[Topless///M]

I would think that with the Shark flash coming out, a piggy-back would be limited to certain parameters where a flash would have full access to everything yielding better results using the SAME boost. But this doesn't seem to be the case with Dinan. Correct me if I'm wrong, looks like they have the same #'s as helix or procede using the same boost.

So basically I'm wondering if a flash is capable of giving you more power than a piggy-back with the same amount of boost.....say 5whp, 10whp, 20whp more considering you have full access to the ecu and not limited to tapping into it.

It would be nice to see a flash that puts out like 10-15whp more using the same boost since it has full access to the ecu. I guess it all depends on what the Shark Edit gives you access to. Anyone thinking the same? I'm sure the ECU tuners will be coming out as soon as the Shark Edit is released, any tuner wanna chime in.....


edited OP

[e.n335]

Flash and piggyback are very different. Piggybacks can provide additional functionality like launch control, water/meth injection controller, o2 simulators, user torque settings, ... Usually such functionality is not provided with an ECU-flash. I prefer ECU-flash because here you change the ECU-tune itself, you don't have to intercept sensor data to get the ECU to deliver more safe power.

[Craigito]

So what's your question?

[Topless///M]

Originally Posted by Craigito

So what's your question?

if you can get more power from a flash than a piggy-back with the same amount of boost since a flash has full access to the ECU, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I have no idea that's why I'm bringing it up. Yeah sorry, my OP wasn't that clear figured I'd bring up a discussion.

[normtrum]

Originally Posted by Topless///M

if you can get more power from a flash than a piggy-back with the same amount of boost since a flash has full access to the ECU, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I have no idea that's why I'm bringing it up. Yeah sorry, my OP wasn't that clear figured I'd bring up a discussion.

Where has it been established that the SI will generate more power? The only numbers that have come out (as far as I know) were estimations coming from another member....something they thought they "heard" from someone at Bimmerfest I believe.

The thing isn't even close to being available yet

[Topless///M]

Originally Posted by normtrum

Where has it been established that the SI will generate more power? The only numbers that have come out (as far as I know) were estimations coming from another member....something they thought they "heard" from someone at Bimmerfest I believe.

The thing isn't even close to being available yet

no....I know that, I was wondering if a flash is capable of giving you more power than a piggy-back with the same amount of boost.....say 5whp, 10whp, 20whp more considering you have full access to the ecu and not limited to tapping into it.

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by normtrum

Where has it been established that the SI will generate more power? The only numbers that have come out (as far as I know) were estimations coming from another member....something they thought they "heard" from someone at Bimmerfest I believe.

The thing isn't even close to being available yet

The SE / SI will provide as much power tuners are extracting from the N54. I don't think that ECU-flashes will be more efficient than piggybacks. Just better.

[Topless///M]

Originally Posted by e.n335

Flash and piggyback are very different. Piggybacks can provide additional functionality like launch control, water/meth injection controller, o2 simulators, user torque settings, ... Usually such functionality is not provided with an ECU-flash. I prefer ECU-flash because here you change the ECU-tune itself, you don't have to intercept sensor data to get the ECU to deliver more safe power.

great info.....thanks

[normtrum]

Originally Posted by e.n335

The SE / SI will provide as much power tuners are extracting from the N54. I don't think that ECU-flashes will be more efficient than piggybacks. Just better.

Well...."better" is a very subjective word.

Don't get me wrong, I think what Jim has come up with has some amazing potential.....I just think a lot of people are getting a bit ahead of themselves. I mean people stating that the "tuners" will all be out of business....people selling their v2's and sstt's......i just think that there is still a lot of things to be figured out before any real determinations can be made.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by e.n335

Flash and piggyback are very different. Piggybacks can provide additional functionality like launch control, water/meth injection controller, o2 simulators, user torque settings, ... Usually such functionality is not provided with an ECU-flash. I prefer ECU-flash because here you change the ECU-tune itself, you don't have to intercept sensor data to get the ECU to deliver more safe power.

Hey Eugen,
Is your assessment based upon theory or actual real world fact? The reason I ask is that your statement isn't uncommon among those who actually have no experience in tuning with both approaches. Flash tuning is great if you do not require any more functionality than the factory ECU provides. It is also great that you do not add any more hardware or even get your hands dirty. But it is largely limited, in my experience with ROM editing, by what maps you have access to (and if they are, in actually, what you think they are). ROM editing, in this light, is no less of a "black box" approach than interceptor-style tuning. Unless of course, you have address information for all relevant maps and perfectly understand how they function. This is rarely the case. There is a reason why ECU flashes undergo revision and get better with time. As you trial-and-error ROM changes, you can isolate what features/maps you are modifying.

Interceptor/piggyback style tuning requires a different approach. First step is establishing how the factory ECU makes its decisions. And what input variables can be adjusted to get the desired output variables. In a way, it's even more straight-forward than ROM editing because you already establish a cause-effect relationship before you even begin to tune. The hard part begins when you run into diagnostic limits which takes time to work out. Often, you end up relieving the ECU of certain duties and give them to the aux computer. The downside to this approach is when the stock ECU provided logic (boost control, for instance) that you relied upon doesn't work as well when you go catless, install intercoolers, raise the boost, etc,. In the case of a reflash, you can (if you just happen to know the map address and mathematics) adjust the PID values and settle with the values that give the best results. In the case of a piggy-back approach, this is impossible to do so you have to go through the effort of adding your own boost control system and cleanly integrating it invisibly into the system. Either approach, it's work. And either approach involves a lot of development/testing in order to get the expected output repeatably.

Shiv

[b335i]

Shiv, please respond to PM!! Thx

[Calgary Agent]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Either approach, it's work. And either approach involves a lot of development/testing in order to get the expected output repeatably.

Shiv

In other words, leave the tuning to the experts

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Hey Eugen,
Is your assessment based upon theory or actual real world fact? The reason I ask is that your statement isn't uncommon among those who actually have no experience in tuning with both approaches. Flash tuning is great if you do not require any more functionality than the factory ECU provides. It is also great that you do not add any more hardware or even get your hands dirty. But it is largely limited, in my experience with ROM editing, by what maps you have access to (and if they are, in actually, what you think they are). ROM editing, in this light, is no less of a "black box" approach than interceptor-style tuning. Unless of course, you have address information for all relevant maps and perfectly understand how they function. This is rarely the case. There is a reason why ECU flashes undergo revision and get better with time. As you trial-and-error ROM changes, you can isolate what features/maps you are modifying.

Interceptor/piggyback style tuning requires a different approach. First step is establishing how the factory ECU makes its decisions. And what input variables can be adjusted to get the desired output variables. In a way, it's even more straight-forward than ROM editing because you already establish a cause-effect relationship before you even begin to tune. The hard part begins when you run into diagnostic limits which takes time to work out. Often, you end up relieving the ECU of certain duties and give them to the aux computer. The downside to this approach is when the stock ECU provided logic (boost control, for instance) that you relied upon doesn't work as well when you go catless, install intercoolers, raise the boost, etc,. In the case of a reflash, you can (if you just happen to know the map address and mathematics) adjust the PID values and settle with the values that give the best results. In the case of a piggy-back approach, this is impossible to do so you have to go through the effort of adding your own boost control system and cleanly integrating it invisibly into the system. Either approach, it's work. And either approach involves a lot of development/testing in order to get the expected output repeatably.

Shiv

Hi Shiv,

My assessment is based on my experience as a customer of both tuning systems. You don't have to be a tuner to know which tunes worked well with your cars and which didn't. However, good information.

Eugen

[sirploppy]

Originally Posted by normtrum

Well...."better" is a very subjective word.

Don't get me wrong, I think what Jim has come up with has some amazing potential.....I just think a lot of people are getting a bit ahead of themselves. I mean people stating that the "tuners" will all be out of business....people selling their v2's and sstt's......i just think that there is still a lot of things to be figured out before any real determinations can be made.

Most people with that point of view will point to the Evo tuning world, where more accessible flash technology killed the piggyback market in that application.

[normtrum]

Originally Posted by sirploppy

Most people with that point of view will point to the Evo tuning world, where more accessible flash technology killed the piggyback market in that application.

Wait a second......did you and I just have a civil forum exchange???? Wow! We've come a long way from the battles we used to have!

when it comes to your statement (and several other people's) regarding the Evo world...and how their tuning world evolved......i'm going to have to take your word on it....I know little to nothing about Mitsiii's!

[Orb]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Hey Eugen,
Is your assessment based upon theory or actual real world fact? The reason I ask is that your statement isn't uncommon among those who actually have no experience in tuning with both approaches. Flash tuning is great if you do not require any more functionality than the factory ECU provides. It is also great that you do not add any more hardware or even get your hands dirty. But it is largely limited, in my experience with ROM editing, by what maps you have access to (and if they are, in actually, what you think they are). ROM editing, in this light, is no less of a "black box" approach than interceptor-style tuning. Unless of course, you have address information for all relevant maps and perfectly understand how they function. This is rarely the case. There is a reason why ECU flashes undergo revision and get better with time. As you trial-and-error ROM changes, you can isolate what features/maps you are modifying.

Interceptor/piggyback style tuning requires a different approach. First step is establishing how the factory ECU makes its decisions. And what input variables can be adjusted to get the desired output variables. In a way, it's even more straight-forward than ROM editing because you already establish a cause-effect relationship before you even begin to tune. The hard part begins when you run into diagnostic limits which takes time to work out. Often, you end up relieving the ECU of certain duties and give them to the aux computer. The downside to this approach is when the stock ECU provided logic (boost control, for instance) that you relied upon doesn't work as well when you go catless, install intercoolers, raise the boost, etc,. In the case of a reflash, you can (if you just happen to know the map address and mathematics) adjust the PID values and settle with the values that give the best results. In the case of a piggy-back approach, this is impossible to do so you have to go through the effort of adding your own boost control system and cleanly integrating it invisibly into the system. Either approach, it's work. And either approach involves a lot of development/testing in order to get the expected output repeatably.

Shiv

Yet more propaganda and your narrow minded views....didn't Jim C. paddle your butt on a few month ago about these very topics.....you never stop.

Orb

[e.n335]

^ IMO Shiv's information is not that bad and now we know how some tuners approach to design ECU-flashes. I hope this is not Vishnu's approach as well. I don't think that JimC, who developed a new, great tool for tuning BMW ECU's, does not know where the maps and even the code resides to tweak the settings.

[Robertbog]

Originally Posted by Orb

Yet more propaganda and your narrow minded views....didn't Jim C. paddle your butt on a few month ago about these very topics.....you never stop.

Orb

I'm gonna have to disagree with that as of today. V3 sounded like exactly what a modded car needed, and well infact it is. Shiv is further along then either company, except maybe dinan and the team of 12 engineers. Shiv made obvious efforts that work in his favor to the validity of his statement, IE everything vishnu has done. Piggybacks do have some delay, ect, ect, ect, but smart, well researched, well tested products can be programmed to anticipate such. Honestly I think V3 is nearly a finished project; I say that with caution. Honestly do you really think these companies broke 1024 bit encryption and didnt have to smooth anything out (Stage 1, Stage 2 dinan is proof of this.... the didnt know what everything meant, hence why thy needed to change back the throttle logic).

You can hate, ive done my fair share and a lot of problems with v1 and v2 were very real, but were getting in the safe area.

Originally Posted by e.n335

^ IMO Shiv's information is not that bad and now we know how some tuners approach to design ECU-flashes. I hope this is not Vishnu's approach as well. I don't think that JimC, who developed a new, great tool for tuning BMW ECU's, does not know where the maps and even the code resides to tweak the settings.

Your right, he definitely did the same thing shiv did to figure out what is what. Thats how everyone does it, figure out what does what for what, its fairly simple to sample voltage/test/road test to figure out what changes what, heck terry did it with minimal equipment. Eugen I dont know if you have seen shiv's software, ive seen it on 3 occassions and it has definitely been revised also, definitely a lot different then the original haltech software.

[M&M]

Originally Posted by Orb

Yet more propaganda and your narrow minded views....didn't Jim C. paddle your butt on a few month ago about these very topics.....you never stop.

Orb

I don't see that as propaganda. Shiv mentioned some pro's & con's of each method. And they all seem to be valid points.

[e.n335]

Time will tell ... In the past it seems that ECU flashes had advantages and I am still a strong believer in ECU-flashes. On the other hand I have never seen a piggyback like the PROcede V3 when it comes to complexity and functionality, I only know the V1 and V2 versions. Dinan showed that ECU-flashes work very well with the N54 and I expect to see some really good flashes based on the Shark platform soon. Let's have a look at it in another half year, when the tunes are working in the car's and initial bugs will be worked out / solved already. I am happy to see a lot of V3+ installations at that time and hope I can contribute with some facts, thus I will take the Shark platform route and provide some informations about it's implementation at that point. However, interesting times ...

[Robertbog]

Originally Posted by e.n335

Time will tell ... In the past it seems that ECU flashes had advantages and I am still a strong believer in ECU-flashes. On the other hand I have never seen a piggyback like the PROcede V3 when it comes to complexity and functionality, I only know the V1 and V2 versions. Dinan showed that ECU-flashes work very well with the N54 and I expect to see some really good flashes based on the Shark platform. Let's have a look at it in another half year, when the tunes are working in the car's and initial bugs will be worked out / solved already. I am happy to see a lot of V3+ installations at that time and hope I can contribute with some facts, thus I will take the Shark platform route and provide some informations about it's implementation at that point. However, interesting times ...

Well put, but I wouldnt think of the shark and the dinan as the same thing. Dinan attacked the ECU for a year with 12 very qualified engineers, literally the best team in the business with ridiculous resources. Shark is nearly the same as going shiv's route, but in hexadecimel

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by Robertbog

Well put, but I wouldnt think of the shark and the dinan as the same thing. Dinan attacked the ECU for a year with 12 very qualified engineers, literally the best team in the business with ridiculous resources. Shark is nearly the same as going shiv's route, but in hexadecimel

I have a lot of trust in Jim. He is well known in the BMW tuning scene and has a great reputation. Not the amount of engineers working on a product is the success factor, it is the knowledge that counts. I'm very sure that we are lucky to have JimC working on tuning tools and hopefully maps as well for the N54.