215whp on mustangs.
https://www.i-club.com/forums/bay-area-15/eq-tuning-road-dyno-day-results-97077/
take note of Simpson's 04 WRX...
Sure there is also a down pipe on Keegan's car but there is also something wrong with it. Maybe it has one of your magical OLMs on it that is causing this issue...
And finally, I don't live in a dorm room, and I have more experience with EFI tuning than you can imagine.
So please only make claims like that if you can back them up with evidence.
I'm done arguing with you as you're not bringing anything concrete to the table.
You can accuse me of whatever you like, but that doesn't change the fact that S^2 claimed there was no problem an obviously problematic car/tune.
05-03-2005, 04:54 PM
#82
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: pompous douchebag
Posts: 9,351
Car Info: $200,000 sports car
Originally Posted by EQ Tuning
I don't even know if Nate uses the user tunable maps as I never even checked on Keegan's car. I would never want to mess with another tuner's map especially in the case when I think there is a mechanical problem behind the issues.
that's a little more in depth than just simply logging.
05-03-2005, 04:58 PM
#83
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: fresno, where there are NO Subies.
Posts: 165
Car Info: XCALABR
Hey arron, i only dropped in without an appointment due to my schedule constraints and the fact that each time i did a data log and saw as issue, it was over the weekend and i wanted to get to the issue asap. so i dropped in both times on monday morning. can you understand my concern in these situations?
and to clarify i was the one who posted this issue not ed. it seems Ali G needs someone to yell at or something so while i stepped away you started right in on him.
and the offered tune i got yesterday was to get a more conservative tune done, which i don't know what difference it would have made seeing the logs i got yesterday on the stock ecu with mods. but arron, i appreciate all you guys did there, i just wasn't getting any answers as to why i was seeing what the logs show. and after giving s-s the first chance to find/fix the issue, i felt that was where it should have been taken care of instead of the second time. so i asked for the refund and you guys complied willingly. my shock came from the logs i got after the tune and then after getting flashed back to stock. there was hardly a difference, and stock didn't have any knock issues.
and to clarify i was the one who posted this issue not ed. it seems Ali G needs someone to yell at or something so while i stepped away you started right in on him.
and the offered tune i got yesterday was to get a more conservative tune done, which i don't know what difference it would have made seeing the logs i got yesterday on the stock ecu with mods. but arron, i appreciate all you guys did there, i just wasn't getting any answers as to why i was seeing what the logs show. and after giving s-s the first chance to find/fix the issue, i felt that was where it should have been taken care of instead of the second time. so i asked for the refund and you guys complied willingly. my shock came from the logs i got after the tune and then after getting flashed back to stock. there was hardly a difference, and stock didn't have any knock issues.
05-03-2005, 04:59 PM
#84
Ali,
I told keegan to drive the car easy and not go WOT untill he resolves the issue with his tuner. Its not up to me to make modifications to someone else's problematic tune.
Simpson's car has two stock cats compared to Keegan's catless car. There is no reason that they should be anywhere near eachother in power output.
Why would Keegan run an OLM if he's not running an MBC, and what exactly is so magical about a simple piggy back device? So far I'm the only one to bring any actual evidence to the discussion, so untill you have some of your own, your arguments are fruitless. I'm in no way competing with you, so I'm not sure what the "I win" statement means. And if I wasn't there to show Keegan the problem, he would still be driving around with an unsafe tune and assuming that everything was ok.
Finally I'd like to make it very clear that it was completely Keegan's decision to post this information and I'm simply backing up the hard data that I collected and made him aware of.
I told keegan to drive the car easy and not go WOT untill he resolves the issue with his tuner. Its not up to me to make modifications to someone else's problematic tune.
Simpson's car has two stock cats compared to Keegan's catless car. There is no reason that they should be anywhere near eachother in power output.
Why would Keegan run an OLM if he's not running an MBC, and what exactly is so magical about a simple piggy back device? So far I'm the only one to bring any actual evidence to the discussion, so untill you have some of your own, your arguments are fruitless. I'm in no way competing with you, so I'm not sure what the "I win" statement means. And if I wasn't there to show Keegan the problem, he would still be driving around with an unsafe tune and assuming that everything was ok.
Finally I'd like to make it very clear that it was completely Keegan's decision to post this information and I'm simply backing up the hard data that I collected and made him aware of.
05-03-2005, 05:03 PM
#85
Originally Posted by RussB
http://eqtuning.com/dynos/keegan/finelearning.jpg
that's a little more in depth than just simply logging.
that's a little more in depth than just simply logging.
05-03-2005, 05:07 PM
#87
Warm Fuzzy Admin
iTrader: (45)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 13,799
Car Info: 97 LOB, 05 FXT, 03 Tundra
Keegan,
Thanks for responding, I appreciate getting your side of the story, and we apologize for any communication breakdown between what we were trying to offer and what you heard.
I certainly understand your sense of urgency to get issues corrected; the reality is that every shop ends quiet Friday and starts deluged Monday morning, so things can get lost in translation. I apologize if that's what happened here, and hope you have fun with the car; according to Ed's graphs, you've got an ECU that's pretty gifted in stock form, so drive the hell out of it and enjoy it.
Thanks for responding, I appreciate getting your side of the story, and we apologize for any communication breakdown between what we were trying to offer and what you heard.
I certainly understand your sense of urgency to get issues corrected; the reality is that every shop ends quiet Friday and starts deluged Monday morning, so things can get lost in translation. I apologize if that's what happened here, and hope you have fun with the car; according to Ed's graphs, you've got an ECU that's pretty gifted in stock form, so drive the hell out of it and enjoy it.
05-03-2005, 05:11 PM
#88
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Woop-de-doo-for-my-subaru
Posts: 422
Car Info: 05 STI
I am so sorry to see this post go this south so bad.
First off Ed: clearly this is not the appropriate place for such a discussion. If there was an issue between your client and SS, that discussion should be between the three of you, not on open boards like this. It does not resolve the situation, it only results in the posturing you see here. This community has a huge respect for Nate and Joe at Subaru Specialists. A discussion like this will only hurt your reputation in this community.
I too have seen what a reputable tuner with horrible customer service and a bad tune did for my car. I brought the car to Nate and he fixed it. I have delt with Nate tuning my cars over the last two - three years. He is extremely honest, knowledable and a huge resourse to the Subaru Community in this area. I can not imagine that Nate would be dishonest in any way shape or form with any client. My experience with this shop has only been outstanding. Far beyond my experience at another shop that is considered to be one of the "top tuners" in California (name will not be mentioned here and would never be mentioned on a forum such as this)
Subaru Specialists customer service and Nate's tuning knowledge are why we continue to give them business.
Nick (337.8 whp and 331.4 wtq of completely satisfied tuning!)
First off Ed: clearly this is not the appropriate place for such a discussion. If there was an issue between your client and SS, that discussion should be between the three of you, not on open boards like this. It does not resolve the situation, it only results in the posturing you see here. This community has a huge respect for Nate and Joe at Subaru Specialists. A discussion like this will only hurt your reputation in this community.
I too have seen what a reputable tuner with horrible customer service and a bad tune did for my car. I brought the car to Nate and he fixed it. I have delt with Nate tuning my cars over the last two - three years. He is extremely honest, knowledable and a huge resourse to the Subaru Community in this area. I can not imagine that Nate would be dishonest in any way shape or form with any client. My experience with this shop has only been outstanding. Far beyond my experience at another shop that is considered to be one of the "top tuners" in California (name will not be mentioned here and would never be mentioned on a forum such as this)
Subaru Specialists customer service and Nate's tuning knowledge are why we continue to give them business.
Nick (337.8 whp and 331.4 wtq of completely satisfied tuning!)
05-03-2005, 05:20 PM
#89
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 280
Car Info: 02 sedan.GC Track Toy.Wrx Swapped Wesfalia. 04 FXT
Ok,
Lets get this done with, sorry I couldnt have posted earlier but have been working.
I am going to deal with the facts only as I saw them, none of this he said/she said junk as it gets none of us anywhere.
Basic fact of the matter is this: Keegan was not happy as a customer of ours and is upset, he had a problem with his tune and didnt feel we treated it properly, so he is now voicing his opinion ( which he has every right to )
So , that said. Lets run with what *I* know:
Yes Keegan did have an issue, the first time I logged his car it was not acting out of sorts, KC AM etc were all where they were supposed to be, no audible knock etc. So , I told him it was possible you guys hit it when heat soaked etc, the KC values move around quite a bit and that I didnt see any issue with it.
He returned yesterday morning, saying that he had issues still, obviously upset a little and this time had logs, from what I was looking at it had some minor issues etc , stuff that easily could have been fixed but as the first time no call ahead had been made and I was trying to squeeze him in the middle of doing 15 other things so I was going to throw a downtuned map on his car until we were able to set something up to take care of it. Before I could he said he wanted a partial refund and to go back to stock, he is the customer , its his call so I did as he asked and put his car back to stock.
After all this he returns to Davis to have Ed log his car again, only to see that his power was similar to what it was before etc, decides to post this ( I have no idea of the motives, if you are suggesting that I didnt flash it, or that I am such a horrible tuner the stock map is the way to go etc. etc. )
Now I do not know what his issue is, not having the time to properly diagnose it I couldnt possibly be expected to know. When I originally tuned Keegans car I had to fix some oddball wiring under the dash etc that myself nor Keegan knew the origin of, so it is absolutely possible that is having an effect, I am not sure. As anyone who is reading this can tell I will absolutely do my best to stand behind what I do, and have always helped deal with problems regardless ( typically no charger or very little ) of what the outcome may be. You are entitled to your opinions but please do not suggest that I do not take care of my customers as I will bend over backwards to do so as long as I can.
Keegan, I am sorry you had a bad experience, and good luck with whatever you decide to do.
Ed,
I suggest that you and I speak offline as I think it will turn messy otherwise, it seems that you have a beef with me and I think we should settle it in a better surrounding. Tell ya what, I will buy you a beer sometime and we can do it face to face.
So thats the story as I see it, minus the name calling, and I think this and you think that BS,
anyone has issues please email me, call the shop whatever but this is getting out of hand here.
thanks,
-Nate
Lets get this done with, sorry I couldnt have posted earlier but have been working.
I am going to deal with the facts only as I saw them, none of this he said/she said junk as it gets none of us anywhere.
Basic fact of the matter is this: Keegan was not happy as a customer of ours and is upset, he had a problem with his tune and didnt feel we treated it properly, so he is now voicing his opinion ( which he has every right to )
So , that said. Lets run with what *I* know:
Yes Keegan did have an issue, the first time I logged his car it was not acting out of sorts, KC AM etc were all where they were supposed to be, no audible knock etc. So , I told him it was possible you guys hit it when heat soaked etc, the KC values move around quite a bit and that I didnt see any issue with it.
He returned yesterday morning, saying that he had issues still, obviously upset a little and this time had logs, from what I was looking at it had some minor issues etc , stuff that easily could have been fixed but as the first time no call ahead had been made and I was trying to squeeze him in the middle of doing 15 other things so I was going to throw a downtuned map on his car until we were able to set something up to take care of it. Before I could he said he wanted a partial refund and to go back to stock, he is the customer , its his call so I did as he asked and put his car back to stock.
After all this he returns to Davis to have Ed log his car again, only to see that his power was similar to what it was before etc, decides to post this ( I have no idea of the motives, if you are suggesting that I didnt flash it, or that I am such a horrible tuner the stock map is the way to go etc. etc. )
Now I do not know what his issue is, not having the time to properly diagnose it I couldnt possibly be expected to know. When I originally tuned Keegans car I had to fix some oddball wiring under the dash etc that myself nor Keegan knew the origin of, so it is absolutely possible that is having an effect, I am not sure. As anyone who is reading this can tell I will absolutely do my best to stand behind what I do, and have always helped deal with problems regardless ( typically no charger or very little ) of what the outcome may be. You are entitled to your opinions but please do not suggest that I do not take care of my customers as I will bend over backwards to do so as long as I can.
Keegan, I am sorry you had a bad experience, and good luck with whatever you decide to do.
Ed,
I suggest that you and I speak offline as I think it will turn messy otherwise, it seems that you have a beef with me and I think we should settle it in a better surrounding. Tell ya what, I will buy you a beer sometime and we can do it face to face.
So thats the story as I see it, minus the name calling, and I think this and you think that BS,
anyone has issues please email me, call the shop whatever but this is getting out of hand here.
thanks,
-Nate
05-03-2005, 05:20 PM
#90
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: fresno, where there are NO Subies.
Posts: 165
Car Info: XCALABR
thanks arron, and sorry as well for the inconvenience.
and another piece of info that should be noted: i took the information to s-s having decided it was a problem with what i know about the ecu and what should be happening. it was my decision to do dive into the issue. ed was the one that explained to me how the ecu works and what is involved in the tune. from there ed and i both were able to see that the knock and the negative timing adjustments were a problem. so that was where the initial problem was noticed.
and another piece of info that should be noted: i took the information to s-s having decided it was a problem with what i know about the ecu and what should be happening. it was my decision to do dive into the issue. ed was the one that explained to me how the ecu works and what is involved in the tune. from there ed and i both were able to see that the knock and the negative timing adjustments were a problem. so that was where the initial problem was noticed.