New beginner's Tuning Guide (DVD) from Calibrated Success

[Chevy366]

If this guy is so famous , how come no one has ever heard of him ?
Lots of Trolls around lately .
If his book is $24.95 , now $16.47 , how come the DVD is $249 ?

[KenB]

If this guy is so famous , how come no one has ever heard of him ?
Lots of Trolls around lately .
If his book is $24.95 , now $16.47 , how come the DVD is $249 ?

I'd put Greg up against just about anyone. I believe the book is more theory and concepts while the DVD takes an instructional approach. I plan on buying the DVD myself.

[RWTD]

If this guy is so famous , how come no one has ever heard of him ?

I can assure you that Greg is WELL known in the automotive history. How many engineers/calibrators for manufacturers have you seen that actually come online and post?

Another software site has 13,266 members, and most all the members that have been there for more than a few months have heard of Greg and his work. Greg also has 472 posts there. This site has 5,269 members and 602 active members, and while that's quite a nice number, there's obviously bound to be those who haven't heard much of Greg if all they do is frequent only this site, especially when Greg only has 35 post counts here. On the commercial sites that require sponsorship, Greg doesn't use this particular tradename.

Lots of Trolls around lately .

Don't know what you are inferring by that, but Greg is certainly not a troll. I could call you an uninformed, uneducated dope, but I won't go to that extent.

If his book is $24.95 , now $16.47 , how come the DVD is $249 ?

Then again...

Anyone can buy an informative "book" on Office 2007 for $19.99, but you're going to pay hundreds of dollars for online or DVD instructional training for it, and potentially a thousand or more for in-person training.

[WeathermanShawn]

We all must enjoy tuning or we would not have purchased tuning software and became active participants on this board. Look, whether a book, DVD, or classroom instruction, everyone is free to choose whatever instructional aids are available and what their budget can afford.

It is possible many people are looking for a simple panacea to understand the complexities of tuning. Quite frankly I relied 99% on the tutorials and search on this forum. I am not sure I could have accelerated the learning curve substantially no matter how many books or DVD's I had. This is not to say they are not of great value. But, learning is doing, and having a core interest in a subject. No book or DVD can fulfill that alone, or we would all be masters at everything we did.

While it is an interesting topic, what are the technical points we are learning from this discussion. If anything, I think a great tool would be a simple 20-30 page 'cliff-note' version of tuning with EFILive. You could combine and update the tutorials (minor tweaks) and probably help 90% of the issues that many people have when they begin tuning.

This is a tough economy right now and I wish all the luck in the world to the author. He has offered to credit the cost of the DVD's if you attend one of his tuning classes. It is a little out of my reach right now, but perhaps we need to keep all of this in perspective. For some it is a business, but for me it is a simple hobby. It is all about having fun with your car.

[98 tigershark]

I agree,

Lets go back to the begging of this post. This is what eficalibrator said.
"After lots and lots of prodding, I finally caved and made a training DVD for the GM crew." Think about that statement, I did and I call BS.

Exactly who at GM would ask this guy for a beginners guide to tuning.
NO ONE!!!! I personally spoke to GM and they are trying to stop this kind of thing as it costs them a small fortune and that is a direct quote from GM.

Below is a recent email from Greg regarding my last post on this thread. Below is my response. I think that says it all. You decide.

Widebands actually work on the pricinciple of pumping current through the nernst cell, not return voltage from the Zirconium Dioxide ceramic as seen in narrowband O2's. Further, I've yet to read anything about significant, repeatable effects of static charge due to gas flow influencing HEGO signals from either the manufacturers or a Society of Automotive Engineers paper. At first glance, the story you're repeating seems to come from the same line of thought that has people marketing snake oil such as magnets for the fuel lines or other magical additives that increase fuel ecomony or atomization or whatever. In short, take it with a huge grain of salt. If there were such a profound effect, EVERY OEM would be compensating for it in their own research and production hardware. I can't tell you how many times I've seen claims like this, and 100% of them turned out to be crap. Sorry. I'd hate to see you brainwashed by someone's PT Barnum impersonation with respect to real testing science.

Greg Banish
Calibrated Success, Inc.


My response;
Hello Greg,

I just ordered your book and I am looking forward to reading it very much. The information I put together was from SAE. The laboratory I mentioned is the gold standard for testing period!!. The issue of static charge is real and even effects the fuel system. The materials only a few years back that were thought to reduced the SE build ups or discharges have been found to be worse in many cases. Such as the use of polymers in the fuel lines and to date this Electro Static charge and discharge is an issue that the SEA has not taken on at this point in regards to the use of WBO2 sensors. The problem is real and in some cases can make any WBO2 off by as much as 10-15% according to some members of the SEA. The UL laboratory is not an interested party and the gentlemen I mentioned is an enthusiast an indisputable expert and a family member. ESC and ESD does interfere with WBO2's but to what extent and when is the only question. Polymers, ceramics and metals all store ES charges simply by the movement of any charged particles. On a wide band 0-1V with the medium being stoich .5 is affected by electrostatic charge from the movement of particles in the exhaust, to the extent that this would effect any sensor in its self or readings from any sensor in that system. It is already somewhat based on charge anyway. My friend is a top researcher for electronic measuring devices and also an enthusiast. Since we are looking for the medium of ESC/ESD and how it effects measurements (WBO2 sensors in this case) we can find which sensor is the most consistent to this naturally occurring event in any exhaust system and the sensors involved). It is a fact that the SAE is aware of this as many other industries use the laboratory mentioned to find ways to deal with this as they cannot accurately measure because of ESC/ESD. Until a gold standard for testing is established you do not know what you are claiming is true. My friend and family member is an expert in this field so that is no PT Barnum impersonation (that is very rude Greg!). He is a member of our family and an expert far and above what any WBO2 sensor assembler has in its service. I had thought you were seeking the truth and you insult a very respected expert in this field and a family member and his laboratory that almost every electronic manufacture respects and uses. He says this is a fact and he does this type of testing for a living. The info is from an expert and enthusiast and someone who really knows. I had thought that since you and I are sticklers for the truth and accuracy in measurement that you would have jumped on this opportunity to find the best device and the most accurate WBO2 sensor. By the way some of the measuring equipment they test is in your shop I am sure.
Take care,
Thor

PS; I canceled my book order!

[Aloicious]

If this guy is so famous , how come no one has ever heard of him ?

I knew about Greg's work before I started tuning, he's more well known in the ford circles as (unless I'm mistaken) thats where he got his start and really made a name for himself before really branching out to GM and others. I've got several poor misguided ford friends so thats where I originally heard about him. he's good at explaining tuning principles easily. I agree that his DVD is priced on the high side. but if you think about the work and experience he has to put in it, I don't think its unreasonable.
FYI here is his website for his tuning/teaching business:
http://www.calibratedsuccess.com/

one of my favorite quotes comes out early on in the book
Suck,Crush, Bang, Blow.. which sounds alot like many internet message boards....but it's good stuff!

I forgot about that mnemonic device he used. it never really stuck with me though because I have a background in chemistry and have been working on engines since I was 5 so the proper intake, compression, power, and exhaust terms are more descriptive to me.

Lots of Trolls around lately

Don't know what you are inferring by that, but Greg is certainly not a troll. I could call you an uninformed, uneducated dope, but I won't go to that extent.

Can't we all just get along?
and why is everyone arguing over widebands? I dont think either of you are wrong. IMO, first off the LC-1 is NOT the most accurate WB out there by any means. and I would not want a shop to use one as its commercial tuning device. however a commercial shop also shouldn't be really using a NGK if absolute accuracy is desired either. IMO they should just invest in a commercial grade high quality sensor to begin with like an AFM1000 or something. however for a person who simply tunes their own vehicle the LC1 is a good tool. LOTS of quality tunes have used the LC1, saying that some other WB happens to be a little more accurate doesn't discredit the LC1. and its a hell of a lot better than trying to tune with narrowbands only.

[Aloicious]

I agree,

Lets go back to the begging of this post. This is what eficalibrator said.
"After lots and lots of prodding, I finally caved and made a training DVD for the GM crew." Think about that statement, I did and I call BS.

Exactly who at GM would ask this guy for a beginners guide to tuning.
NO ONE!!!! I personally spoke to GM and they are trying to stop this kind of thing as it costs them a small fortune and that is a direct quote from GM.

...

On a wide band 0-1V with the medium being stoich .5

I don't believe he was saying he made the DVD for GM employees. he's a Ford tuner, he's saying he made the GM tuning DVD for GM enthusiests like us. he could have said the "GM posse" "GM tuning folks" "GM Gangstas", or whatever, It was just a figure of speech.

and BTW, widebands don't run off 0-1v they run off 0-5v. narrowbands use 0-1v.

[RWTD]

I agree,

Lets go back to the begging of this post. This is what eficalibrator said.
"After lots and lots of prodding, I finally caved and made a training DVD for the GM crew." Think about that statement, I did and I call BS.

Exactly who at GM would ask this guy for a beginners guide to tuning.
NO ONE!!!! I personally spoke to GM and they are trying to stop this kind of thing as it costs them a small fortune and that is a direct quote from GM.

Ole 98 tigershark, you know damn good and well you haven't spoken to anyone at GM.

My response;
Hello Greg,

I just ordered your book and I am looking forward to reading it very much. The information I put together was from SAE. The laboratory I mentioned is the gold standard for testing period!!. The issue of static charge is real and even effects the fuel system. The materials only a few years back that were thought to reduced the SE build ups or discharges have been found to be worse in many cases. Such as the use of polymers in the fuel lines and to date this Electro Static charge and discharge is an issue that the SEA has not taken on at this point in regards to the use of WBO2 sensors. The problem is real and in some cases can make any WBO2 off by as much as 10-15% according to some members of the SEA. The UL laboratory is not an interested party and the gentlemen I mentioned is an enthusiast an indisputable expert and a family member. ESC and ESD does interfere with WBO2's but to what extent and when is the only question. Polymers, ceramics and metals all store ES charges simply by the movement of any charged particles. On a wide band 0-1V with the medium being stoich .5 is affected by electrostatic charge from the movement of particles in the exhaust, to the extent that this would effect any sensor in its self or readings from any sensor in that system. It is already somewhat based on charge anyway. My friend is a top researcher for electronic measuring devices and also an enthusiast. Since we are looking for the medium of ESC/ESD and how it effects measurements (WBO2 sensors in this case) we can find which sensor is the most consistent to this naturally occurring event in any exhaust system and the sensors involved). It is a fact that the SAE is aware of this as many other industries use the laboratory mentioned to find ways to deal with this as they cannot accurately measure because of ESC/ESD. Until a gold standard for testing is established you do not know what you are claiming is true. My friend and family member is an expert in this field so that is no PT Barnum impersonation (that is very rude Greg!). He is a member of our family and an expert far and above what any WBO2 sensor assembler has in its service. I had thought you were seeking the truth and you insult a very respected expert in this field and a family member and his laboratory that almost every electronic manufacture respects and uses. He says this is a fact and he does this type of testing for a living. The info is from an expert and enthusiast and someone who really knows. I had thought that since you and I are sticklers for the truth and accuracy in measurement that you would have jumped on this opportunity to find the best device and the most accurate WBO2 sensor. By the way some of the measuring equipment they test is in your shop I am sure.
Take care,
Thor

PS; I canceled my book order!

You just made that shit up! Geezus Christ!

Hey newb, care to explain your blatant plagiarism and made up BULLSHIT that I called you out on? You can't, can you? You're a false prophet of your own cult.

You claim you're some marketing genius in your emails, but you're nothing more than a CON ARTIST and an attention whore!

P.s. It's SAE, not SEA, and it's NGK, not NKG.

[98 tigershark]

A Beer summit is in order here. But how can we test for the best beer?
By drinking allot of them. So a beer summit is in order.
98 tigershark

[RWTD]

No, I'm not letting you off that easy. Until you admit what you did, I'm going to continue calling you out, so EVERYONE can see you're nothing more than a fake and a "wanna-be" plagiariser.

Again, based on your post #72 of this thread (and don't try to delete it, as I have it copied to a notepad):

98 tigershark, that article you referenced from here...

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...charge-in.html

As I said before, that article talks about nothing in regards to widebands and exhaust systems. It's merely a "safety" article in regards to using plastics inside of the fuel delivery system. All manufacturers conform to ESD testing standards for their fueling systems. Regardless, the ESD (electrostatic discharge) issue that the manufacturers resolve is during the flow of fuel from the tank to the injector. After that, it's in the cylinder, and all you get is combustion.


Furthermore, I figured out that you made up some crap! You literally took that real article I linked above and raped it like newbs do to their tunes, in an attempt to make you look like some marketing genius! Everyone, look at what he stated, and then look at what the real article said:

A quote from from the hacked up article posted above:

The flow of gases in automotive exhaust systems creates a static charge. While this is not a problem if the charge dissipates as it forms, it can become a serious problem if the electrostatic potential builds to the point were it interferes with sensors. Several trends in automobile exhaust systems have heightened the potential for charge buildup.
This change increased the volume of gases or exhaust through the exhaust
pipes, increasing charge accumulation. Charge accumulation may increase in the exhaust system as fuel pressure is boosted to aid fuel injection. In addition, some oxygenates blended into fuels can increase static charge as they flow through the exhaust system

Quote from the "real" article, titled "Seeking neutral: controlling charge in auto fuel systems.":

The flow of fuel in automotive fuel systems creates a static charge. While this is not a problem if the charge dissipates as it forms, it can become a serious problem if the electrostatic potential builds to the point where arcing occurs. Repeated arcing can pierce a hole through a plastic fuel-system component, which will cause fuel or vapors to escape. During refueling, even a single electrostatic discharge can cause a thermal event.

Several trends in automobile fuel systems have heightened the potential for charge buildup. One is the growing use of plastics, which has generally been a boon to the industry. As insulators, however, plastics heighten electrostatic issues. Another is the shift to fuel injection, which prompted designers to move the fuel pump from near the engine to the fuel tank. This change increased the volume of fuel through the fuel lines, increasing charge accumulation. Charge accumulation may increase in the future as fuel pressure is boosted to aid fuel injection. In addition, some oxygenates blended into fuels can increase static charge as they flow through the system.

Not only just that part, but you took the ENTIRE real article and added and deleted to it in multiple other areas with blatant bullshit! This is about as bad as plagiarism gets, and all for the sake of your attempt to make yourself look brilliant.

Here's more:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

Test for Electrostatic Charge to determine the best WBO2 sensor should includes test methods for measuring the electrostatic characteristics of materials, components, and assemblies to ensure they will not cause electrostatic charges.

Quote from the "real" article:

All plastic elements that carry fuel--filler necks, fuel modules, filter, lines, fuel rails, onboard vapor recovery refueling systems and more (Table 1)--receive close scrutiny regarding electrostatic charge. The industry's fuel-system ESD standard, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J1645, "Fuel System--Electrostatic Charge," includes test methods for measuring the electrostatic characteristics of materials, components, and assemblies to ensure they will not cause electrostatic hazards in vehicles

And again:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

Uneven dispersion can make also make conductivity spotty and render a part nonconductive. Exhaust and sensor designers should use uniform wall thicknesses and generous fillets and corner radii to keep material flowing freely and to prevent a filler or fiber from concentrating in parts and on sensor geometries.

Quote from the "real" article:

Uneven dispersion can make conductivity spotty and render a part nonconductive. Designers use uniform wall thicknesses and generous fillets and corner radii to keep material flowing freely and to prevent a filler or fiber from concentrating in part geometries such as comers.

Yet more:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

The tester must evaluate components to ensure to classify the electrostatic-dissipation characteristics of materials.
The ESD Association classifies material having a resistance below 104 Ohms as conductive, between 104 and 1011 Ohms as static-dissipative, and above 1011 as insulating. Unfilled plastics are usually insulators. Although these classifications were developed primarily for static-safe packaging materials, they are also referenced throughout the static-control industry.

Quote from the "real" article:

Resistance is used to classify the electrostatic-dissipation characteristics of materials. The ESD Association classifies material having a resistance below 104 Ohms as conductive, between 104 and 1011 Ohms as static-dissipative, and above 1011 as insulating. Unfilled plastics are usually insulators. Although these classifications were developed primarily for static-safe packaging materials, they are also referenced throughout the static-control industry.

And finally:

Volume resistivity (in Ohm-cm) is the measured resistance times the area of the measuring
electrode Resistance and static-dissipation measurements should be performed using surface contacting electrodes that simulate real-world surface contact. Standard test probes- pinpoint probes that come with digital multimeters or alligator clips—should not be used. The former lack sufficient contact area, while the latter make random point surface contact and could also punch through the surface and contact the conductive parts. Silver-paint electrodes should also be avoided. They can give false low resistance
readings because the paint makes total surface contact and can penetrate the surface layer to make contact with the conductive additive, neither of which occurs under normal conditions.

Quote from the "real" article:

Conductive polymers are defined by their volume resistivity, as opposed to surface resistivity, because current flows through them and not just along the surface. Volume resistivity (in Ohm-cm) is the measured resistance times the area of the measuring electrode or material surface, whichever is smaller, divided by sample thickness. The resistance of loaded thermoplastics is nonlinear and is a function of the test voltage applied.

Resistance and static-dissipation measurements should be performed using surface-contacting electrodes that simulate real-world surface contact. Standard test probes--pinpoint probes that come with digital multimeters or alligator clips should not be used. The former lack sufficient contact area, while the latter make random point surface contact and could also punch through the surface and contact the conductive filler or fiber. Silver-paint electrodes should also be avoided. They can give false low-resistance readings because the paint makes total surface contact and can penetrate the surface layer to make contact with the conductive additive, neither of which occurs under normal conditions.

Again, 98 tigershark, please explain yourself!