Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Mustang Forums
2011-2014 Mustangs
Power-Adders
What aluminator to go with?? Blown motor
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="beefcake" data-source="post: 14210706" data-attributes="member: 1692"><p>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. </p><p></p><p>• Flasher was shipped in May 2013 WITH tune base file loaded</p><p></p><p>• Customer did not contact us for remote tuning instructions (logging, etc) until August 11, 2013. So about 2.5 months after ordering everything..</p><p></p><p>• Lund responsed on the 12th first thing in the morning since the 11th was a Sunday. </p><p></p><p>• Lund provided datalogging instructions along with an updated calibration to use since they had made some updates since his original base tune was sent.</p><p></p><p>• 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.</p><p></p><p>• 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.</p><p></p><p>• 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 <strong>initial</strong> logs done. Again, <strong>initial logs</strong></p><p></p><p>• 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 <strong>initial base logs</strong>. 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 <strong>NO BOOST</strong>.</p><p></p><p>• 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 <strong><em>“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.”</em></strong></p><p></p><p>• Lund immediately replied that same day and said <strong><em>“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. </em></strong> </p><p></p><p>• Customers reply was <strong><em>“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.”</em></strong></p><p></p><p>• 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.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="beefcake, post: 14210706, member: 1692"] 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 [b]initial[/b] logs done. Again, [b]initial logs[/b] • 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 [b]initial base logs[/b]. 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 [b]NO BOOST[/b]. • 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 [b][i]“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.”[/i][/b] • Lund immediately replied that same day and said [b][i]“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. [/i][/b] • Customers reply was [b][i]“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.”[/i][/b][i][/i] • 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Mustang Forums
2011-2014 Mustangs
Power-Adders
What aluminator to go with?? Blown motor
Top