The Truth About Natural Power - A Look At What Makes Power and How Much

    Quote from FunCycle

    Kyle D is there such a thing as a learning curve when a change is made? Like with Bob's tune, he said something like run the Sling 50 miles before really pushing it. Well I was going to do that and the rains came after about 5 miles. The next day was the day that I stayed on @rabtech's ass all day long. So it relearned the curve but it was wide open, petal to the metal so to say.

    If we are talking in regards to a tune, from what I have seen in this platform, no. Once you make a change in the tune, that's it. The change is made and you've "altered the brain" of the SS and it will now function according to the new parameters that you've set. It does not work in the sense that you upload a new parameter and the PCM has to slowly learn it. It has no ability of A.I. (artificial intelligence)


    When we flash a PCM for our turbo kit, IF Bob's statement were true, surely when you add boost to something that was not boosted previously, you can assume that there are a good deal of changes to that tune file. But we don't have to go out and let the PCM "learn" the new tune. When I take a SS out for the first time, I do take it easy and listen and monitor for KR. If all seems well at 1/4 throttle, I do a 1/2 and 3/4 throttle pull watching for KR. If all is good I do a full pull. We do this because you never know what fuel someone puts in their SS or where they got it from. I made a joke in a different post about people telling us they have 93 octane octane but we take the car out and its got KR through the roof and is running like its on 87. You go back and ask and they say oh yeah I use 87 or I got it from Jimmy discount shit gas station. This seriously happens ALL the TIME and we have to pump the tank and put in good fuel and like magic, all the KR goes away. Once I have verified that there is no KR I take it for a "spirited" run through our proving grounds..............in "Mexico" and make sure everything is happy and playing nicely together and make any adjustments to the tune at that point if necessary. Every engine runs a little different.


    However, in some platforms like the Cadillac ATS for example, we have a larger throttle body mod for that. It does NOT require updating the tune, but the PCM does have to relearn the throttle body position sensor since the new TB has a larger flap and opens at a different rate. But that happens automatically with a few key cycles. The car however runs no differently during that time.


    It's also similar to our turbo kit. You get your PCM back and typically you have a check engine light because the MAP sensor was unplugged but that goes away after you drive it a little bit.


    So yes there are some instances where there are things that the PCM will "relearn" something but if we are talking about the tune itself, no.


    My apologies for my long winded answer.

    ZZPerformance EST 2000 - Go Fast Not Broke

    Thanks, I was just trying to figure out the why Bob said this. Oh! and by the way I am NA

    Quote from SlingLow

    Good eye MiM ! I missed that completely. I wonder who that is.


    I have official scientific engineering documents showing that my luggage racks add 18 horsepower to an N/A Slingshot. Apparently Kyle D missed that comparison so y'all can take my word for it.

    It is all about down-force!

    The more people I meet

    The more I love my Dog!

    Well the results are in. I started off doing another base line pull with the existing setup of the ZZP intake and exhaust package with the stock tune. Because the Slingshot was removed from the dyno after the initial testing, it was a new day with new temps and barometric readings, and was strapped down again, there’s no way the readings would be identical to before. Doing a NEW baseline insures accurate comparisons.


    We adjusted and tested everything we could. We added and removed ignition timing, played with cam timing, added and removed fuel, and what we ended up with was 2whp and 7ft-lbs tq above the stock tune. So all in all, including the mods and tuning, we picked up 8whp and 16ft-lbs tq over the bone stock base line pull. What I did notice when I drove it afterwards was an increase in throttle response, a broader power band, and better mid range. With our extensive back ground in the Ecotec market and having been tuning this engine for over a decade, we knew we were not going to make much of power increase. Tunes (when done safely) on this engine just do not produce dramatic results in NA trim. To make any type of large gains in power in a cost-effective manor, you have to add boost in one form or another.


    There is a tune out there that claims “gains of 11 rhp and 18 ft/lbs of torque on just the tune alone, with no other mods.” which is fairly close to where we came in at. BUT, that was with ALL the bolt ons available which is line with the gains we were getting when we were adding one mod at a time. The tune also claims, “If you pair the ECM tune with other engine mods such as Exhaust, Headers and a Cold Air Intake... this reflash can gain you up to 30 rwhp”. This is simply not true… at all. I do not know about you guys but that sounds a lot like the 1320 exhaust package that claims gains of 18hp with just swapping those parts in……..misinformation. I’ll be releasing the tune on its own soon, which will be very competitively priced, along with our Stage 1 NA Package which will include the Intake, Exhaust Package, and Tune.


    ZZPerformance EST 2000 - Go Fast Not Broke

    Hey Kyle D Thanks for all the work. Having real honest numbers is awesome. I do have a question if you don't mind. how strict are the fuel requirements with this tune. Is this something that requires 93 octane? I ask because here in California the best I could reliably get is 91. Also if it is safe with 91 could I expect the power gains to be the same or would they be lower?


    Thanks


    Ed

    Cage Free - 2016 Pearl Red SL

    DDM Short Shifter, Sway Bar Mounts Coolant tank Master Cylinder Brace & CAI

    Twist Dynamics Sway Bar, JRI GT Coilovers, Assault Hood Vent

    OEM Double Bubble windshields & various other goodies

    Quote from edwardaneal

    Hey Kyle D Thanks for all the work. Having real honest numbers is awesome. I do have a question if you don't mind. how strict are the fuel requirements with this tune. Is this something that requires 93 octane? I ask because here in California the best I could reliably get is 91. Also if it is safe with 91 could I expect the power gains to be the same or would they be lower?


    Thanks


    Ed

    This was done on 93. To answer your question definitively, it would really need to be done on a dyno. In reality, this was still at a fairly conservative level and i would not be surprised if it also ran well on 91. We were not at the knock limit of 93 with the final tune, and additional timing was not making significant changes signifying it was at/near MBT. That leads me to the conclusion that similar gains are probable on 91. It's still way better than 87. But, like I said, this would need to be verified on a dyno.
    In reality, I would advise you to stay on the stock tune with 91 and put the money towards boost ;)

    Thanks Al :thumbsup:

    Cage Free - 2016 Pearl Red SL

    DDM Short Shifter, Sway Bar Mounts Coolant tank Master Cylinder Brace & CAI

    Twist Dynamics Sway Bar, JRI GT Coilovers, Assault Hood Vent

    OEM Double Bubble windshields & various other goodies

    Quote from ARM

    This was done on 93. To answer your question definitively, it would really need to be done on a dyno. In reality, this was still at a fairly conservative level and i would not be surprised if it also ran well on 91. We were not at the knock limit of 93 with the final tune, and additional timing was not making significant changes signifying it was at/near MBT. That leads me to the conclusion that similar gains are probable on 91. It's still way better than 87. But, like I said, this would need to be verified on a dyno.
    In reality, I would advise you to stay on the stock tune with 91 and put the money towards boost ;)

    I had not realized that you guys were using 93 for the tune, in my opinion that is/was a mistake, you should have used 91 since that is what is available for most people, most of us staying NA do so for the simplicity vs turbo/SC "kinks".

    Also here you guys say that someone using 91 should skip the tune, so is it safe to assume that you guys are not expecting the tune to be an improvement over stock when using 91?

    The reason I ask is because we have "real world" proof that there is a big difference of a slingshot with a stock tune and one with Bob's tune and it doesn't require 93, again I am not talking about HP or wHP but improved driving response which is what most of us NA people care for.

    Also I don't mean any offence but it's rather annoying to hear the "save your money for boost" comment on a dedicated NA thread, although thank you for being honest and saying it so we can figure out ahead of time if this tune is something that will do what we have come to expect from seeing people with "the other" tune.

    Is not that I am mean, I just don't sugarcoat what I say.

    did you miss the wink face at the end of Al's post

    Cage Free - 2016 Pearl Red SL

    DDM Short Shifter, Sway Bar Mounts Coolant tank Master Cylinder Brace & CAI

    Twist Dynamics Sway Bar, JRI GT Coilovers, Assault Hood Vent

    OEM Double Bubble windshields & various other goodies

    I run 91- 93 non ethanol in everything even the lawn mower. Also in the wife's 4 cylinder Chev. Equinox you would be surprised at how much better and smoother it runs with the 93 in it. But she buys the cheapest shit she can find in it, just as long as it will run.

    Neosolidus I,m going to let kyle answer for himself when he is available, but for myself , I,m quite happy with him verifying with real world dyno comparisons verses claims and I think you are both in agreement although Kyle is substantiating his claims with dyno runs . I did read where he said '' What I did notice when I drove it afterwards was an increase in throttle response, a broader power band, and better mid range. " sounds to me to be a pretty agreeable finding amongst most professional tuners ,


    Please be patient and give him time to respond before you start putting words in his mouth "Also here you guys say that someone using 91 should skip the tune," Kyle did not say that , Kyle is a very very dedicated Slingshot enthusiast who has delivered far more accomplishments with a Slingshot in a short period of time then most. Arm may very well be a highly skilled guy and I don't doubt for a minute he is, but he is not the Slingshot rep from ZZP, he made a joke about his preference for turbocharging as a car guy and even indicated that with the wink, but only after he very professionally, clearly stated " To answer your question definitively, it would really need to be done on a dyno. In reality, this was still at a fairly conservative level and i would not be surprised if it also ran well on 91. We were not at the knock limit of 93 with the final tune, and additional timing was not making significant changes signifying it was at/near MBT. That leads me to the conclusion that similar gains are probable on 91. It's still way better than 87. But, like I said, this would need to be verified on a dyno.''


    so Neosolidus forgive me if I'm a little confused as to how you come up with ''Also here you guys say that someone using 91 should skip the tune," Please let Kyle speak for himself before you start putting words in his mouth . Arm clearly concluded with, ''That leads me to the conclusion that similar gains are probable on 91''   




    Read the bolded text that is in my quote.......never said Kyle said it, it was his coworker.

    Is not that I am mean, I just don't sugarcoat what I say.

    Neosolidus I think it,s the difference between optimism and pessimism for a particular product from a particular party, I read, increase in throttle response, a broader power band, and better mid range. " and his coworker said,That leads me to the conclusion that similar gains are probable on 91.


    You read, Also here you guys say that someone using 91 should skip the tune,


    We,re all entitled to our own analysis and opinions.


    My Hat goes off to ZZP for their work, integrity and results. And I welcome the competitive spirit that brings the largest industry leader in performance mods, and biggest and world record setting builds in the automotive Ecotech arena, to bring that expertise to the Slingshot arena.


    In the short time that ZZP has been here, given the results they have accomplished already in the Slingshot Arena, has me beaming with pride and optimism , lets wait and see what price plan Kyle has in mind for the N/A crowd and tunes.


    I for one trust their expertise will deliver every bit, as capable and well performing tune as ODB's and my faith in our Capitalism , free market system, will see the price of tunes becoming much more affordable for the N/A crowd .


    THANK YOU ZZP

    Couldn't say it better! So glad Kyle is doing everything possible to get accurate, scientific data, and being transparent about his methods (and their limitations.)


    Kyle is doing things right, and I think we all owe him a big "Thank you!" -- at least that will have to do until he's near enough to invite him over for tacos and beer!

    The smarter you get, the funnier I am.