- Sep 19, 2006
- 169
To "Architect" and "DBK"...
Thanks for your posts on useage and advertisors/shops. I would also like to propose you require any shops/tuners/manufacturers posting performance gain claims for their products/services to provide substantiation for same. This means before and after dyno charts, as well as risk/durability factors associated with any re-tunes. Certainly stock baseline dyno data for torque/horsepower and A/F ratios are not asking for much when comparing to claimed improvements, particularly for the costs associated with most of the products. It seems to me, even as a new member (but physicist/mathematician and engineer, as well as former Can-Am and Trans-Am series racer...sorry, I age myself), the difference between "perception" and "content" is a service the forum can demand. For example, if a $2,000 cat-back pipe system is primarily just for sound modification purposes, the vendor should say so and not try to hype the unit as providing any significant horsepower gains. If a tune provided/offered with the pipe system provides the same, or nearly the same, performance benefit for a stock system without paying for the expensive pipes, that information should be stated.
The good folks on this forum deserve no less than the truth about all aspects of operating their vehicles. If they prefer perception over content, or if they want both, let each have available the appropriate information to make an informed judgement.
Thanks!
Thanks for your posts on useage and advertisors/shops. I would also like to propose you require any shops/tuners/manufacturers posting performance gain claims for their products/services to provide substantiation for same. This means before and after dyno charts, as well as risk/durability factors associated with any re-tunes. Certainly stock baseline dyno data for torque/horsepower and A/F ratios are not asking for much when comparing to claimed improvements, particularly for the costs associated with most of the products. It seems to me, even as a new member (but physicist/mathematician and engineer, as well as former Can-Am and Trans-Am series racer...sorry, I age myself), the difference between "perception" and "content" is a service the forum can demand. For example, if a $2,000 cat-back pipe system is primarily just for sound modification purposes, the vendor should say so and not try to hype the unit as providing any significant horsepower gains. If a tune provided/offered with the pipe system provides the same, or nearly the same, performance benefit for a stock system without paying for the expensive pipes, that information should be stated.
The good folks on this forum deserve no less than the truth about all aspects of operating their vehicles. If they prefer perception over content, or if they want both, let each have available the appropriate information to make an informed judgement.
Thanks!