openflash tablet vs ecutek tune

[s2d4]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Basically if you have money to spare, get EcuTek if you want to get the most out of your NA car. If you're poor, then settle for the OFT.

Via Note 4 using Tapatalk.

What a load of crap.

[s2d4]

Originally Posted by xuimod

Come help me make my car stock and give me $100 to dyno it ok? If not, then your post is pointless.

Also, you are essentially saying my original torque dip was 40 ft lbs? That's a really stupid thing to say. Show me 1 FRS/BRZ that has that kind of torque dip stock. Almost all have about 20 ft lbs torque dip stock.

Because you are not smart enough to read into the context of my post, my point was the vendor can't make a stupid blanket statement that an Open Flash Tablet canned tune will reduce the torque dip by 50% for everyone. I was calling him out on his sales pitch bullshit.

Go and pay for the ecutek, get someone to dyno tune it.
You'll see that there won't much difference.

[toast]

Look at a dyno comparison such as this one:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47001

Look at plot 2. If you draw a straight line on the red trace from 3200-4700 rpm and then calculate the area between that line and the stock torque curve that is the 'torque dip'. Do the same thing with the blue line (and make sure you subtract any area where the blue line is above the straight line!) and that is the torque dip for the 1.1 map. I would say Shiv's estimate of the OFT map's torque dip being 50% smaller pretty damn close.

It's ok, maths are hard.

Originally Posted by xuimod

Also, you are essentially saying my original torque dip was 40 ft lbs? That's a really stupid thing to say. Show me 1 FRS/BRZ that has that kind of torque dip stock. Almost all have about 20 ft lbs torque dip stock.

Because you are not smart enough to read into the context of my post, my point was the vendor can't make a stupid blanket statement that an Open Flash Tablet canned tune will reduce the torque dip by 50% for everyone. I was calling him out on his sales pitch bullshit.

[shif7i7down]

Originally Posted by xuimod

Come help me make my car stock and give me $100 to dyno it ok? If not, then your post is pointless.

Also, you are essentially saying my original torque dip was 40 ft lbs? That's a really stupid thing to say. Show me 1 FRS/BRZ that has that kind of torque dip stock. Almost all have about 20 ft lbs torque dip stock.

Because you are not smart enough to read into the context of my post, my point was the vendor can't make a stupid blanket statement that an Open Flash Tablet canned tune will reduce the torque dip by 50% for everyone. I was calling him out on his sales pitch bullshit.

What were you expecting to gain from tuning a stock car? Over 9000hp? :P

Anywho, you can switch to any tuning option you like. No one is stopping you from doing so. just don't expect to much from a stock car and you won't be disappointed.

Also, it might be a good idea to check if you actually flashed the e85 rom, your graphs look like stock power pulls., just saying.

Edit: its also a good idea to pump e85 in your tank if you're running the e85 tune. .. < just ruling out possibilities

[xuimod]

Originally Posted by s2d4

Go and pay for the ecutek, get someone to dyno tune it.
You'll see that there won't much difference.

Um, that's not the point. The point is vendors making bullshit claims. Shiv said his canned tunes would reduce torque dip by 50%.

I just don't like when vendors twist data in an effort to push a product.

Originally Posted by toast

Look at a dyno comparison such as this one:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47001

Look at plot 2. If you draw a straight line on the red trace from 3200-4700 rpm and then calculate the area between that line and the stock torque curve that is the 'torque dip'. Do the same thing with the blue line (and make sure you subtract any area where the blue line is above the straight line!) and that is the torque dip for the 1.1 map. I would say Shiv's estimate of the OFT map's torque dip being 50% smaller pretty damn close.

It's ok, maths are hard.

Lolol. That ain't math. That's eyeballing it. Since you are so good at math, what's the area under the curve before and after from 3200-4700 rpm? Give me specific numbers. Because the difference does not look anywhere near 50%. I would say maybe 20% difference.

Originally Posted by shif7i7down

What were you expecting to gain from tuning a stock car? Over 9000hp? :P

Anywho, you can switch to any tuning option you like. No one is stopping you from doing so. just don't expect to much from a stock car and you won't be disappointed.

Also, it might be a good idea to check if you actually flashed the e85 rom, your graphs look like stock power pulls., just saying.

Edit: its also a good idea to pump e85 in your tank if you're running the e85 tune. .. < just ruling out possibilities

I was expecting a vendor to be honest and forthcoming. Specifically implying that simply applying his oh-so-great canned tuned will reduce the torque dip by 50%.

[xuimod]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Basically if you have money to spare, get EcuTek if you want to get the most out of your NA car. If you're poor, then settle for the OFT.

Via Note 4 using Tapatalk.

I agree to an extent.

Put more kindly, OFT is a budget tuning solution. OFT's software is quite buggy and its canned tunes are just ok.

EcuTek is more expensive but has more features and is better supported (has a much bigger company standing behind it).

Also, OFT's datalogging is pretty poor. It formats its datalogging in a way that other programs can't read. For example Virtual Dyno. OFT doesn't support Virtual Dyno but EcuTek (and like 20 other tuning programs) do support Virtual Dyno.

Apparently OFT datalogs are in a weird formatting style that Virtual Dyno does not read. Why doesn't OFT just coordinate with Virtual Dyno, release a firmware update to make its datalogging compliant? That reaks of laziness on the behalf of OFT.

OFT.... budget tuning solution, budget features.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Ok guys, don't feed the troll

[phrosty]

Originally Posted by Shiv@Openflash

Ok guys, don't feed the troll

Honestly threads with titles like these usually devolve into flamebait and trolling rather quickly.

[Apoc]

Originally Posted by xuimod

I agree to an extent.

Put more kindly, OFT is a budget tuning solution. OFT's software is quite buggy and its canned tunes are just ok.

EcuTek is more expensive but has more features and is better supported (has a much bigger company standing behind it).

Also, OFT's datalogging is pretty poor. It formats its datalogging in a way that other programs can't read. For example Virtual Dyno. OFT doesn't support Virtual Dyno but EcuTek (and like 20 other tuning programs) do support Virtual Dyno.

Apparently OFT datalogs are in a weird formatting style that Virtual Dyno does not read. Why doesn't OFT just coordinate with Virtual Dyno, release a firmware update to make its datalogging compliant? That reaks of laziness on the behalf of OFT.

OFT.... budget tuning solution, budget features.

I have no issues with OFT data logs in Virtual Dyno. It's in excel CSV format which is not a new mystery format created by OFT firmware. You just need to remove the junk above the header row and set VD to use the right names in the columns by going in under File > Options > Columns and Profile the Change Time and RPM to Time(s) and Engine Speed. Also I have used both EcuTek and OFT and find OFT a lot easier to datalog. I have not experienced any buggy software in the year and a half I have been using OFT. Now just remove your foot from your mouth jackass.

[chaoskaze]

ecutec currently offers more if u gonna endup with serious build with lots cash to blow. Other wise OFT all day.

OFT need to improve the write time thou, some ppl are going with ecutek cuz its cheaper to do dyno tune with it.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

ecutec currently offers more if u gonna endup with serious build with lots cash to blow. Other wise OFT all day.

OFT need to improve the write time thou, some ppl are going with ecutek cuz its cheaper to do dyno tune with it.

Funny you mention that: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83818

[xuimod]

Originally Posted by Apoc

I have no issues with OFT data logs in Virtual Dyno. It's in excel CSV format which is not a new mystery format created by OFT firmware. You just need to remove the junk above the header row and set VD to use the right names in the columns by going in under File > Options > Columns and Profile the Change Time and RPM to Time(s) and Engine Speed. Also I have used both EcuTek and OFT and find OFT a lot easier to datalog. I have not experienced any buggy software in the year and a half I have been using OFT. Now just remove your foot from your mouth jackass.

Oh yeah, it works great as long as you edit the hell out of the CSV file. And you have to edit it a very specific way.

Not everyone wants to figure out how to make OFT's CSV files compliant for Virtual Dyno. Meanwhile almost 2 dozen other pieces of tuner software are compliant.

Why doesn't Shiv just get with Virtual Dyno make it compliant out of the box like almost every other tuning software out there? That reaks of laziness.

[Apoc]

Originally Posted by xuimod

Oh yeah, it works great as long as you edit the hell out of the CSV file. And you have to edit it a very specific way.

Not everyone wants to figure out how to make OFT's CSV files compliant for Virtual Dyno. Meanwhile almost 2 dozen other pieces of tuner software are compliant.

Why doesn't Shiv just get with Virtual Dyno make it compliant out of the box like almost every other tuning software out there? That reaks of laziness.

It's not that hard you remove a few rows. I know how to use excel and don't need to edit the hell out of it. You can't do simple stuff like this you shouldn't be data logging.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by Apoc

It's not that hard you remove a few rows. I know how to use excel and don't need to edit the hell out of it. You can't do simple stuff like this you shouldn't be data logging.

You could say that it "reaks of laziness"