[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Glowin

Just for having Mike's responses in context for myself, Mike, are you just an e-vendor or do you have a shop with mechanics, and you tune cars as well as selling products on E90? If so, how many years have you been doing it?

The n54tuning website just seems like an e-store to me, so I wasn't clear.

I am an eVendor and enthusiast, and do installs for Canadian customers. We are BMS' highest volume distributor and work closely with them on technical aspects of the products, and I bounce ideas and questions off Terry, Russ, and Jon, (aka the brains) often. I have a BT pro cable and use it often to help develop/test new mapping concepts, etc. I have gained most of my knowledge on this platform through logging and conceptual discussion with the experts.

Mike

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Malekreza11

That's exactly it.

Yah I'm aware that Mike has no real technical knowledge on this subject. He is simply posting what Terry is telling him to. And that is fine. The problem I have is that he may or may not be aware of the outright misinformation he spreads to others who truly have no knowledge on this subject. And that's how these silly "camps" are formed. And that is why it is so difficult to learn anything on this forum when the disingenuous claim to be the experts.

Shiv

[Malek@MRF]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Yah I'm aware that Mike has no real technical knowledge on this subject. He is simply posting what Terry is telling him to. And that is fine. The problem I have is that he may or may not be aware of the outright misinformation he spreads to others who truly have no knowledge on this subject. And that's how these silly "camps" are formed. And that is why it is so difficult to learn anything on this forum when the disingenuous claim to be the experts.

Shiv

I understand, and it's always going to be that way with forums unfortunately. Misinformation is spread in mass amounts, and as you say, little cliques are formed and it becomes the blind leading the blind.

I am not so sure if Terry himself has the knowledge either. He was never able to discuss in detail a few things with me a little over a year ago on n54tech.com. Instead he silently banned me.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Mike/Terry
You are still trying trying to confuse issues here. Either that, or you really don't have a good grasp of the subject. Of course, you could do what many have suggested (including myself) and actually present the hard data you claim to have. I'd imagin that simply doing that would be a better investment of your time than posting what you have been posting.

Truthfully, I do question your honestly/motives when it comes to the subject of timing control. We are all aware of the lies and misinformatin that you have spread (either knowingly or unknowingly as Terrys mouthpiece.). I'd tread carefully if I were you. If you post tweaked or doctored data, I'm not going to go easy on you.

Shiv
iPhone

Shiv,

The analysis I've done so far is based strictly on your hand-picked logs. That your own logs don't fully support your assertions is your business. This is supposed to be a friendly technical discussion and I would appreciate it if you could keep your person insults/threats to a minimum. I have plenty of technical knowledge, would never alter data, and if you have a counter point to my analysis of your logs, then please raise it.

Also by misinformation do you mean things like allowing readers to believe DME signals from hardwired sensors can be manipulated via the CANbus? Because if so I strongly agree with you that such misinformation should be corrected.

Mike

[OpenFlash]

Mike,
Come back when you can stay on topic and have some appropriate data.

Shiv

[lawdude]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Shiv,

The analysis I've done so far is based strictly on your hand-picked logs. That your own logs don't fully support your assertions is your business. This is supposed to be a friendly technical discussion and I would appreciate it if you could keep your person insults/threats to a minimum. I have plenty of technical knowledge, would never alter data, and if you have a counter point to my analysis of your logs, then please raise it.

Also by misinformation do you mean things like allowing readers to believe DME signals from hardwired sensors can be manipulated via the CANbus? Because if so I strongly agree with you that such misinformation should be corrected.

Mike

Get off your high horse and post some logs complete with your own technical analysis.

[jpsimon]

still waiting for your own data you claim to have....

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Shiv,

The analysis I've done so far is based strictly on your hand-picked logs. That your own logs don't fully support your assertions is your business. This is supposed to be a friendly technical discussion and I would appreciate it if you could keep your person insults/threats to a minimum. I have plenty of technical knowledge, would never alter data, and if you have a counter point to my analysis of your logs, then please raise it.

Also by misinformation do you mean things like allowing readers to believe DME signals from hardwired sensors can be manipulated via the CANbus? Because if so I strongly agree with you that such misinformation should be corrected.

Mike

[shifterboy45]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

If that were true why even have a piggyback? Just make an OBDII dongle that communicates on the bus and does the sensor manipulation without having to fuss with going in to the ECU box and wiring, and without having to fuss with encryption/learning/overwriting the ECUs internal tables.

Spoiler alert: It is because you can't change how the ECU reads signals from hardwired sensors. You can only read that data through the interface the ECU provides. So for example the IAT sensor is hardwired in to the ECU. The ECU will always read that as the IAT and always use that as the basis for its engine management. The only way to alter that signal is through physical means. But lets say hypothetically for some reason your air conditioning computer also wants to know IAT, it can request it via the CANbus from the ECU. In theory if the piggyback were wired in a certain way (which it isn't in this case, AFAIK), the piggyback could intercept and alter the CANbus signal going back to the air conditioning computer, or answer for the ECU with a fake value. But the key here is that the ECU does all the tuning using the hardwired signals by design. CANbus signals are too slow for real time engine management.

Mike

im a little new at this so please bear with me --

the CAN-Bus is designed as a dual channel communication network with a low and high speed channel -- correct ?

the low speed channel takes care of the comm. modules such as the door module, window module and etc. -- correct ?

the high speed channel takes care of the comm. between the highly active monitoring/reactive units such as the DSC / DTC / ABS and DME to provide "realtime" response levels --correct ?

if this is the case then i dont understand the statement that CAN signals are too slow for real time engine management

i would think the challenge would be to capture the given signal and supplying a subsitute value at a high enough rate as to "fool" the system itself .

but then again its only an guesstimate of the CAN capabilities....

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

im a little new at this so please bear with me --

the CAN-Bus is designed as a dual channel communication network with a low and high speed channel -- correct ?

No. Every conclusion you've drawn from this false axiom is as flawed.

http://www.canbus.us/

EDIT: I hope that didnt come off too harsh but there is plenty of CANbus basics available even through a google search.

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by scalbert

My guess would be at least 10 times per event. Perhaps sampling at about 100kHz with a filter algorithm (FFT perhaps) to isolate the frequencies desired.

Are you sure the DME is doing all the work? They could be using something more integrated: http://www.semiconductors.bosch.de/p...oduct_Info.pdf

[stealth-twntrbo]

This post is getting good I would like to see about procede real time Engine managment if there is delays and what not, also i would like to see some data posted by mike to back up his theories.

[shifterboy45]

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

No. Every conclusion you've drawn from this false axiom is as flawed.

http://www.canbus.us/

EDIT: I hope that didnt come off too harsh but there is plenty of CANbus basics available even through a google search.

hmm harsh you say? no comment --

but maybe my information sources are tainted because that not what i read
-- and please be sure i know where the search button is ....

nonetheless.. my source of information if you'd like to refute the authors please feel free --

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=CAN

btw: i did say "correct me if im wrong" so no harm - no foul..

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

hmm harsh you say? no comment --

but maybe my information sources are tainted because that not what i read
-- and please be sure i know where the search button is ....

nonetheless.. my source of information if you'd like to refute the authors please feel free --

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=CAN

btw: i did say "correct me if im wrong" so no harm - no foul..

Your link doesnt work, but a careful search of the site clearly shows you have misread the text.

"In a vehicle, both low- and high-speed CAN buses are used. For example, window, lighting and seat control only need low speeds, while engine, cruise control and antilock brakes require high speeds. Two or three CAN buses may be used in a vehicle; for example, a high-speed bus may be dedicated only for safety (air bags, seat belt tensioners, etc.)."

This is clearly describing the implementation of multiple buses, not channels on a single bus as you implied.

EDIT: These vehicles have several CAN bus networks. The power train,PT-CAN, (the one the Procede interfaces) is just one of them.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

Are you sure the DME is doing all the work? They could be using something more integrated: http://www.semiconductors.bosch.de/p...oduct_Info.pdf

I don't know anything for sure within the DME. But i would guess that something like the what is in the link does this and returns the data to the core DME processor(s).

[shifterboy45]

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

Your link doesnt work, but a careful search of the site clearly shows you have misread the text.

"In a vehicle, both low- and high-speed CAN buses are used. For example, window, lighting and seat control only need low speeds, while engine, cruise control and antilock brakes require high speeds. Two or three CAN buses may be used in a vehicle; for example, a high-speed bus may be dedicated only for safety (air bags, seat belt tensioners, etc.)."

This is clearly describing the implementation of multiple buses, not channels on a single bus as you implied.

EDIT: These vehicles have several CAN bus networks. The power train,PT-CAN, (the one the Procede interfaces) is just one of them.

easy big fella,

-- if you noticed in the "beginning"

"i said im a little new at this so please bear with me -- the CAN-Bus is designed as a dual channel communication network with a low and high speed channel -- correct ?"

doesnt the preceding statement imply my lack of knowledge in this situation?

or does it make you "feel" better to think i know something -- and spank me with your all-knowing paddle ?

if i get something wrong -- school me -- dont scold me -- i a grown-up and would give you same respect --

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

easy big fella,

-- if you noticed in the "beginning"

"i said im a little new at this so please bear with me -- the CAN-Bus is designed as a dual channel communication network with a low and high speed channel -- correct ?"

doesnt the preceding statement imply my lack of knowledge in this situation?

Yes it does. Didnt you see my edit, which occurred prior to your response? And then there was this:

Originally Posted by shifterboy45

hmm harsh you say? no comment --

but maybe my information sources are tainted because that not what i read
-- and please be sure i know where the search button is ....

nonetheless.. my source of information if you'd like to refute the authors please feel free --

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=CAN

btw: i did say "correct me if im wrong" so no harm - no foul..

....there was nothing to refute. You misread the information.

or does it make you "feel" better to think i know something -- and spank me with your all-knowing paddle ?

if i get something wrong -- school me -- dont scold me -- i a grown-up and would give you same respect --

I never berated or scolded you. I stated the obvious. You misread the information . Now, as the above comment implies, you proceeded to interject a tone into my replies where none existed.

[shifterboy45]

lets put it this way -- without injecting any semantical ambiguites ---

i stand corrected in my previous assumptions ...

the rest of the conversation adds nothing to the topic -- true?

i will do my due diligence in regard to bring myself current on CANbus ..

[jpsimon]

Bump for data from other parties to support any supposed theories/claims they have........

[WOPALX]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

Bump for data from other parties to support any supposed theories/claims they have........

I don't think we will get any firm data, but one needs to have an open mind to these things so bring it on so we all learn something.

[inthemiddle]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Also by misinformation do you mean things like allowing readers to believe DME signals from hardwired sensors can be manipulated via the CANbus? Because if so I strongly agree with you that such misinformation should be corrected.

Mike

I must chime in here... I don't believe Shiv has ever made a statement to try to lead anyone to believe that.... ...

It would be nice to stay on point as well... good dicussions sorta.. but seems to be degrading rapidly...

[jpsimon]

still waiting for data from the other side

[Septro]

/thread

If there is a technical discussion to be had between vendors, put out competing white papers, let the mods make a vendor-only thread, or here's an idea - both of you put your money where you mouth is and pay an independent reputable 3rd party to assess/test your claims - otherwise all this is just marketing yap for the sake of pushing $$'s (on both sides)

Pedantic arguments, ad-hominums, deflection, progressive attacks, and .02 secs of actual technical data is all I see here (including my own dam post).

Mods are too damn scared to take this forum out of the vendor's hands and back to the folks that visit here so often. Clean this @#$ up FFS.