OpenFlash Tablet

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

Maybe I misunderstood something previously or missed a post saying I needed to purchase hardware to support OFT as a tuner. I have had a number of people contact me requesting custom tuning using OFT, and FI tuning on OFT. This is why I have asked you about logging a number of times via PM, posts, and phone calls. Are you saying I need to purchase a tablet to ask a question about your platform in "open"? I don't see why your post was warranted vs just simply answering the question at hand that both me and @jamesm had. Both of us are attempting to support your platform but I cannot seem to get ahold of you or get any answers. Maybe there is a specific email I should be using instead? At this point you are making it more than difficult to attempt to support this platform and are making me lean more and more towards simply respond to people with something such as "If you want any custom tuning you will need to sell the OTS, or have shiv tune it for you".

Disingenuity at it's finest. I've read your posts and I definitely hear things sir. So let's drop the charade okay?

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Disingenuity at it's finest. I've read your posts and I definitely hear things sir. So let's drop the charade okay?

I am legitimately trying to contact you. This is getting outrageous shiv. Your assistant has my number. The fact you are taking my serious post this lightly is quite disappointing. You should learn to support tuners as well as end users.

[jamesm]

Disingenuity? Wtf? I talk to @nelsmar almost every day and I can assure you he's one of the only people out there actually tuning on your platform. I haven't tuned with oft yet but plan to soon once the extra logging params are available. Is this how you plan to 'support' tuners? What is disingenuous about him asking a very valid question? Flash time is a real concern when it comes out of your pocket. All he did was ask if it's on the radar.

[86-tundra]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

This was simply flashing from OFT to the car. Not including the transfer to OFT. I have also had problems with OFT being plugged into both OBD & my laptop at the same time so I end up having to close the software, flash ecu, unplug the OBD connection, plug into my laptop, open OFT, let it run the update routine, Let it check for files, Transfer files, Etc. This comes up to 10-12 minutes on average per flash. When paying $1-2/min for dyno time this is quite expensive if you are doing more than just a hand full of flashes so it has been a struggle for me. Of course you can pre-load a number of rom's to the OFT but then there is still the ~8min flash time between tests.

It looks like his recent post mentions adding a number of logging parameters both you and me needed for tuning, but this is equally important.

I think instead of complaining about the length of time it takes, it may be wiser to accept the length of time the OFT takes to tune and adjust pricing to your customers properly.

I don't think the time is going to change. The bottleneck is surely in the hardware. And I don't see any reason for a change in hardware from shiv. There really is no reason. The majority of people use OFT for the OTS tunes, or remote tunes from shiv.

I think it's great you're trying to support OF community, but telling shiv he needs to come up with a faster way to flash and then complaining when he doesn't return your calls is unnecessary. Like I said, I'm almost positive the bottleneck in write time is in the OFT device it self, and we will likely not see a change in that. It's not what it's sold for.

Shiv wants to design OTS maps, and have then open for anyone that buys OFT to use. That is the goal.

If you are not looking for OTS maps, then maybe ecutek is a better choice for your customers. Plus, at the price, it isn't too much different.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by trevorovert

I think instead of complaining about the length of time it takes, it may be wiser to accept the length of time the OFT takes to tune and adjust pricing to your customers properly.

I don't think the time is going to change. The bottleneck is surely in the hardware. And I don't see any reason for a change in hardware from shiv. There really is no reason. The majority of people use OFT for the OTS tunes, or remote tunes from shiv.

I think it's great you're trying to support OF community, but telling shiv he needs to come up with a faster way to flash and then complaining when he doesn't return your calls is unnecessary. Like I said, I'm almost positive the bottleneck in write time is in the OFT device it self, and we will likely not see a change in that. It's not what it's sold for.

Shiv wants to design OTS maps, and have then open for anyone that buys OFT to use. That is the goal.

If you are not looking for OTS maps, then maybe ecutek is a better choice for your customers. Plus, at the price, it isn't too much different.

I legitimately tried to contact him about it in private to ask if this was something he planned on improving. I legitimately asked in public if he had plans to improve it. He has avoided answering. Its a shame that I am attempting to support the "open" community. I have yet to lock a single ecutek tune for any car. Nor do I care to. I am trying not to post information that would look negatively on shiv's product and simply trying to ask if there is any chance there will be an update to support faster flash time as I am pretty sure I remembered him commenting on it when the product first came out.

And the simple fact is a number of locals purchased OFT and I have been recommending it for people with stock intakes. Some of those people are wanting changes done, or are wanting to do upgrades and have asked me to tune their cars on OFT. The two main concerns were datalogging issues & flash time. I would hate to tell people that they have to sell their product and switch to ecutek and sound like a fanboy when I am simply trying to support all platforms. I would prefer to privately ask shiv if he had any plans to improve this in hopes that it would work.

The reality is I was quite excited that he extended data logging and added from what I saw was the majority of what I was looking for to save me time. I would be more than happy to explain in full detail why I am hoping for faster flash time but then everyone would probably just say I am vendor bashing when in fact I am trying to support this product.

There are a number of individuals that can vouch that I recommend OFT and have been tuning with it and that I have genuinely just had a lot of frustration, and am hoping to see improvements.

[Captain Insano]

Is it possible to tune your customers with a road tune (in a relatively safe place to do WOT pulls and proper driving) then perfect the tune with a few dyno pulls? I have had previous cars of mine completely road tuned without using a dyno before by very reputable professional tuners. Me driving following their instructions, them tuning.

I ask that because, besides taking more of your time and your customers time, it would not drive up the dyno cost due to time of flashing and minimize or eliminate that from the equation.

[jamesm]

Originally Posted by Captain Insano

Is it possible to tune your customers with a road tune (in a relatively safe place to do WOT pulls and proper driving) then perfect the tune with a few dyno pulls? I have had previous cars of mine completely road tuned without using a dyno before by very reputable professional tuners. Me driving following their instructions, them tuning.

I ask that because, besides taking more of your time and your customers time, it would not drive up the dyno cost due to time of flashing and minimize or eliminate that from the equation.

that's how i do all of mine. always street tune prior to going to the dyno. you can't really tune for drivability on the dyno effectively (well, you can on a proper load dyno, but it's just way easier and cheaper on the street).

the issue with OFT that concerns me personally is that it requires a map flash between every run. without map switching you can't just load up 4 maps and do 4 back-to-back runs. you have to wait and reflash between each one. if it takes 8 minutes each time like @nelsmar is saying (which i haven't seen for myself, that seems a bit long to me) then that's over a half hour worth of flashing. in dollars and cents, that's $50 worth of dyno time spent twiddling your thumbs effectively accomplishing nothing.

now if you're doing 10-15+ runs dialing in a car, you can see how this quickly snowballs and could potentially eat up an entire evening. this costs quite a bit of money that comes out of our pockets, and if we were to pass that on to the customer they'd be much better off using something else in terms of OTD cost.

this is a real concern, and one that i also remember being mentioned early on as an area they look to improve. i don't see why asking if there has been any progress on this is in any way 'disingenuous'. it is disingenuous to tell people that relying on long term fuel trims to hit fueling targets in open loop is a good idea, but that's a whole 'nother topic i don't have the energy to get into right now.

[StormTrooper]

What about using a tactrix cable for the tuning process?

Get a base tune via road tuning and then tweak cam timing and fine tune on the dyno?

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by StormTrooper

What about using a tactrix cable for the tuning process?

Get a base tune via road tuning and then tweak cam timing and fine tune on the dyno?

That's what I was going to suggest for tuners. Then just upload the final tune files into the customer OFT. You can use the OFT's realtime data display for monitoring during the dyno pulls which I find just as useful as reviewing logged csv data after the pull.

[jamesm]

that's a good suggestion. i wouldn't actually tune a customer car with opensource at this point (it's still far too beta), but once it's fully baked that would be a decent alternative. basically just tune the car on EcuFlash/RomRaider then load the roms when it's all said and done.

[StormTrooper]

Originally Posted by jamesm

that's a good suggestion. i wouldn't actually tune a customer car with opensource at this point (it's still far too beta), but once it's fully baked that would be a decent alternative. basically just tune the car on EcuFlash/RomRaider then load the roms when it's all said and done.

Sounds like romraider is functional but ecuflash needs more work.... I think by summer it should be fine.

My wrx was about 1-2 minutes to flash and we managed to get everything but vvt road tuning.

Would it be possible in the future to log via wide band and tie it into the OFT? Either through it's own unit like an aem uego or a new sensor in the second stock location and connection.

[BobbyBlue86]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

I am legitimately trying to contact you. This is getting outrageous shiv. Your assistant has my number. The fact you are taking my serious post this lightly is quite disappointing. You should learn to support tuners as well as end users.

Remember that whole conversation we had about you being overly pushy? No one wants to help someone when they always come off as an overly aggressive douche. I understand that shiv is representing a company and must act accordingly, but that doesn't mean you can take advantage of him with your "Im the customer and you HAVE to be nice to me" mentality. I've worked in customer service enough to know that I NEVER liked dealing with people like you. So just relax man! If you show people some respect, they will usually return it.

[mkivsoopra]

Originally Posted by Sonolin

Yes. I'm running the stage 2 EL e85 tune (all stock aside from that).

Check the last few pages of this thread: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53537

I was eventually able to get it down to 1 crank with a very strong start on high ethanol content (80%) cold starts. This was in the middle of winter in Norcal (~50 degrees F).

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by BobbyBlue86

Remember that whole conversation we had about you being overly pushy? No one wants to help someone when they always come off as an overly aggressive douche. I understand that shiv is representing a company and must act accordingly, but that doesn't mean you can take advantage of him with your "Im the customer and you HAVE to be nice to me" mentality. I've worked in customer service enough to know that I NEVER liked dealing with people like you. So just relax man! If you show people some respect, they will usually return it.

Sorry.... But I don't think you realize what this is about. This is about me calling shiv in an attempt to use his product in a professional manner. However he has been avoiding me. Possibly just due to the fact he has been busy. Bit it is starting to look quite selective in what he does and does not answer. This is why I attempted to contact him privately to discuss something as simple as datalogging and flash time which actually matter to a tuner in which he has avoided me entirely. All of which @jamesm has also mentioned

No I am not a customer. So no Shiv does not need to "do what I say". But his own post implied that I should be his customer just to support his customer base. Hell as you may not know I offered my own code base and offered to help hardware wise for r&d testing for datalogging to shiv as I was one of the first to build my own datalogging hardware. So you may think I am pushy based off what one local has said, but in reality I have been trying to contribute to shiv and he has been ignoring me flat out and this was my last attempt at attempting to communicate with him as I am getting frustrated telling people to "wait".

However since the posts earlier shiv actually finally got back to me and asked for my phone number. So it looks like he is either wanting to yell my ear off or realize what James is saying is correct and that I genuinely wanted some answers.

You need to rember that shiv boasts the "open" name in an attempt to "change" how things are by making tunes open. I am one of the only tuners around that has been willing to accept this concept and yet I am having to fight and go out of my way to do so. How is this "open" when he only answers to end users, and not the tuners?