Nope, previous version was powerful to me, now "VE new" is missing. I found it to be very useful, removing them causes me lot of trouble when trying to verify map validity. In fact I do not know now an easy way to confirm that V-tune does the right adjustements.

I'm real, my bike is real, my new exhausts are real and the time spent using excel & matlab to find the "VE new" value from PW, desired AFR, intake temp. values and the like is also real. People in this forum telling that they miss something in the new version are, I suppose, also real.

Now, to confirm that VE and spark advance values are Ok I must take two runs. One with v-tune to confirm that the recomputed VE values are not much different that the original ones and one second run to see how knock retard behaves. With the "VE new" item I only need one run.

People in this forum saying that removing "VE new" was a good idea are ... well ... not-real (except if I have missed their posts).

You're right, I'm not open to changes, bad changes.

 

So how does VE new solve your comment? The value displayed is incorrect most of the time so that's why it was removed. So please tell me how that helps make sure the values in the VE table are correct by using an incorrect value. The point you seem to miss is the reported information was and is incorrect. To try and verfy against bad data gets you more bad data. V-tune is the tool used so only the correct data is used to generate VE tables. I tried over and over again to tell people VE new is not what needs to be used for that. Just because a few of you still believe that VE new is the end all be all does not make it so. If you are trying to use VE new your going to make change after change and never get a correct tune.

I understand people want to see what was there before but when it is bad information please explain to me how the data is useful. The same can be said for the Front/Rear AFR values. They mean nothing as the information is incorrect. Are you trying to use those as well?

We have add Spark data there as that is what was asked for by our customers. It's new for this version and was not in the tool before but you can still get at it in some of the other data stream as well.

Again present any real data to support what you assume to be going on and we will look into it, but saying you use incorrect data isn't a valid reason. Bad data is bad data and that is just why it was removed, to us that makes a product better not worse!

 

Steve, I posted earlier in this thread about checking my VE table work under load by looking at the amount of movement from VE to new VE and the o2 integrator movement. Thats the big thing I miss. And I was only using these tools as a final check. I can still hook up an old 4.77 dongle or SEST and use that if I want. The Vtune works so well that on the CVO 110 I just finished and checked this way showed my integrators running between 97-98 and 102 which equals very little movement between VE and New VE. That would indicate pretty accurrate VE tables. If everyone will just be patient and open minded, read the updates, and apply the knowledge contained within them, all will be fine. I would very much like to see that info reinstalled as an option though. I think most readers here are forgetting just how much information could be made available and how confused even experienced tuners would be if it were all to be made available. You and your team must make decisions on what the most important data items are for those of us in the field to access to in order to create consistent, accurrate, reliable tunes (maps).
You see guys, TTS is not deliberatly trying to make the product work less effectivley for end users. Just the opposite. As much as I want the New VE and integrator info back. This product is far easier to use and makes my life on the Dyno easier. In my opinion the Mastertune product has no equal in the "inside the ECM" tuners on the market.
Thanks
P.S. If it weren't for change, we would still be using horses and buggies.

 

Steve, your're not as fair as you pretend to be ...

Yes, your tool was and will still be a wonderful tool after the changes of have made ... but anyway, here are my answers ...

"Just saying it was there before isn't going to be good enough present a real case of what and why its needed and I will take that useful information and see about getting it brought into future releases just as we always have."
In my opinion, what is missing now (New VE and O2 Integrator) is something some of us were using to double check the results of Vtune, not more, not less ...
I was happy to see the O2 integrator value staying near 100 after a good tune ...

I once asked you about Front and Rear AFR and your answer to not take them in account was absolutely clear and understandable, so I did ...

"The new software allows you to set up the display with the items you want in the order you want."
As it was before ....(see picture enclosed)

"All the old files can be played back on the new software ..."
Yes but not the New VE and the O2 Integrator ...

"We offered and got less than a total responce of 20 people that showed any interest"
How could you have more answers when only that number of user is following this thread ?
(and this was posted on another thread ...)
Producing a simple DVD showing a tuning session wouldn't surely cost a lot and could be very appreciate, especially for people like me living outside the USA, and we surely are a little more than 20...

just my 2 cents ...

 

If your using the integrator values to see where they are sitting under light load steady state then and only then they could be useful. Again, you must understand that under load those are not alway correct due to the fact the ECM does not always update them. So those values can be misleading but at least they are closer to being real during closed loop operation only. If the motor goes in to any heat management control, torque control, PE, AE, DE those are not updated. So those value again mean nothing at those times and you now have more bad data.

I think people need to get use to the fact that V-tune really does do what it is supposed to do. If you want to check where your at it does it for you. The color code shows how much it is correcting each cell. If your corrections are less than 5% your done and there is no reason to do any other checking. At some point using the tools as designed and allowing them to do there job is something everyone needs to trust in. In the beginning we allowed the data out but the trouble it has caused just has not been worth it. If you trust the tools to do there job and do it correctly there is no need other than just to make you feel warm and happy all over again.

The Spark Data was added so you could collect just the data needed as fast as possible to help in the setting of the Spark tables. This was something asked for and we felt it could help so we added it. The other items that were rearranged to make the data more useful.

 

While you didn't ask, I'll toss in my 2 cents anyway.

I have quite a bit of experience building and facilitating technical training classes including T3 classes. It has been my experience that developing such training can be very time and resource consuming. And I also have some experience in video production...those types of materials can be even more difficult to effectively produce....assuming even a moderate level of professionalism (not to mention legal aspects) with the end product.

FWIW, I asked Doc (in Florida) months ago about the possibility of conducting a Tuning Class (on the TTS system) for those of us that weren't already trained tuners. Maybe a small, somewhat informal class and allow those attending a change to get some one-on-one instruction. It is the personal time spent with a competent instructor that I'm looking for.

But for those across the pond, I can see your point.

 

The tuning training be it a DVD or a class takes time for all involved. While we thought it might be a good idea the response was just not there. We have put the question out through other places just not here and like here we had very little response. Now as for making a DVD it's something we would have to pay someone else to do as we do not have the equipment or knowledge to do it and again with the little response it just doesn't make any sense to do. We will continue to add to the "Help" files as we hear of problems or we find a better way to explain something.

Now so far all I have seen is that you all are using VE new to check with and that is already done for you when using V-tune. Maybe I didn't understand you all or you did not understand what the colors in V-tune were all about but I think if you look it over you will find the real information is already being showen there. If you want the tune to be as close as possible get the backround colors in the cells with numbers to be white. That will mean the system has gotten within 2% of what it believes to be correct for the way you've set it up. Then there is no reason to event mess with VE new and intergrator and hope they are correct. So the information is there but it is just presented different than what you looked for. The major difference is when presented in V-tune you get only the real data with all the bad data stripped out.

 

Steve:

Again, with all due respect, I find it hard to understand the statement above:

When you initially made the statement:

Surely you can understand why, since we've trusted you from the beginning, we are now totally confused by your statement that this info is incorrect, not needed, etc.

A sample DR in Ver 1.2 shows us 38 Data Items in Main Data Display:



That same DR in Ver 1.3 yields a 21% reduction in Data Items available:



And you say that "none" of this info is of any true value to a user or Tuner?

I'm also curious as to why we have two (metric and USA) entries for VEHICLE SPEED, ENGINE TEMP, and INTAKE AIR TEMP?

Please don't shoot the messenger! IMO, everyone here is committed 110% to the TTS MasterTuner. We may not be accepting change as easily as you would prefer, but we've taken your original statements and "lived" by them; and comparing what you originally wanted us to use and now saying it's useless is just not your usual style.

Regards,

Ben

 

While I understand the confusion this is just why things were changed. I made the decision to show all of it and it was wrong on my part. I though that people would understand and it has turned out that was not the case. I've tried to explain things but it seems that we have to do it over and over everyday. So that told us we had to be doing it wrong. By letting people see the data, right or wrong they assumed it was alway one way or the other. When the truth is both were correct part of the time. So to remove the confusion a few items were dropped that cause 95% of the confusion.

Above you have compared "Electronic Throttle Data" to the full data set from before from what I see. As I stated we rearranged some of the items into a more user set of data.

When working with larger data sets the data comes across the buss slower so we took a look at what data should be in each set and moved things around. If your going to work on a none O2 bike you would now use the "Generic Data" set. Items that were not valid for this application were removed and place in the proper data stream. For a bike with O2 sensors use "Generic O2 Data" So what you see is less data that does not go with the bike your not working on.

Now you can arrange the screen and add or subtract from the default settings in each screen. The data for the most part is still all there just moved around. A complete new data stream was added with just Spark data to pickup the speed when recording spark related data. Understand the more we ask for the slower the data comes from the ECM. The ECM does not send it all at one time, it comes as chunks and we build a screen to show it. So as we ask for more and more the time between slows down. So what does this mean to you? It means that the time from when let say RPM is read in to the next time RPM is read in many thing may have changed but you would never see it. Now with the smaller data sets it comes in faster so you will not miss as much.

People were able to see that some of the data did not look correct and they were right, it was just too slow to update and the only way to speed it up is to ask for less total data. It's not a program issue or a PC issue it's a ECM issue that we cannot change. People with a full set of gauges could see things like the 6th gear light not working correctly, gauages that would read screwie once in awhile. All this while collecting data. The ECM just cannot keep up with all the task so it slows down. The newer DBW bike were the worst of the bunch.

The changes were made to speed up the data and get more of the real data to show. Yes, a few items that were and still are incorrect were dropped. The ones we seleceted to drop were ones that cause problems or were not being used. Others were moved into a different data stream. So it's a choice to speed things up and get the most valid data to the user or live with the slower data, there is no inbetween.

If you users can show me a valid reason for something to be there I'm all ears but so far no one has. Do you really ever need to see TPS in both % and voltage? For most the answer is no. Give the new stuff a chance and go use it and I believe you will see the differences in the amount of data recorded in the same amount of time has increased with the newer format.

Put a list of the data that really gets used together and why and let's discuss it. If we need to change we can. So far all I have seen is that people say the sky is falling and it's no good, the product will not do as good as before, Bait and Switch and I can no longer recommend the product because of the changes, and on and on and on. The truth is that it performs better than before and will do everything it did before only better. Yes, things have changed, and we believe for the better. New features were added that it could not event do in earlier versions!

 

I think I now see your reasoning a little clearer. All this info is competing for time on the J1850 serial data bus. The more we try to capture, the slower we aquire accurrate data. So if I hear you correctly, the disputed data items were not correct for several reasons with the main one being J1850 and data aquisition load factors. So you thinned out the least accurrate of these in order to provide the cleanest most pertinant data to accomplish the task at hand. The main reason for all confusion is once users get used to doing something a certain way and then something changes it throws a little curve ball. As for me, I'll continue reading, testing my theories on the dyno untill I'm happy and proceed as usual. I know your right, but I had to satisfy myself by double checking with 4.77 just to satisfy myself. And as I think you jokingly said got that warm fuzzy feeling when I got the expected result. Remember, as a tuner, I want my customers to feel good about my work and also about the TTS product. I detest the new SEST because the Moco and their engineers are totally unresponsive to any and all requests for some type of real time cell trace so I have all but stopped using SEST in favor of the TTS product. Of course we also do Powercommanders both PCIII usb and PCV as well as DTT and Zippers. Basically whatever comes through the door or a customer insists upon. I don't mean to keep repeating myself but Vtune works great. I did try to "street tune" one recently and I believe as you wants stated the Dyno did win the battle but by only 3-4hp. 4-5 ft lbs torque. To optimize a tune, a load control Dyno with a knowledgable operator will win every time.
If I'm off track on any of my statements hear please feel free to point them out. Knowledge is power.
Thanks