LOL......Geaux lay the bottle down before you post Burke. Your deduction is brilliant sir...brilliant...not
What aluminator to go with?? Blown motor
- Thread starter Rubberman
- Start date
And.... Now we have our own village idiot.
I'm pro TVS but I personally don't try and sell them this way, to each his own :-D.
I'm in favor of compression....I run my boss on the road course at 10-12psi under constant abuse (82mm and 79mm), i've even run it on 91 octane in OK. That's a very mild setup, but everything can scale when timing and boost is done appropriately. When you are running a lot of boost on pump gas and want to run more aggressive timing to make more power, just add octane, torco works well for that. I consider it equal to mild race gas (100 oct), then there is another timing curve for balls to the wall 116oct like gulfMach unleaded or C10-C16 if you so choose.
Wow, I guess he missed the threads about tvs cars windowing blocks last year. People blow stuff up when they push the limits wanting more and more power don't think it matters if it is a centri, tvs, or turbo.
I completely agree. Anything over 650rwhp and hell even 600rwhp is pushing it on stock engine. Doesnt matter nitrous, turbo, centri or tvs.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2007
- Messages
- 19,523
Dumbest post of this thread right here.. lol.. Wow!
Truth hurts i guess
Since this supposed car we tuned that had an engine rebuilt at CCC has been brought up several times now in several threads to try to discredit me / Lund. I figured I would go ahead and give “our side” as there is always 2 sides, about the car in question.
• Flasher was shipped in May 2013 WITH tune base file loaded
• Customer did not contact us for remote tuning instructions (logging, etc) until August 11, 2013. So about 2.5 months after ordering everything..
• Lund responsed on the 12th first thing in the morning since the 11th was a Sunday.
• Lund provided datalogging instructions along with an updated calibration to use since they had made some updates since his original base tune was sent.
• At the same time customer was asked things like how is the MAF clocked and to veryify the clocking, and spark plugs and spark plug gap. Inquiry as to what fuel he was running since it was Cali, and that’s usually 91.
• The datalogging instructions specifically say only to do 2 LOGS – idle and neutral rev. Lund proceeds from there and provide instruction with each revision. This implies to do as Lund asks.. Once Lund feels that the tune is ready for WOT pulls whether it be on the dyno or street, we inform the customer. At this point car was not even close to wot pulls.
• Customer did not reply until Aug 14th saying that he has limited time due to his schedule, etc. but would verify Lund’s questions and get initial logs done. Again, initial logs
• Customers first set of logs were sent on August 24th – a Saturday. Lund Responded first thing on the 26th – a Monday. Lund again asked to verify the MAF clock again based on logs as the maf clocking appeared to be off. Customer stated he did have to reclock the MAF (which was already asked originally) because it was not where Lund wanted it placed. Car then needed to be re-logged with new initial base logs. He sent new logs on the 30th. At this point, this is the very first set of useable logs. A revision is sent, and instructions are provide to now do a 2nd log, which is another small idle log, and some light street driving. Instructions specifically say NO BOOST.
• Nothing else from customer until October 19th (a little over a month later) – saying that he had mechanical issues with the car (not tune related) that delayed him. He said “Since I was at a shop with a dyno (and they were doing pulls for cheap) I decided to get a quick dyno of my results to see where I was sitting. Looks like I'm getting about 559 rwhp and 487 ft/lbs.”
• Lund immediately replied that same day and said “The point of the process is I tell you when to go WOT. What if fueling didn't look right and it was lean? You already breeched that process and went wide open without being given any indication it was ok.
• Customers reply was “Jon, My apologies. Truth is I had forgotten about your warning since I had a few other issues with the car and it had been a while since I had read the email. I am glad my enthusiasm did not lead to disaster. I will make sure to honor the process from this point on. I do realize that it is the weekend and you will not be able to analyze the data until the work week. Again, let me know if you need more information. Thanks.”
• A revision was sent on October 20 with instructions to start making wot pulls to 5000-5500 and that’s it. Customer was never heard from again.
People can try to skew things anyway they want, just because you type it on the internet, doesn’t make it true. There is a logging process the customer is expected to follow and it simply wasn't done here. You have a car that's been out there for months that at some point had some sort of an unknown mechanical issue, and a tune calibrated for a certain maf clock, unlogged with who knows how many miles or wot hits on it. Then for several more months, without out any kind of a base log and on the dyno making wot hits.
Customer now has a built engine, and just purchased some fuel system upgrades this week and is still doing business with me. So that is "our side of the story" and I don't think anything more needs to be said.
• Flasher was shipped in May 2013 WITH tune base file loaded
• Customer did not contact us for remote tuning instructions (logging, etc) until August 11, 2013. So about 2.5 months after ordering everything..
• Lund responsed on the 12th first thing in the morning since the 11th was a Sunday.
• Lund provided datalogging instructions along with an updated calibration to use since they had made some updates since his original base tune was sent.
• At the same time customer was asked things like how is the MAF clocked and to veryify the clocking, and spark plugs and spark plug gap. Inquiry as to what fuel he was running since it was Cali, and that’s usually 91.
• The datalogging instructions specifically say only to do 2 LOGS – idle and neutral rev. Lund proceeds from there and provide instruction with each revision. This implies to do as Lund asks.. Once Lund feels that the tune is ready for WOT pulls whether it be on the dyno or street, we inform the customer. At this point car was not even close to wot pulls.
• Customer did not reply until Aug 14th saying that he has limited time due to his schedule, etc. but would verify Lund’s questions and get initial logs done. Again, initial logs
• Customers first set of logs were sent on August 24th – a Saturday. Lund Responded first thing on the 26th – a Monday. Lund again asked to verify the MAF clock again based on logs as the maf clocking appeared to be off. Customer stated he did have to reclock the MAF (which was already asked originally) because it was not where Lund wanted it placed. Car then needed to be re-logged with new initial base logs. He sent new logs on the 30th. At this point, this is the very first set of useable logs. A revision is sent, and instructions are provide to now do a 2nd log, which is another small idle log, and some light street driving. Instructions specifically say NO BOOST.
• Nothing else from customer until October 19th (a little over a month later) – saying that he had mechanical issues with the car (not tune related) that delayed him. He said “Since I was at a shop with a dyno (and they were doing pulls for cheap) I decided to get a quick dyno of my results to see where I was sitting. Looks like I'm getting about 559 rwhp and 487 ft/lbs.”
• Lund immediately replied that same day and said “The point of the process is I tell you when to go WOT. What if fueling didn't look right and it was lean? You already breeched that process and went wide open without being given any indication it was ok.
• Customers reply was “Jon, My apologies. Truth is I had forgotten about your warning since I had a few other issues with the car and it had been a while since I had read the email. I am glad my enthusiasm did not lead to disaster. I will make sure to honor the process from this point on. I do realize that it is the weekend and you will not be able to analyze the data until the work week. Again, let me know if you need more information. Thanks.”
• A revision was sent on October 20 with instructions to start making wot pulls to 5000-5500 and that’s it. Customer was never heard from again.
People can try to skew things anyway they want, just because you type it on the internet, doesn’t make it true. There is a logging process the customer is expected to follow and it simply wasn't done here. You have a car that's been out there for months that at some point had some sort of an unknown mechanical issue, and a tune calibrated for a certain maf clock, unlogged with who knows how many miles or wot hits on it. Then for several more months, without out any kind of a base log and on the dyno making wot hits.
Customer now has a built engine, and just purchased some fuel system upgrades this week and is still doing business with me. So that is "our side of the story" and I don't think anything more needs to be said.
:bowdown:
That happens ALL the time when I am doing remote tuning as well. It is VERY frustrating!
It's the #2 reason I recommend doing boosted cars on a chassis Dyno. #1 reason is safety.
In one instance I waited over 6 months for Datalogs of a Paxton application. Customer was racing (I saw the YouTube videos). When I finally did get a datalog I saw major fueling issues. Turns out the aftermarket fuel system was FUBAR.
Still no blown engine from it though...
It's the #2 reason I recommend doing boosted cars on a chassis Dyno. #1 reason is safety.
In one instance I waited over 6 months for Datalogs of a Paxton application. Customer was racing (I saw the YouTube videos). When I finally did get a datalog I saw major fueling issues. Turns out the aftermarket fuel system was FUBAR.
Still no blown engine from it though...
Not sure how you remote tuners do it, end users can do some dumb shit. I know a guy that hooked his boost controller up wrong and gave the car 24psi on it's first wot pulls on the dyno while roughing in the tune. Said dumbass figured out his screwup and the motor lived to go make many 8 second runs 
Temptation, honest mistakes, bad install, etc have to be hard on a remote tune scenario. Add in internet rumor and drama when things do go wrong and it just gets ridiculous.
Temptation, honest mistakes, bad install, etc have to be hard on a remote tune scenario. Add in internet rumor and drama when things do go wrong and it just gets ridiculous.
My remote tuning session with Lund/Beefcake has been great! Can't wait to get the car on the dyno and track!
All of the above. We started about 6 months ago limiting the tunes on rpm and mph to help with the "lets just give it a little" guys. Lets you know who your working with up front when you get the call. "theres something wrong with my tune, seems like it's hitting a limiter or something at 5k".......
lets you know you have to watch that one
and on the 24psi....lol
I'm not a tuner, but why isn't it possible to send base tunes and log tunes so super save at WOT...so in the event the stupid owner decides to get crazy on a tune that's in the base/log stages it won't smoke a motor?
Is that not possible? Like I said I'm not a tuner so I don't know...just asking.
Is that not possible? Like I said I'm not a tuner so I don't know...just asking.
I believe tuners do use stuff like that.
Somtimes no matter how safe the tune if they installed parts wrong they can still
Blow a motor.
Users who are viewing this thread
