whata-gramps-
read that document CAREFULLY! i took a quick look at it- i am a professional engineer, so allegedly i understand and grind numbers for a living.
whomever reduced the data and made those pretty charts is not someone who regularly deals with gathering and interpreting data. sure the graphs are pretty, but they really don't show you much. the X-Y plots don't reveal too much.
their conclusions though, are somewhat conclusive with the data.
"All of the tuners and modules produced more power and torque than the stock engine as measured on the DynoJet
....
The conclusions drawn for torque are the same as those for HP"
yeah, we pretty much expected that. and notice that the well known 'better' tuners did a better job realizing their 'performance' gains. their analysis about which tuner gained 50/75/100 HP over stock at whatever RPM is interesting- but i am not sure it means anything in the real world.
i would ignore the percentage comparisons between brands. the references are worthless.
i was also surprised why some of the other reputable tunes were left out- tony's and jody's. i should reread it....
i think there are other parameters that would be important to consider against all this data: boost, EGT and some index to compare fuel consumption/HP or consumption/RPM (think amount of smoke generated. Why? Are they getting their HP/TQ by overfuelling or by optimizing the engine's performance?)
i commend them on their initiative and efforts but i would not consider their data to be reliable and use it to make an informed purchase decision.
dennis
