I am not doubting or calling into question Justin's tuning ability. It's just that it's much more difficult to optimize when you don't ever tune at the altitude where the car resides. Experience and trial/error are major factors. IF you don't believe this despite no experience, then there's nothing more I can say. I'm just interested in what's best for the OP, not what's best for my tuner or friend.
PS. Have you not dyno'd or hit the drags since adding the rest of your mods?
Apex-i Intake, Megan O2, Megan Down Pipe, Test Pipe, B&B cat-back, Buschur LICP, Forge Unos MBC, AEM WB
As I mentioned, I'm at 329whp and hitting trap speeds of 109mph. That is with everything you listed. That was also at only 21~22psi. Is that not good for those mods?
If the OP wants to be competitive or wants every ounce of hp out of his car then a local guy might be the way to go. If he just wants a great tune to run his car on some new mods than I think an eflash would suffice.
How is a tuner going to get experience with trial/error, tuning cars at different altitudes unless someone lets them tune their car.
this is what the guy that own project tuning stated.. Wartalon what do you think?
"If you get a good e-mail tune (I call it "remote tuning") it's just like your tuner was sitting in the car with you ... the process is EXACTLY the same.
You go for a drive in your car and log the parameters your tuner suggests and then e-mail the results. The tuner reviews the logs and makes adjustments to your ROM and sends it back to you. You repeat the process until it's tuned safely and correctly.
The people that replied to you may be thinking of the canned mail-in tunes of the past where you send your ECU to the tuner and he flashes a generic map to it and sends it back. Those can be problematic with climate differences.
Take a look at my FAQ (http://www.projecttuning.com/faq.shtml). It may answer some questions that you have. Please forgive the site for not being complete ... as you can read above, I'm working on it. =)"
I think that person hasn't tuned at this altitude and is unaware of the stark differences. I've never heard of Project Tuning, but it could just be a known tuner with a different name on a different forum, though.
Madman, no, those are not particularly good results at sea level on a IX with those mods. I went 12.26 @ 110 with less mods on an VIII with a base Dynoflash off the shelf - nothing custom and also on 21-22psi. IXs usually blow VIIIs away. You can see mid 11s and mid-teen traps with those mods on other IXs (not all, of course). That doesn't mean anything is wrong with your tune, and you said you're happy, but I don't want you thinking that's normal or even average. I have no idea if that local tuner could do any better, but IN GENERAL it's best to get tuned by someone who is an expert at your altitude. That's why I didn't recommend Tobz...not that he couldn't do it, but that I think this guy is best served finding a tuner on the East Coast, especially since there are MANY of them known nationwide.
Sure, tuners can't learn without someone letting them use their car for practice, but is that what you paid for? I don't think the OP was asking for someone to experiment on his car, and I don't think that's what you paid for.
Well maybe my driving, which is poor, has somthing to do with my track results. That's why I didn't post my ET. Plus like I stated on my other thread I was missing gears, actually they were grinding more than me missing them, so I'm a little hesitant with my stock transmission and clutch, so using the track might not be the best to judge my cars performance.
As far as sea level, I think I might be somewhere inbetween NY elevation and Denver, just as FYI.
Track aside, 329whp was what I was very close to what I was figuring on and the car made that so again, I'm happy. From what I've seen on this site and others, the hp seemed to be right on with the mods.
I would suggest to the OP to talk to a few different tuners, be it local or not, and tell them what he is wanting out of his car and see who he likes.
Yeah, although trap speeds are typically achievable regardless of driving, you likely didn't see your max capable trap if shifting slowly. Plus, 329whp uncorrected on a Dynojet would usually 111-112 on a normal weight Evo.
Assuming you are in or near Kansas City (near Overland Park, KS), then your altitude is 758'. We are at 6000'. So, at worst you'd be no higher than 1000' so not close to halfway between sea level and here. I consider anything below 1000' to be sea level as an FYI. If you are much further West in Kansas, then you may be higher. Salina is still only 1250', but Goodland is up to 3600' (near the CO border).
Type "kansas city, mo + elevation" in google, and it's in the first result. You can do the same for just about any town. I do it all the time when trying to find drag strips, but none are within 600 miles that are near 1000'.
Some people seem to think I've only tuned cars at altitude, which is hardly the case. I've got cars in Alaska, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, California, Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Kansas, Illinois, Florida, Georgia, and probably elsewhere. So as you can see I'm not just some "high alititude" guy.
A datalog, if you know how to select the right data and know how to interpret it, will tell you everything you need to know. Someone has already stated that though..
Everyone's got a different way of interpreting a timeslip or dynosheet. Don't get too wrapped up in the fact you're not doing [email protected] with your given setup to "please" everyone. Those few who typically have slips registering well below the standard time have tricks up their sleeves. Oddly enough I'm a part of a private forum where some of these tuners/drivers share such information that isn't privy to the general public.
Thanks for the sugestion. I really like the sound of the B&B. It's quiet when I want it to be and it's lound when I want it to be. I'm thinking a straight through design might be a little louder than I want. I'm very pleased with the power I'm making so for now I think I'll stick with the B&B.
I think it's important for the masses out there to realize that just because you have the "basicis" and aren't running crazy times is not indicative of a poor tune.. Must look at the big picture!
As I already stated:
That doesn't mean anything is wrong with your tune, and you said you're happy, but I don't want you thinking that's normal or even average (109mph traps)
Although I'm not sure what the big picture is other than getting a fully optimized tune by someone who specializes in the same conditions as where the car resides, which is the point of everything I've said - not to knock anyone's tuning abilities.
Just that not everything is created equal. To cars with MBC's, TBE's, and Tuning by the same person can run VASTLY different. When you start throwing more parts in the mix the standard deviation between cars spreads drasticly.
I just think saying some's "slow" or has weak power for a given mod set isn't really doing anyone a favor. Unless you're trying to make the point of a different setup could potentially make more power than another. When you factor in all the little nitty gritty details of Dennis's situation (since it was brought into question) you really can't compare (and not that you were) his results with someone like Curt Brown's. Two different drivers, and VASTLY different cars. Get my picture though?
Trust me Clay, a datalog tells everything one needs to know. Be it on pikes peak or in death valley. If you know what you're doing the location of the car makes no diffence.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.