What if SME-DVD-3 came out in a few weeks and it covered Ford tuning the same way that the previous two DVDs covered GM tuning?
Are you smart enough to translate from brand X to HPT software if the task of drive by wire tuning is properly shown?
What if SME-DVD-3 came out in a few weeks and it covered Ford tuning the same way that the previous two DVDs covered GM tuning?
Are you smart enough to translate from brand X to HPT software if the task of drive by wire tuning is properly shown?
When's it due out Greg?? Any previews of the ford side of things??
04 Velocity MKII M6 & 06 BF F6 555 ZF6
Looking forward to this one! I can't rewind the advanced class. Are you going to cover effective area and monoblade throttle bodies too, or just open loop feed forward throttle angle?
How about VCT?
As of the last round of editing, run time for the video is around 2hrs 20 min. That's about all that physically fits on the DVD. Even with that relatively long time, I can still only get into open loop feed forward for ETC tuning. I touch on throttle area, but the example used was a stock throttle body with a supercharger. Obviously, if you change the throttle body, one would expect a change in the throttle area calibration table. There is a short section on VCT toward the end.
Any chance your Ford tuning DVD will cover Australian Ford tuning? Our cars don't have MAF sensors. Ours are speed density, but don't use the standard style table, we have a complex algorithm and i'd like to learn more about it.Originally Posted by eficalibrator
What if SME-DVD-3 came out in a few weeks and it covered Ford tuning the same way that the previous two DVDs covered GM tuning?
Are you smart enough to translate from brand X to HPT software if the task of drive by wire tuning is properly shown?
cheers, Matt.
I saw Greg teach that to an Australian tuner at the advanced ford class. I seriously doubt that will be on the dvd though. The trick was to find the maf/map slope as I recall.
Last edited by pontisteve; 10-26-2011 at 10:49 AM.
+1
04 Velocity MKII M6 & 06 BF F6 555 ZF6
As mentioned above, the Australian Fords would require their own DVD since the base airflow calculation is fundamentally different. The Ford DVD is already riding the time limit for available space on the DVD, and there's LOTS more I could potentially add. I'm trying to hit the items that most people have trouble with, but there's always going to be something(s) that just can't make the cut for the video.
Now you're on to a marketing and business discuss, Steve. While I welcome it,this thread probably isn't the place. For now, I'm just trying to pack as much content into affordable training sessions as possible that still appeal to a mass market and have the potential to sell a significant volume that justifies the (expensive) production costs.
OK.
legally no, they don't. and i am sure their EULA has a disclaimer clause that protects them from precisely that.SCT has a legal and a moral responsibility to protect others from your ignorance to the complexity of the system.
but if they were legally responsible for someone causing harm through the (mis)use of their product, having previously sent that someone to some ad-hoc self-designated class wouldn't absolve them of it whatsoever. neither the product nor the class are sanctioned by the manufacturer whose VCMs they hacked nor any govt agency.
you may think the case is special, but SCT is not. as HPT develops more ford tuning capability, i doubt they will follow suite. and it's not bc they are less moral. or clueless to their legal exposure. i think it's hard to sustain the argument that SCT's policy is driven either by legal or altruistic considerations. generally, whenever there is a profit incentive, that's usually where the motivation lies. it's a business.
that's an ill-posed question. it is not a mutually exclusive "or" since you are saying that the ability to modify a tune is precisely what may affect someone's life in this case. which may be so. but it doesn't invalidate anything i said. nowhere am i arguing that this particular class (or another) has no potential benefit. i am arguing against the way the class is being bundled with SCT tuning software product.Whats more important, your ability to modify a tune, or somebody's life?
Truth be told, legality is never a constant anyway. It's always up for re-negotiation in every lawsuit. From SCT's standpoint, they can always say they had safeguards in place and that they tried.
That self proclaimed expert you talked about is Greg. He taught the class, and has the degrees in mechanical engineering, plus the experience of having worked at Ford as a calibrator to back that up. So as professional tuners, we can say we tried.
What can hpt say?
i am sure they have a legal disclaimer in their EULA. if not, "we tried" wouldn't help them much if there is legal exposure. the activity (SCT hacking ford ECUs and the EU editing them with SCT's product) is unsanctioned by ford or any agency that matters to begin with, and neither is SCT's class.
i don't know why you choose to use the term self-proclaimed. anyway, it was mentioned who is teaching it, i am following. he has a good reputation and the class has potential to be useful. and if SCT wants to OFFER the class, i think it's a good idea. but i disapprove of the tactic of making it mandatory to pay for additional services to access features of their product that has been paid for.That self proclaimed expert you talked about is Greg.
and not every single person whom they force to take the class can't do without it. nor does every person know what he should after he takes it. it is a self-sanctioned self-regulated arbitrary process, they offer no exam to opt out, there are no exams to pass, no control mechanisms. i find it kind of funny actually. but this point is 2ndary.
they certainly have the right to bundle their product with any additional services/costs they like. i am just offering my opinions, i think most would agree though. you are apparently attempting to argue some different points.
you can say that. the class is not endorsed by ford nor any official entity, it is meaningless legally. and even more so to the end user than the software vendor. if damage or injury is actually attributable to changes made to the ECM by you the tuner tinkering with it, good luck using an SCT class as a defense.He taught the class, and has the degrees in mechanical engineering, plus the experience of having worked at Ford as a calibrator to back that up. So as professional tuners, we can say we tried.
so. i am saying that to SCT, the purpose of the class is neither to legally protect themselves (it offers no protection and they don't need it anyway), nor the end user (it offers no protection).
they can point to the EULA disclaimer. same as SCT...What can hpt say?
You're entitled to your opinion. I wasn't too keen on the idea of having to pay more to get access in the software either, at first. But if SCT wants to charge different amounts for different levels of access, that's up to them.
All I am saying is that I went thru the class, and have a different perspective after having been thru it. If you tinker with the wrong tables in those torque-based DBW calibrations, you can cause serious safety risks.
Reply With Quote