LZH

dude - your clutching at straws.....let it go already. If you don't agree, then just sit back and watch to see what the early adopters here have to say about MHP's tuning.

MHP

Any other questions?

MarkoCL65

At least my father's minivan isn't green!!!!

I Like Soup

I mean, really, that is pretty hughmorous! Nicely follows the "then why are you posting" bit.

EastCoastAMG

OK, here goes. My 07 E63 is up for your offer. PM me and let me know how we should work it. Want to come to Boston for the weekend? For everyone else, we will post the 7,000 rpm 1st to 2nd ASAP. Andy, let me know.

MHP

Call me (now is fine): 614 940 9523

or send me a PM with your # and I'll call you (please let me know when it's convenient to speak with you).

Thanks
Andy

Vic55

I am scared that if everyone followed suit ... id have to leave too

(I did own 2 55's back in the day)

Rock

Wow!! What an elitist. What's next? Will you now start calling us little men, idiots or maybe even wannabes because we fail to possess the latest and greatest automobiles?

I will now refer to you as VICcart in all future correspondence.

Vic55

This all from a man in search of a big package ...

Rock

I would respond if it wasn't for my moratorium on all homosexual references.

Vic55

Self Imposed Rock?? Not that there is anything wrong with that.

MHP

Going over the graphs,

Notice that we make 350rwtq+ from 3000-6400rpm

Renntech makes 350rwtq from 3500-6000rpm.


We make 400rwhp from 5450+

Renntech makes 400rwhp from 6000+.


We make 350rwhp from 4700rpm+

Renntech makes 350rw from 5000rpm+.


These are HUGE differences.

MHP

rpm v rpm



v Renntech (also notice how low their base numbers are compared to ours...)



I was watching the A/F meter during testing today and the operator didn't want to hit the limiter which is why we didn't pull quite as high. I'll make sure I do the testing myself next time.

chiromikey

get a clue...seriously. i'm accurate with my observations and my retort was right in line with his comment.

anyone that knows me, knows i've been trying to get tuners to work on our tq limiters for a while. i've even solicited most of the respected srt8 tuners over the past year. i've wanted this longer than anyone here and i'm pulling for this to happen more than anyone. just show me results without unsubstantiated "can do" claims. is that too much to ask for? and don't flame me for being honest about what i'm seeing. too many newbies around here don't know the history that some of us do about tuners blowing up motors with their special "our tune is better than theirs" ecu mapping. so forgive me for being the voice of reason.

forgive me for saying this but i know it's on many peoples' minds and i could care less about the flak i'll get...many new members have really run this place into the ground. to the point that it's worse than the m boards anymore. no wonder many respected senior members are starting their own forums. what i really find ironic is the fact that most of these new members are clk bs owners.

chiromikey

glad to see at least one other non-koolaid drinker around here.

Can Drive 55

Like everyone else, I am sitting back and waiting for some hard data comparison figures. But, in the meantime, I am wondering why all the tuners with years in the business have not been able to crack the forbidden torque limiting code and all of a sudden someone comes out of the clear blue sky and states that he is the only one in the world who can do it. This is begining to sound like presidential politics.

DFW01E55

That happens with all boards, change is inevitable and uninvited. I agree with you on the delivery versus promises, I'm not overwhelmed by what I see either.

But I'm okay with the idea that the tune evolves as it's tested and refined. I got the impression that some people expected it to be perfect on the first try.

JAYCL600

+1

ummm speaking of change when the heck did you get a CLKBS, damn talk about steppin it up, congrats bro!! Post some pics!

buckeyewalt

I guess you can call me a newbe on these boards here,,,,when I first came on here,, I noticed that this board was ruled the the "55" guys, and rightfully so, their cars were the beasts. Then came the "63" guys and I felt that we were kind of looked down on, from "no way can your cars can compete with us, too, not making the hp we can, etc, etc. Then Andy comes along and he ruffles some feathers from the "55" guys, with them claiming that he can't do that or show me, or what have you. I for one welcome his input here, and feel he is doing something that I found very lacking,,,,that being making us
"63" guys more competitive, and cars more driveable. Thanks Andy!!

evilb

Yes. Explain to me why I should be impressed at C63 tuning in the W211 E forum?

Show me E results, and show me baselines with torque figures. An improvement dyno graph means nothing without a complete baseline. On this same subject, as stated in your C63 thread, the baseline dyno pulls also have to be taken into consideration when comparing to competitors dynos. Someone mentioned that the Renntech car dyno'd lower than yours, which would account for the gains at higher RPM and negate much of an improvement as shown in your graphs. Although I haven't spent too much time comparing those graphs since they're in different gears.

Also, I think it's important for you to respond to the long-term reliability comment that has been brought to the forefront a few times in this thread. Do you think that the reason no other supplier has offered TCU tuning is due to reliability concerns?

You're obviously tuning your ECU's/TCU's for 1/4 mile performance. How is this going to effect daily drivability, if at all?

chiromikey

there was never a problem with the 63 guys. the problem was with mb/amg for a lateral shift instead of significantly improving on the older platform. also i don't think there's a problem with andy ruffling feathers. maybe with rare exception we all want what he claims to offer. the problem is with all the cronies mouthing off for no apparent reason.

LZH

No apparent reason ???
What, are you blind ?? You asked for dyno numbers, now you have them and you're still questioning....Andy's posted video's of his car pulling on a 55k that should have walked all over the C63. Other members have posted their first hand experience with Andy's car and validated its legitimacy. Perhaps you just don't want to believe what is right in front of you, or perhaps you're just too stupid to see it. Either way it makes no difference to me and you can follow suit with the other "senior" members and go start your own forum if you don't like the atmosphere here.

tuningtechnician

Well said.

I believe that there has to be a motive for the select few idiots that can't understand or want to understand that Andy is substantiating his boasts with all of the information that is being asked of him.

As I've said to Andy on the phone and here on the forum: DON'T lower yourself to these clowns and stop acknowledging these asinine nay sayers that will continue to complain about something no matter what Andy does.

chiromikey

chill on the roid rage arnold and don't take it out on the forum just because you can't get rid of your back acne and the puss stains on your favorite wife beater.

nice try but if you had a clue you'd know that i've never asked for dyno numbers... EVER! i don't give a rats *** about dyno numbers, especially numbers coming from a dynojet. the only numbers i've referred to were track numbers so if you want to discuss those then lets talk.

chiromikey

lol, clk bs groupie number 2 chimes in.

i've never attacked andy and, in fact through our pm's, he should know i'm hoping tcu tuning works out.