ZyroXZ2
Stinger Enthusiast
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- 356
- Points
- 68
I normally don't spend time to write reviews for vendors since I usually don't have to, but I think JB4 folks will get a kick out of this win for them. This is a bit of read, but some of you know I'm quite detail oriented.
As some of you know, I have been trying to hunt for what's causing 3* of KR in what seems to be random cylinders on my WMI map. Normally, especially in boosted applications, I expect 1-2* of KR at MOST in optimal conditions. Many cars from the factory err on the safe side and will even see 3-4* of KR. Aftermarket tuning or even piggybacks can usually refine maps enough to bring KR levels down (or reduce sensitivity) and power levels up: that's kind of the point, right? So I began the process of troubleshooting this, and shot some logs over to LAP3 for some advice in regards to my setup (nozzle, mix, etc.). Before I even continue, I want to note that their followup is pretty poor, and I often have to email again or even a few more times to get a response. Not really a good impression for the most expensive piggyback on the market. But anyway...
The first thing they told me was that it's the fuel that has also caused other folks problems, and to throw some E85 in the tank. I did just that: I filled up with 4.5 gallons of E85. It seemed to run a little worse, but logs showed identical KR and nearly identical values across the board. So I went back to them with that. During the time I was waiting, I decided I'd order a set of M45iL spark plugs to see if maybe, just maybe, it was the spark plugs causing detonation from hotspotting or something. My gut says that seems unlikely when WMI and E85 are both cooling the combustion, but you know, troubleshooting...
The second thing after eventually getting their attention again was to have me do a custom user map because the user maps actually have overall less aggressive timing (non adjustable). We ended up pulling boost until KR did get reduced, but so did power. While timing started to advance on its own in light of less KR, because the boost was reduced, the overall power was down. I told them this can't be right, as I was now running less boost than my old GT and running slower by a significant margin! My spark plugs arrived in the meantime, so I let them know I'm installing M45iLs. I gapped them and took some logs after installing them, and of course, identical 3* of KR on the WMI map. Still no difference, and at this point, I began to point the finger at them because my gut and oldschool tuning experience were telling me this is clearly a tuning issue despite my lack of experience tuning anything newer than 10+ years ago.
So now they had me do an ECU reset, stating that the ECU may have learned some bad behaviors and was repeating these. I pushed back a little mentioning that KR is a response, not a learned behavior. But since they're the "experts", I did what they asked anyway and disconnected the battery. Once reconnected, the ECU clearly was in learning mode, and guess what: NO KR! The car even pulled nice and strong AND had more timing than pre-reset logs had. I was both elated and also a little irritated that I had already spent time and money only to find that they were right (after all) on something so elementary!... ... That is, until I drove enough miles for the ECU to learn, and they were wrong. That's because, voila, the KR came back in IDENTICAL form to pre-reset ECU. So of course, I took logs and emailed them in disappointment, reiterating that this has clearly got to be a tuning issue to have come back once the ECU learned its maps.
This is when it gets irritating for me as someone who works on cars and knows there's a process to follow. They then figure they need to pull timing, and said I could send my piggyback in and get a timing-reduced map. I immediately pushed back: I clarified that after the ECU reset, there is MORE timing and NO KR in the logs compared to pre-reset. That pulling timing is clearly not the answer. My logs were all providing supportive data to everything I had been telling them. They did eventually respond in regards to different WMI mixes, particularly 70%, and using an even higher flowing nozzle on 100% as a possibility. What already irked me was that their response was based around a 70% mix which is in contrast to their own installation manual AND their previous suggestion on my old GT that I do 80% mix. It didn't seem like they wanted to address the issue at all, and this was the third time it was a dismissive response that finally indicated to me they were not really analyzing my logs very closely and just throwing shit to do my way in hopes that they'd "solve" it.
I then ordered another nozzle of the same brand (to reduce the variables in spray patterns, mist atomization, different "flow" rates, etc.) that was higher flow rate as they indicated because I am STILL kindly having faith that THEY are the experts on the Stinger and tuning, not me. This is when all of this time and back and forth and stuff proved to me that they may not be quite as knowledgeable as they need to be to handle customers. With a higher flow rate nozzle, I saw EVEN MORE KR!!! This immediately laid out what the problem was: rich KR. I kindly emailed them my logs, now speaking to THEM dismissively about their terrible post-sales support, and that it really should have been them who read my emails, looked at my logs, and immediately told me "if you're running 80%, we've recently found 70% to run better and 80% may be running too rich". I went through all this to basically do the research FOR them when all it turned out to be was running too much methanol in the mix which came from their instructions and recommendations to begin with. I am the customer, not the tuner: it should not be me trying to figure out what runs best; it's them with testing equipment and knowledge that should be telling me what runs best.
I email twice again, this final time letting them know I'm truly disappointed that they wasted nearly a month of my time (and money) by not actually knowing how to read the logs and figure out what's going on. It's clear that the person helping me has little tuning and mechanic experience working on cars, and yet I trusted that they did only to just end up learning it myself and testing things out until I figured it out. For being the most expensive piggyback on the market, they sure as hell don't know how to spend time taking care of their customers. I also indicated I hope they fix this tuning issue because clearly whatever values are spoofing are causing an incorrect learning pattern in the ECU making it SLOWER once the ECU learns the maps. That's obviously the reverse of how it should be: open loop usually runs worse until the car learns what it needs to and then goes into closed loop.
Having said that, now that I know what the problem is, I am working on how to best solve it. They responded again, and NOW recognize from me telling them that it's a fueling issue having provided proof in the logs and all, and NOW tell me that a higher rate nozzle and higher mix would result in more KR (yes, they told me AFTER all this that the suggestion to go with a higher rate nozzle would result in more KR... WAY TO LISTEN TO MY CONCERNS!!!). I nearly threw my phone because this whole time I was trying to reduce KR, and then they go and tell me that it runs better on a higher flow nozzle with higher mix... and once presented that I have more KR, then tell me that running a higher flow nozzle with a higher mix would cause more KR. I mean, what the f*ck?! Their response was also to use the user map to adjust fuel bias, though I've already pushed back again and reminded them that the user map has less aggressive timing, so I don't see how we're going to fine tune it without full control over the necessary parameters to match the WMI map.
So yea, I am currently working on it, though, and had I known I'd be guinea pigging this shit, I might have reconsidered purchasing it. Though, I recognize the Stinger market is small, so each vendor is actually a bit too self-righteous in the absence of a quantity of competitors. Nevertheless, it sucks to be a "tester" and be treated like I just need to do stuff rather than trying to look at the logs and figure out what's going on in the first place. Terrible experience for what is supposedly a "premium" product.
As some of you know, I have been trying to hunt for what's causing 3* of KR in what seems to be random cylinders on my WMI map. Normally, especially in boosted applications, I expect 1-2* of KR at MOST in optimal conditions. Many cars from the factory err on the safe side and will even see 3-4* of KR. Aftermarket tuning or even piggybacks can usually refine maps enough to bring KR levels down (or reduce sensitivity) and power levels up: that's kind of the point, right? So I began the process of troubleshooting this, and shot some logs over to LAP3 for some advice in regards to my setup (nozzle, mix, etc.). Before I even continue, I want to note that their followup is pretty poor, and I often have to email again or even a few more times to get a response. Not really a good impression for the most expensive piggyback on the market. But anyway...
The first thing they told me was that it's the fuel that has also caused other folks problems, and to throw some E85 in the tank. I did just that: I filled up with 4.5 gallons of E85. It seemed to run a little worse, but logs showed identical KR and nearly identical values across the board. So I went back to them with that. During the time I was waiting, I decided I'd order a set of M45iL spark plugs to see if maybe, just maybe, it was the spark plugs causing detonation from hotspotting or something. My gut says that seems unlikely when WMI and E85 are both cooling the combustion, but you know, troubleshooting...
The second thing after eventually getting their attention again was to have me do a custom user map because the user maps actually have overall less aggressive timing (non adjustable). We ended up pulling boost until KR did get reduced, but so did power. While timing started to advance on its own in light of less KR, because the boost was reduced, the overall power was down. I told them this can't be right, as I was now running less boost than my old GT and running slower by a significant margin! My spark plugs arrived in the meantime, so I let them know I'm installing M45iLs. I gapped them and took some logs after installing them, and of course, identical 3* of KR on the WMI map. Still no difference, and at this point, I began to point the finger at them because my gut and oldschool tuning experience were telling me this is clearly a tuning issue despite my lack of experience tuning anything newer than 10+ years ago.
So now they had me do an ECU reset, stating that the ECU may have learned some bad behaviors and was repeating these. I pushed back a little mentioning that KR is a response, not a learned behavior. But since they're the "experts", I did what they asked anyway and disconnected the battery. Once reconnected, the ECU clearly was in learning mode, and guess what: NO KR! The car even pulled nice and strong AND had more timing than pre-reset logs had. I was both elated and also a little irritated that I had already spent time and money only to find that they were right (after all) on something so elementary!... ... That is, until I drove enough miles for the ECU to learn, and they were wrong. That's because, voila, the KR came back in IDENTICAL form to pre-reset ECU. So of course, I took logs and emailed them in disappointment, reiterating that this has clearly got to be a tuning issue to have come back once the ECU learned its maps.
This is when it gets irritating for me as someone who works on cars and knows there's a process to follow. They then figure they need to pull timing, and said I could send my piggyback in and get a timing-reduced map. I immediately pushed back: I clarified that after the ECU reset, there is MORE timing and NO KR in the logs compared to pre-reset. That pulling timing is clearly not the answer. My logs were all providing supportive data to everything I had been telling them. They did eventually respond in regards to different WMI mixes, particularly 70%, and using an even higher flowing nozzle on 100% as a possibility. What already irked me was that their response was based around a 70% mix which is in contrast to their own installation manual AND their previous suggestion on my old GT that I do 80% mix. It didn't seem like they wanted to address the issue at all, and this was the third time it was a dismissive response that finally indicated to me they were not really analyzing my logs very closely and just throwing shit to do my way in hopes that they'd "solve" it.
I then ordered another nozzle of the same brand (to reduce the variables in spray patterns, mist atomization, different "flow" rates, etc.) that was higher flow rate as they indicated because I am STILL kindly having faith that THEY are the experts on the Stinger and tuning, not me. This is when all of this time and back and forth and stuff proved to me that they may not be quite as knowledgeable as they need to be to handle customers. With a higher flow rate nozzle, I saw EVEN MORE KR!!! This immediately laid out what the problem was: rich KR. I kindly emailed them my logs, now speaking to THEM dismissively about their terrible post-sales support, and that it really should have been them who read my emails, looked at my logs, and immediately told me "if you're running 80%, we've recently found 70% to run better and 80% may be running too rich". I went through all this to basically do the research FOR them when all it turned out to be was running too much methanol in the mix which came from their instructions and recommendations to begin with. I am the customer, not the tuner: it should not be me trying to figure out what runs best; it's them with testing equipment and knowledge that should be telling me what runs best.
I email twice again, this final time letting them know I'm truly disappointed that they wasted nearly a month of my time (and money) by not actually knowing how to read the logs and figure out what's going on. It's clear that the person helping me has little tuning and mechanic experience working on cars, and yet I trusted that they did only to just end up learning it myself and testing things out until I figured it out. For being the most expensive piggyback on the market, they sure as hell don't know how to spend time taking care of their customers. I also indicated I hope they fix this tuning issue because clearly whatever values are spoofing are causing an incorrect learning pattern in the ECU making it SLOWER once the ECU learns the maps. That's obviously the reverse of how it should be: open loop usually runs worse until the car learns what it needs to and then goes into closed loop.
Having said that, now that I know what the problem is, I am working on how to best solve it. They responded again, and NOW recognize from me telling them that it's a fueling issue having provided proof in the logs and all, and NOW tell me that a higher rate nozzle and higher mix would result in more KR (yes, they told me AFTER all this that the suggestion to go with a higher rate nozzle would result in more KR... WAY TO LISTEN TO MY CONCERNS!!!). I nearly threw my phone because this whole time I was trying to reduce KR, and then they go and tell me that it runs better on a higher flow nozzle with higher mix... and once presented that I have more KR, then tell me that running a higher flow nozzle with a higher mix would cause more KR. I mean, what the f*ck?! Their response was also to use the user map to adjust fuel bias, though I've already pushed back again and reminded them that the user map has less aggressive timing, so I don't see how we're going to fine tune it without full control over the necessary parameters to match the WMI map.
So yea, I am currently working on it, though, and had I known I'd be guinea pigging this shit, I might have reconsidered purchasing it. Though, I recognize the Stinger market is small, so each vendor is actually a bit too self-righteous in the absence of a quantity of competitors. Nevertheless, it sucks to be a "tester" and be treated like I just need to do stuff rather than trying to look at the logs and figure out what's going on in the first place. Terrible experience for what is supposedly a "premium" product.
