View Single Post
      07-30-2009, 07:51 AM   #67
Mike@N54Tuning.com
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: 07335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Earth

Posts: 14,328
iTrader: (86)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu
With respect to this "discussion".... CPS offsetting would not take anything away from a tune. The argument is whether it adds anything. So even if CPS does not add anything, does this make the JB a better tune... or just equal? And what if it does have a positive effect?
No one is faulting anyone for discussing features, but there is a right and wrong way to go about things. For example with the JB3 there are combined tens of millions of miles now with no reported failures, no signs of detonation problems (reading plugs, etc), and you really have to look far and wide to find an unhappy customer. So it's fair to discuss what you feel your tune does better, but the scare tactics, FUD, and insults employed by some are transparent and underhanded. Some of these people have a track record of this style of marketing on other platforms, and on this platform with other tuners, so this isn't an isolated case. I would also like to say thanks for not doing the above, and providing your opinion in a respectful, no belittling fashion.

You raise some interesting points on the rate of acceleration and we can discuss those points, devise tests, etc. BMS has been reading/writing ecu BINs for a few weeks now using the BT so perhaps I can pry some better data out of them as well. I still think the data supports our floating timing theory, and the more data I see presented here the more seems to fall under that model vs. the base timing map model you've outlined. But there still may be room for both models to coexist. This is a discussion forum first and a marketing platform second, so the more discussion about these things the better!

Mike
Mike@N54Tuning.com is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote