E38/E67 ECM Speed Density Virtual VE table

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geoff

Not really touchy, but it just seemed a little hypocritical to me.

Honestly, you need to really look hard at the RoadRunner compared to the HPT RTT 'solution'. While the stuff from HPT does somewhat get the job done, it is like comparing a Cessna to an SR71. They aren't even remotely even in the same league as far as what their capabilities are. IMHO the only time where the RTT might be 'better' is on something like a Cadillac CTS-V where it is a total bitch to remove the PCM. Also if you leave the HPT RTT OS in your computer you have effectively locked out all other tuning software packages. If you are doing this for a customer they might leave mad if they find out they can't get in their own computer with whatever software they happen to be using if it isn't HPT.

I guess I am touchy from the aspect that I don't like people taking swipes, jokes, snide comments, or whatever you want to call it, behind someones back while asking them for help.

---

First off, its not behind anyones back. Its a public forum, there for everyone to see.
As for the comparison between the two. I understand the differences. I dont need to be able to change every table in the PCM on the fly. I dont want to have to buy 3 different RRs to cover everything that comes in the door.
As for asking for help. I didnt ask for help, I asked about the status of a feature that is being released.
Both software companies have their advantages and disadvantages. I'm not here to debate either. I use both.
The custom OSs by HPT effectively lock out anything BUT HPT. I know that. It doesnt lock it to my interface. If another tuner licenses the pcm, they're in.
I never said RTT was BETTER, or vice versa. ALL I SAID WAS, WELL YOU READ IT. And I stand by that comment. I dont need a RR. Would a RR make things a little faster? Maybe, but I dont have to have one. Maybe someday I'll get one. I'm not opposed to owning one.
You took that comment as a bad mouth and its not. It doesnt mean I'm anti-RR, it means what it says. I dont NEED one.

I don't mind this discussion as long as it's kept civilized... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joecar

I don't mind this discussion as long as it's kept civilized... ;)

---

Def not trying to be UNcivilized. Just feel like I was called out for no reason. Theres too much favortism in this biz. I use 'both' because of various reasons.
I dont think a comment about me needing a RR has any bearing on my use or thoughts about EFIlive.

That's ok, so far it's civil, and that's fine with me.

If you're called out, you have the right to answer.

So far, everyone treats everyone respectfully, and all's well.

This thread is about the Virtual VE table in E38s :)

I just used it on two E38s one was an LS2 the other an Australian Ls2 with L92 heads. Both went well - one of them making 297rwkw with just a 220 220 114 XER cam and a decent exhaust. The Virtual VE table has the effect but it doesnt change the exact cells by the requested % so its best to always be comparing to the tune that was just logged when you make adjustments.

Virtual VE works well with VVT, as it is currently available in a L76 engine. I installed a new cam and tuning for it was fairly straight forward. I haven't started screwing with the VVT timing yet.. Thats next.

I haven't seen swings in the AFR based on the cam angle yet. But I've only logged about 10 minutes worth of data on this. So what is its impact on a single cam VVT engine as it relates to VE? Not much so far.

:muahaha: :notacrook:

Cam variation should not cause any 'major' issues because GM already set the coefficient up for you :)

Cheers,
Ross

I'm just amazed that in just 5 short years how things have advanced. When I bought LS1 edit not even all the tables were available and the ones that were didn't always work correctly.

Virtual VE is a huge advantage for tuning these ECM's.

:notacrook:

Glad the 'old timers' of tuning can appreciate what is really is.

Cheers,
Ross