2020 Singer may have a new 3.3 ECU calibration file..

[Secondchance]

Not sure how boost and O2 spoofing could be impacted by a year to year change but the ECU tune certainly can and did.
Wasn't the Jb4 issue a voltage spike protection shut down that you now raised the threshold on? Or was it a bad batch of units?

Still patiently waiting for the day you wake up and realize that the guy who owns TORK is still the same POS he was years ago when he had dozens of people on the MSforums defending him and believing his shit right up until he was fully outed for who he is. Had I known the comedic value of the threads back then I would have screenshotted them all. Hindsight...

Real talk though, your "tune" is a step below what a conventional "piggy back" system provides. How you haven't clued into this yet is beyond me. Whathisface that owns TORK is NOT, i repeat NOT some genius wizard with a capacity to crack multiple layers of security on the ECU. Companies known for doing so on various platforms ( like COBB for instance ) have openly stated they have interest in trying to do so because of how complex it is, and they are what we refer to as professionals. One back yard dingaling like the guy who runs Tork isn't about to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Terry@BMS]

Not sure how boost and O2 spoofing could be impacted by a year to year change but the ECU tune certainly can and did.
Wasn't the Jb4 issue a voltage spike protection shut down that you now raised the threshold on? Or was it a bad batch of units?

Someone here mistakenly changed a burn time setting when we updated production firmware from v11 -> v12 to be 10x more sensitive. Took a couple weeks to realize what happened as most cars didn't have any issues with it, but some randomly did. There was never a correlation to model years though.

 

[Toddasaurus]

Edit: Nevermind.

 

[Tonkabob]

Still patiently waiting for the day you wake up and realize that the guy who owns TORK is still the same POS he was years ago when he had dozens of people on the MSforums defending him and believing his shit right up until he was fully outed for who he is. Had I known the comedic value of the threads back then I would have screenshotted them all. Hindsight...

Real talk though, your "tune" is a step below what a conventional "piggy back" system provides. How you haven't clued into this yet is beyond me. Whathisface that owns TORK is NOT, i repeat NOT some genius wizard with a capacity to crack multiple layers of security on the ECU. Companies known for doing so on various platforms ( like COBB for instance ) have openly stated they have interest in trying to do so because of how complex it is, and they are what we refer to as professionals. One back yard dingaling like the guy who runs Tork isn't about to reinvent the wheel.

Well I had a Race Chip on the Stinger and still have a jb4 on my Stinger along with the ECU tune so have a pretty good sense of what each provides. (Jb4 for WMI and logging only currently) The ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption and every thing to do with ECU definitions, making sense of it all. Tork has acquired the full A2L files recently so the tune will just get better from here. You do know on Dragy I am about .2 faster than the fastest piggies in the 1/4 mile as well as 0-60 with out using break snip. So by "a step below" I'm not really sure what that is referring to.
Also at least 2 of the top piggy back times are anxiously awaiting their Tork Stage 2 tune pre order.

 

[patrickm500]

OK so as I am the OP for this unintentionally "controversial" thread here are a couple of updates to the original issue. Here's your TL;DR

Terry was spot on with diagnosing the JB4 issue as a bad eeprom chip. From my initial perspective, plugging up the defective JB4 (even on map 1) would make the car fall on its face. I Had Densos installed to spec by the dealership and also installed the BMS CAI.
Re-plugged the JB4..Same Result. Next Tapped the O2 Sensors...Same Result.

Decide to contact a different vendor hoping for better results.I parked the car and sidelined it for an 'expected' 24-48 hour turnaround time frame to fix this issue. Send the ECU to John for 'bench tune'. After many unanswered emails and voicemails I FINALLY get a replacement ECU 8 DAYS after they received my ECU. At this point I finally have a vehicle again. Over a week without a car is a bitch. To their credit, They provided me the replacement ECU at not cost..8 days with my car sidelined, however.

I contact Terry at this point and have a few discussions with him based on what I'm seeing on the forums. Terry calls the issue correctly as I mentioned above. Within 3 days of contacting support I have a replacement chip in hand. Install chip and everything is right in the world.. Progressively went thru maps 1-3 with ZERO issues. My next step is to an E85 station to fill up with E30 and run map 5 because nothing is ever enough..

Currently the car will burn the tires WOT even on a rolling start @ 10-12mph. (FYI its RWD) Makes me wish I had not been a cheap bastard and bought the AWD version, like my previous Audi RS4 that I spent twice as much on, which incidentally couldn't break the tires even from a standstill dumping the clutch at high RPM. I want to say it had ~315 ft.lbs torque for that engine. Contrast that with the Stinger in its current tune on map 3 that's probably 500+ ft.lbs of torque..


Still haven't heard back on my 'bench tune' from John. Emailed them over a week ago asking for an update and no reply so far.. This has been typical of communication with them.

There you have it.

Regards,

Pat

 

[Toddasaurus]

OK so as I am the OP for this unintentionally "controversial" thread here are a couple of updates to the original issue. Here's your TL;DR

Terry was spot on with diagnosing the JB4 issue as a bad eeprom chip. From my initial perspective, plugging up the defective JB4 (even on map 1) would make the car fall on its face. I Had Densos installed to spec by the dealership and also installed the BMS CAI.
Re-plugged the JB4..Same Result. Next Tapped the O2 Sensors...Same Result.

Decide to contact a different vendor hoping for better results.I parked the car and sidelined it for an 'expected' 24-48 hour turnaround time frame to fix this issue. Send the ECU to John for 'bench tune'. After many unanswered emails and voicemails I FINALLY get a replacement ECU 8 DAYS after they received my ECU. At this point I finally have a vehicle again. Over a week without a car is a bitch. To their credit, They provided me the replacement ECU at not cost..8 days with my car sidelined, however.

I contact Terry at this point and have a few discussions with him based on what I'm seeing on the forums. Terry calls the issue correctly as I mentioned above. Within 3 days of contacting support I have a replacement chip in hand. Install chip and everything is right in the world.. Progressively went thru maps 1-3 with ZERO issues. My next step is to an E85 station to fill up with E30 and run map 5 because nothing is ever enough..

Currently the car will burn the tires WOT even on a rolling start @ 10-12mph. (FYI its RWD) Makes me wish I had not been a cheap bastard and bought the AWD version, like my previous Audi RS4 that I spent twice as much on, which incidentally couldn't break the tires even from a standstill dumping the clutch at high RPM. I want to say it had ~315 ft.lbs torque for that engine. Contrast that with the Stinger in its current tune on map 3 that's probably 500+ ft.lbs of torque..


Still haven't heard back on my 'bench tune' from John. Emailed them over a week ago asking for an update and no reply so far.. This has been typical of communication with them.

There you have it.

Regards,

Pat

I've found it's quicker to get a response from Tork if you just call them. They seem pretty busy all the time.

 

[turboAWD]

I've found it's quicker to get a response from Tork if you just call them. They seem pretty busy all the time.

I think the quickest way to get a response from Tork is to claim BMS has a new feature they don't..

 

[Terry@BMS]

Lol!

 

[Secondchance]

Well I had a Race Chip on the Stinger and still have a jb4 on my Stinger along with the ECU tune so have a pretty good sense of what each provides. (Jb4 for WMI and logging only currently) The ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption and every thing to do with ECU definitions, making sense of it all. Tork has acquired the full A2L files recently so the tune will just get better from here. You do know on Dragy I am about .2 faster than the fastest piggies in the 1/4 mile as well as 0-60 with out using break snip. So by "a step below" I'm not really sure what that is referring to.
Also at least 2 of the top piggy back times are anxiously awaiting their Tork Stage 2 tune pre order.

A ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption? Are you drunk ?! The encryption on the ECU itself, which needs to be cracked in order to access and modify the necessary tables has everything to do with a tune. The functionality, viability, reliability and necessity of said tune all directly relate to the accessibility of the tables in the ECU. Tork has precisely 0% additional access to the tables than anyone else throwing the ECU on the bench and jumper cable tuning it has. The limitations of his "tune" make any claims you or the other 7 dwarfs that make up his internet posse nothing more than a continuation of the hilarious albeit sad mythological history of Tork.

The fact you openly refer to it as a tune is embarrassing, and not only does it do a disservice to the definition of the word tune, but it also strongly suggests just how green and misinformed you are in the tuner landscape as a whole. Other evidence of such would be you admitting you owned a Racechip, that you have "Momo" wheels on a vehicle in 2020, and that I can basically guarantee that your "custom cat back" is crushed pipe and not mandrel bent.

Whats the stage 2 jumper cable tune have that stage 1 doesn't? Is he going to amplify the maf signal we don't have by 4% to run a richer mixture only to suggest the lower gas mileage equates more power (logically of course) ?

 

[Sales@Tork]

OK so as I am the OP for this unintentionally "controversial" thread here are a couple of updates to the original issue. Here's your TL;DR

Terry was spot on with diagnosing the JB4 issue as a bad eeprom chip. From my initial perspective, plugging up the defective JB4 (even on map 1) would make the car fall on its face. I Had Densos installed to spec by the dealership and also installed the BMS CAI.
Re-plugged the JB4..Same Result. Next Tapped the O2 Sensors...Same Result.

Decide to contact a different vendor hoping for better results.I parked the car and sidelined it for an 'expected' 24-48 hour turnaround time frame to fix this issue. Send the ECU to John for 'bench tune'. After many unanswered emails and voicemails I FINALLY get a replacement ECU 8 DAYS after they received my ECU. At this point I finally have a vehicle again. Over a week without a car is a bitch. To their credit, They provided me the replacement ECU at not cost..8 days with my car sidelined, however.

I contact Terry at this point and have a few discussions with him based on what I'm seeing on the forums. Terry calls the issue correctly as I mentioned above. Within 3 days of contacting support I have a replacement chip in hand. Install chip and everything is right in the world.. Progressively went thru maps 1-3 with ZERO issues. My next step is to an E85 station to fill up with E30 and run map 5 because nothing is ever enough..

Currently the car will burn the tires WOT even on a rolling start @ 10-12mph. (FYI its RWD) Makes me wish I had not been a cheap bastard and bought the AWD version, like my previous Audi RS4 that I spent twice as much on, which incidentally couldn't break the tires even from a standstill dumping the clutch at high RPM. I want to say it had ~315 ft.lbs torque for that engine. Contrast that with the Stinger in its current tune on map 3 that's probably 500+ ft.lbs of torque..


Still haven't heard back on my 'bench tune' from John. Emailed them over a week ago asking for an update and no reply so far.. This has been typical of communication with them.

There you have it.

Regards,

Pat

You have your OEM ECU we did not keep your OEM ECU we stated we would send you the tune on a spare ECU when finished. What email are you sending emails to and under what name? Because we have numerous name for you in our system you are on here as a Pat yet filled out your tuning paperwork under a john? So that may be a reason on why your having issues getting a response. You can also reach out to us on any of our social media platforms i.e Facebook or Instagram or even message us on here. You are also more then willing to call the shop during business hours as well.

 

[Terry@BMS]

A ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption? Are you drunk ?! The encryption on the ECU itself, which needs to be cracked in order to access and modify the necessary tables has everything to do with a tune.

The post is hilarious but let's go easier on Tim. I've spoken with him a few times via email and seems reasonable and always down for dragy testing. His problem is he hitched on to John's cart before he knew it was heading to crazy town and now is sort of trapped for the duration of the ride. Tim just blink twice quickly if you ever need us to extract you.

 

[Sales@Tork]

A ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption? Are you drunk ?! The encryption on the ECU itself, which needs to be cracked in order to access and modify the necessary tables has everything to do with a tune. The functionality, viability, reliability and necessity of said tune all directly relate to the accessibility of the tables in the ECU. Tork has precisely 0% additional access to the tables than anyone else throwing the ECU on the bench and jumper cable tuning it has. The limitations of his "tune" make any claims you or the other 7 dwarfs that make up his internet posse nothing more than a continuation of the hilarious albeit sad mythological history of Tork.

The fact you openly refer to it as a tune is embarrassing, and not only does it do a disservice to the definition of the word tune, but it also strongly suggests just how green and misinformed you are in the tuner landscape as a whole. Other evidence of such would be you admitting you owned a Racechip, that you have "Momo" wheels on a vehicle in 2020, and that I can basically guarantee that your "custom cat back" is crushed pipe and not mandrel bent.

Whats the stage 2 jumper cable tune have that stage 1 doesn't? Is he going to amplify the maf signal we don't have by 4% to run a richer mixture only to suggest the lower gas mileage equates more power (logically of course) ?

Encryption has NOTHING to do with the tune, it is written on a completely different protocol. Who else has mapped the ECU? Who has an A2L file? If we arent doing anything special then why are we the fastest with less mods on the car? If our Tune is garbage again why are we faster? Doesnt add up

 

[Tonkabob]

A ECU tune has nothing to do with encryption? Are you drunk ?! The encryption on the ECU itself, which needs to be cracked in order to access and modify the necessary tables has everything to do with a tune. The functionality, viability, reliability and necessity of said tune all directly relate to the accessibility of the tables in the ECU. Tork has precisely 0% additional access to the tables than anyone else throwing the ECU on the bench and jumper cable tuning it has. The limitations of his "tune" make any claims you or the other 7 dwarfs that make up his internet posse nothing more than a continuation of the hilarious albeit sad mythological history of Tork.

The fact you openly refer to it as a tune is embarrassing, and not only does it do a disservice to the definition of the word tune, but it also strongly suggests just how green and misinformed you are in the tuner landscape as a whole. Other evidence of such would be you admitting you owned a Racechip, that you have "Momo" wheels on a vehicle in 2020, and that I can basically guarantee that your "custom cat back" is crushed pipe and not mandrel bent.

Whats the stage 2 jumper cable tune have that stage 1 doesn't? Is he going to amplify the maf signal we don't have by 4% to run a richer mixture only to suggest the lower gas mileage equates more power (logically of course) ?

Every tuner has access to all the tables, the encryption is not an issue. You can modify any table you want but most have no idea what the shit is.
Sorry but you obviously know nothing.

 

[Sime]

Glad I’m staying stock.

 

[Tonkabob]

Glad I’m staying stock.

Go ride in a well tuned Stinger and you will change your mind.

 

[Sime]

Go ride in a well tuned Stinger and you will change your mind.

Fat chance of the possibility of that where I live.