typical I did attempt to reply to your private message, but you blocked me. YOU can suppress the truth on your forums. I will wage war on any source that you do not control. so thanks for your unwillingness to make this right. so delete that
Printable View
typical I did attempt to reply to your private message, but you blocked me. YOU can suppress the truth on your forums. I will wage war on any source that you do not control. so thanks for your unwillingness to make this right. so delete that
yes I get that but this all should have been disclosed before buying. these are questions that I asked specifically and have been fighting this for weeks and only today do they tell me this. ive been back and forth all day today with support only to be left high and dry. I have essentially spent money that could have just as easily went to the engine and then in the future after it sits on the stand for a year they may actually support the older vehicle. there has to be a way I have seen to many ppl with twin turbo or SC hemis it is important to keep the factory ecm because in Phx AZ we have emmisions and aftermarket ecms usually don't pass.
Probably not the computer failing emissions but the tuner trying to tune that computer with little to limited knowledge. Just a guess anyways. I don't think computers give a shit about emissions one way or the other. They do what they're told for the most part.
I dont know if this has been covered.... How do you purchase credits for the Benzos?
Just see the big 3 as options still
They are licensed with Dodge credits.
Surprised to see Mercedes support and more surprised it is for the 6.2 NA engine instead of the 5.4 supercharged M113 engine found in the E55 AMG, CLS55 AMG, etc. which I would say are far more sought after tuner cars so would think there is a bigger market.
is 06 dodge 1500 545rfe support coming along with 3.4?
Anyone got a stock C63 Merc tune I can download? curious for a look....TIA
Anybody runs 3.4 with windows 10?
Hey guys I had to restor my computer and need to now how to get HP Tuners back..
Cheers pointed me in the right direction, adjusted the axes to a standard setup. But I think this is a bug, shouldn't each tune have it's own axes information.......... instead of carrying it across to all tunes that you open?.....
As soon as I reset the axes all the other tunes worked properly.
Just wanted to add, in PHX for emissions on 96 and later years it doesn't matter how the engine runs, if there is no check engine light and the gas tank holds pressure it will pass emissions. They do hook up to the PCM through the obdII port to make sure the readiness tests are completed. (This applies to 1/2 ton and lighter vehicles)
Bosch production ECU's have only 1 CAN channel for communication 250kbit/s IIRC. A development Bosch ECU has two CAN Transceivers, the one standard channel that production ECU's use, and the second channel is a 1mbit/s that operates on a CCP or XCP protocol depending on the ECU. Etas Inca can talk directly with the high speed network creating a virtual calibration, hence allowing real time modifications. To enable real time tuning a new chip would need to be added to the ECU, and HPTuners would need to setup a new A2L file (or equivalent) to use the new hardware.
In the long run it is easier to do non-real time tuning, also more robust as the ECU wouldn't need to be opened and tampered with.
My graphs & charts appear to function well on windows 10 so far, havn't tuned with it yet though.
I've been tuning my PT7675 equipped 5.3 96 Z28 using the Wide band and Histograms for the past month. Sometimes, I play with the Real Time Tuning (RTT) from time to time and it's worked great with the 3.2.55. I loaded this new version yesterday and today, fired up RTT but it was showing values that are not in my VE table. Whereas my loaded tune starts with 32 in the 15 KPA/400RPM intersect, the RTT showed '5' there. And at the ldle intersect where my actual tune had 41 at 50kpa/800RPM, the RTT had 75. No value in the RTT reflected what was in my tune.
Anyone else seeing this?
Do I need to redefine my PID to correct this?
Just wondering if it's just me, but is anyone else having layout file loading problems? Am I suddenly doing something wrong? Just wondering because I went to open a gen 5 layout for the scanner today - it opened with all of my just previously used gen 4 graphs, but my gen 5 channels loaded fine - set all of my graphs back up used this morning for data logging and tuning - hooked up laptop and closed scanner while went to lunch - came back and opened the scanner - all of my gen 4 channels were back - had to reload the gen 5 channels a couple of times before they started working, but when I loaded the layout again it only loaded with a "partial" gen 5 layout - by partial I mean all of my map/baro axis were still in the correct decimal numbers or rather the line breakpoint designations, but it was back to using "map" instead of the map/baro parameter...
Anyone else having problems with multiple layouts or is it just me?