Eurocharged E85 Tuning!
#26
Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!
Last edited by MBHR; 04-29-2020 at 12:20 AM.
#27
I see you have listed 680-720awhp for a M157 but what are the torque numbers? I was told the new E85 Flex tune is set at around 640awtq. Can you confirm this? I am running a 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) and have a current stage 2 tune from AMR that is said to yield 600awhp with 743awtq. AMR has provided me a handheld with both 93 and race gas 100 which they say will yield and additional 35awhp. I was very much so interested in your tune for obvious reasons but was concerned that the excessive drop in torque could impact things overall. From my understanding, this particular tune is said to level the RPM ranges for both torque and hp whereas most other tuners have the torque spiking up quickly then dropping down like a bad habit. Do you have any M157 dyno sheets or data you can share on this E85 tune?
I loaded the tune I got my dragy and I went out testing my best 60-130mph was 7.27secs I never got many 1/4miles because I had terrible tyres and couldn't hook. I'm also RWD. Since getting better tyres I've got my 0-60 down to 3.53secs in a Rwd car on the street which is pretty impressive.
#28
Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!
Mine is a stock car with nothing other than the Eurocharged tune, the 725ps/983nm equates to 714rwhp/725ftlbs
#29
Thanks for responding Sebastian, but My question was concerning the AWD model which I believe you reported you do not have. Don't you have the RWD model in France or am I mistaking you for someone else??? If so, than much is lost in both HP/TQ from one AWD modele to the RWD model. I was asking for better clarification. Thanks for you input.
Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (AWD-M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (AWD-M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Last edited by MBHR; 04-29-2020 at 08:43 AM.
#30
Thanks for responding, but My question was specifically concerning the AWD model which I believe you reported you do not have. Don't you have the RWD model in France or am I mistaking you for someone else??? If so, than much is lost in both HP/TQ from one AWD modele to the RWD model. I was asking for better clarification. Thanks for you input.
"Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!"
"Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.
Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!"
mods are: EC flex fuel tune, UPD intake spacers and filters, resonator delete. All else is stock.
.
Last edited by BCP; 04-29-2020 at 08:43 AM.
#32
The dyno sheet Im showing is for my car.
I believe Sebastian's car had stock DPs on the dyno as they were changed later.
Last edited by BCP; 04-29-2020 at 08:55 AM.
#33
Thanks again for responding! I am not sure why you would have a dyno on this tune if you were unsure of proper ethenol levels as that seems counter intuitive to me but to each there own reasons. I do wish you had confirmed this, because your data is very close to the tune I currently have through AMR with race gas.
Again, thanks for your help in responding to this.
Again, thanks for your help in responding to this.
#34
Thanks again for responding! I am not sure why you would have a dyno on this tune if you were unsure of proper ethenol levels as that seems counter intuitive to me but to each there own reasons. I do wish you had confirmed this, because your data is very close to the tune I currently have through AMR with race gas.
Again, thanks for your help in responding to this.
Again, thanks for your help in responding to this.
#35
Thanks again for providing better insight, but I noticed you are stating E50 blend. EC is advertising the straight E85 tune and stating the numbers to be 680-720awhp and 740wtq. I saw the original post from Brutus_TX on all this and he too was using the E50 blend reporting phenomenal numbers but said to me in a private message that they would be scaled down on the E85 tune. I might have misinterpreted what he was saying, but thought that was what he was conveying to me?!?!
Your numbers seem decent no doubt! I was seeking clarification on specific model E63 S-AMG AWD M157 which you seem to have, yet you are conveying the same E50 blend tune not the straight E85 unless I am mistaking here from what you wrote. Moreover, Sebastain_Bird is reporting his is the straight E85 tune but he has RWD.
I not trying to beat this to death, but wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting $2700 since I already have a tune that is coming in with pretty much the same numbers as your current dyno shown above this post. Obviously, if I could get a significant bump in HP with comparable TQ being leveled off throughout the RPM range, I would want to try it out especially since what we are talking about is from a completely stock car...discounting your UPD spacers, etc.
Again, I really appreciate the responses from everyone.
Your numbers seem decent no doubt! I was seeking clarification on specific model E63 S-AMG AWD M157 which you seem to have, yet you are conveying the same E50 blend tune not the straight E85 unless I am mistaking here from what you wrote. Moreover, Sebastain_Bird is reporting his is the straight E85 tune but he has RWD.
I not trying to beat this to death, but wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting $2700 since I already have a tune that is coming in with pretty much the same numbers as your current dyno shown above this post. Obviously, if I could get a significant bump in HP with comparable TQ being leveled off throughout the RPM range, I would want to try it out especially since what we are talking about is from a completely stock car...discounting your UPD spacers, etc.
Again, I really appreciate the responses from everyone.
#36
Thanks again for providing better insight, but I noticed you are stating E50 blend. EC is advertising the straight E85 tune and stating the numbers to be 680-720awhp and 740wtq. I saw the original post from Brutus_TX on all this and he too was using the E50 blend reporting phenomenal numbers but said to me in a private message that they would be scaled down on the E85 tune. I might have misinterpreted what he was saying, but thought that was what he was conveying to me?!?!
Your numbers seem decent no doubt! I was seeking clarification on specific model E63 S-AMG AWD M157 which you seem to have, yet you are conveying the same E50 blend tune not the straight E85 unless I am mistaking here from what you wrote. Moreover, Sebastain_Bird is reporting his is the straight E85 tune but he has RWD.
I not trying to beat this to death, but wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting $2700 since I already have a tune that is coming in with pretty much the same numbers as your current dyno shown above this post. Obviously, if I could get a significant bump in HP with comparable TQ being leveled off throughout the RPM range, I would want to try it out especially since what we are talking about is from a completely stock car...discounting your UPD spacers, etc.
Again, I really appreciate the responses from everyone.
Your numbers seem decent no doubt! I was seeking clarification on specific model E63 S-AMG AWD M157 which you seem to have, yet you are conveying the same E50 blend tune not the straight E85 unless I am mistaking here from what you wrote. Moreover, Sebastain_Bird is reporting his is the straight E85 tune but he has RWD.
I not trying to beat this to death, but wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting $2700 since I already have a tune that is coming in with pretty much the same numbers as your current dyno shown above this post. Obviously, if I could get a significant bump in HP with comparable TQ being leveled off throughout the RPM range, I would want to try it out especially since what we are talking about is from a completely stock car...discounting your UPD spacers, etc.
Again, I really appreciate the responses from everyone.
As previously stated, i was told the tune in the original post is a revised version of the tune im running, which is the same tune as Brutus_TX; Sebastian is running full E85 and his car is RWD.
I'm.not sure about your area, but I cant get 100 octane race gas from an ordinary filling station. Being able to run a E85 (or a blend in my case), which is available at many filling stations, and not having to switch tunes to do it and enjoy the extra power is quite a value, IMO. I have no doubt the tune in the first post performs as stated. Best of luck, whichever path you choose to take.
#37
#38
So no, there is not a need to switch tunes with the EC tune.
Last edited by BCP; 04-29-2020 at 11:26 AM.
#39
BCP, again thanks for all your input on this!! I would agree, the benefits to the particular E85 tune are such that the car can maintain emissions compliance and having the ECU capable of detecting fuel types i.e., 91/93 octane as well E85 without having to whip out the handheld and switch between the two.
I am still considering it, but wish you had the newer straight E85 tune and or comparable fuel ratios to support the overall claims of EC on the particular 2014 E63s M157 AWD . Yes, I know you said you have an updated version of the tune, but also said you were unsure of fuel ratios during your posted dyon test. Again my current 93 tune with spacers and mid pipes and plugs (only mods) is reporting an average of 600awhp and with 100 race gas mapping it is around 640awhp give or take. For me the 40awhp gain you are reporting without having to switch between mappings might not be worth it to me for the $$$, but the EC claims of a gains around of 80-120awhp from my current 93 tune of 600awhp would be well worth the money! ...Obvious reasons why I was going back and forth on this thread trying to get someone to show their dyno results from a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG M157 AWD car on the EC E85 tune. *On a side note, I find it a bit silly that most of the companies selling their tunes rarely show dyno results for the particular products they are selling. Since most of them do in-house dyno's, you'd think the results should be readily available to share or post to all for a decent number of various cars.
I will say this though, I do feel this tune is a value to anyone considering any tune on the market, because no other tune (stage 1) is even reporting 641awhp (see your dyno test) or even 680-720awhp for the same price point, let alone on a stock car!! I certainly feel EC is more than a reputable tuner as they carry thousands of tunes under their belt. Moreover, I have only heard great things about the owner "Jerry" there; his reputation speaks for its self!!
I am still considering it, but wish you had the newer straight E85 tune and or comparable fuel ratios to support the overall claims of EC on the particular 2014 E63s M157 AWD . Yes, I know you said you have an updated version of the tune, but also said you were unsure of fuel ratios during your posted dyon test. Again my current 93 tune with spacers and mid pipes and plugs (only mods) is reporting an average of 600awhp and with 100 race gas mapping it is around 640awhp give or take. For me the 40awhp gain you are reporting without having to switch between mappings might not be worth it to me for the $$$, but the EC claims of a gains around of 80-120awhp from my current 93 tune of 600awhp would be well worth the money! ...Obvious reasons why I was going back and forth on this thread trying to get someone to show their dyno results from a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG M157 AWD car on the EC E85 tune. *On a side note, I find it a bit silly that most of the companies selling their tunes rarely show dyno results for the particular products they are selling. Since most of them do in-house dyno's, you'd think the results should be readily available to share or post to all for a decent number of various cars.
I will say this though, I do feel this tune is a value to anyone considering any tune on the market, because no other tune (stage 1) is even reporting 641awhp (see your dyno test) or even 680-720awhp for the same price point, let alone on a stock car!! I certainly feel EC is more than a reputable tuner as they carry thousands of tunes under their belt. Moreover, I have only heard great things about the owner "Jerry" there; his reputation speaks for its self!!
The following users liked this post:
Siegmann (04-30-2020)
#40
The dyno sheet loungn14 posted are from an awd car; most, if not all, who are running the EC flex fuel tune are in that range. My ‘14 model with awd made 641awhp and 731 awtq on a dynojet; while I’m not sure if the lower numbers are a result of poor airflow on the dyno or less ethanol in the fuel, the dragy times are right there with the others running it. Best so far is 11.01@129 on an unprepped surface.
mods are: EC flex fuel tune, UPD intake spacers and filters, resonator delete. All else is stock.
.
mods are: EC flex fuel tune, UPD intake spacers and filters, resonator delete. All else is stock.
.
Dyno's are notoriously variable.
Here's my dyno... 680/780... why the difference? variations in dynos and temperature, etc. Mods are STOCK
The important thing is the trap speed we are seeing with this tune.
There is another member, Marine_1, running the same tune as well as myself and BCP... he is also stock. I leave it to him to post a dyno if he has one.
When you compare all three of our cars draggy times you would be hard pressed to determine which is which. All three are running the almost exact same 1/4 mile times... 11.0/10.9 @ 129/130.
The thing to remember here is, regardless of claimed horsepower numbers and associated time slips, no other tuner is approaching these numbers.
Instead of listening to your tuners claim about getting this amount of horsepower or torque blah blah, ask them what your expected trap will be in the quarter... if they state anything over 125 mph I would ask to see hard evidence.
The onus of these power claims does not reside with EC or the guys running the tunes. We've been nothing but transparent in all our postings. The onus sits with all the other tuners spouting "our tunes make the same power, same torque etc."
When those tunes start posting 129/130 mph traps and 11 second FLAT times on a stock platform, then I'll say they are comparable. I haven't seen anything out in the market nearly as competitive... and that's for all of them.
/end rant
At the end of the day... choose your team and run with it. We have nothing to prove from our end...
#41
Are you serious??!! Go back and re-read my postings as I know who is reporting what from their data! I was only seeking apples to apples data and nothing more!! When it comes to focusing on numbers, I take all the numbers in to consideration prior to shelling out thousands of dollars and yes, trap speeds as well regardless of their variations and such!! Go back and re-read what I have stated and you will find your particular post here is irrelevant!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS The variations would also include AWD vs RWD which you have; we know power loss is greater through the AWD!
PSS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS The variations would also include AWD vs RWD which you have; we know power loss is greater through the AWD!
PSS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
Last edited by MBHR; 04-29-2020 at 12:34 PM.
#42
Are you serious??!! Go back and re-read my postings as I know who is reporting what from their data! I was only seeking apples to apples data and nothing more!! When it comes to focusing on numbers, I take all the numbers in to consideration prior to shelling out thousands of dollars and yes, trap speeds as well regardless of their variations and such!! Go back and re-read what I have stated and you will find your particular post here is irrelevant!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
You are not the only one blowing up my inbox with PM's... I'm just tired of repeating the same stuff over and over again... how much clearer do we need to be? I came into this conversation when you mentioned my name.
Can you show me where I was shut down in other threads? I'm seriously curious now....
The following users liked this post:
loungn14 (04-29-2020)
#43
SPONSOR
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,459
Likes: 149
From: Houston/ Austin /Toronto / UAE / Minneapolis / Orlando /Cincinnati
Eurocharged Performance ML63 and TT lambo
Are you serious??!! Go back and re-read my postings as I know who is reporting what from their data! I was only seeking apples to apples data and nothing more!! When it comes to focusing on numbers, I take all the numbers in to consideration prior to shelling out thousands of dollars and yes, trap speeds as well regardless of their variations and such!! Go back and re-read what I have stated and you will find your particular post here is irrelevant!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS The variations would also include AWD vs RWD which you have; we know power loss is greater through the AWD!
PSS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!
PS The variations would also include AWD vs RWD which you have; we know power loss is greater through the AWD!
PSS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!
Do you have any draggy results on your race gas tune? We have tuned a few amr cars over their existing tune and seen quite a difference in power
Feel free to pm if ya want.
The following users liked this post:
BCP (05-01-2020)
#44
Gentlemen, I recently pulled the trigger on the E85 tune from Eurocharged. I had their stage 2 tune before that was great. But this tune is on another level my car picked up over 4mph in the 1/4. There really is a difference on how hard it pulls now after 4-4.5k rpm. The car overall feels much crispier. Here is the before and after. Notice also that the DA in the 125mph run on the stage 2 was much better.
The following users liked this post:
BCP (04-29-2020)
#45
You (brutus_tx) obviously care less about the true context of my postings and missed the facts of what I was saying and or asking altogether!
People were reporting considerable differences which is important to me to clearly understand prior to spending $$$
Keep in mind EC respond to my post and I recognized the data (photos of dyno etc.) was different from what was stated by them (680-720awhp). This caused me to inquire further for clarification nothing more! ...I assume anyone would have done the same?!?!
The differences that I found were as follows, which only led me to ask about the EC E85 tune, not blurt out opinions.
No one ever said anyone was not being "transparent" and I appreciate people speaking up on what they found concerning the tune overall. No one ever said EC was misrepresenting numbers, on the contrary I said they seemed of value and paid a compliment.
I guess I am out for now...thanks for everyone's input.
People were reporting considerable differences which is important to me to clearly understand prior to spending $$$
Keep in mind EC respond to my post and I recognized the data (photos of dyno etc.) was different from what was stated by them (680-720awhp). This caused me to inquire further for clarification nothing more! ...I assume anyone would have done the same?!?!
The differences that I found were as follows, which only led me to ask about the EC E85 tune, not blurt out opinions.
- E50 vs E85: brutus_tx reporting higher numbers due to different blend and other
- AWHP: Sebastain_Bird was reporting different HP based on both different blend/tune
- TQ: Torque was being reported differently
- AWD vs RWD: Sebastain_Bird was reporting differently based on his RWD M157 and other
- Ethenol Content: BCP was reporting different HP and thought it might be due to an uncertain ethenol content
- ETC: Etc...
No one ever said anyone was not being "transparent" and I appreciate people speaking up on what they found concerning the tune overall. No one ever said EC was misrepresenting numbers, on the contrary I said they seemed of value and paid a compliment.
I guess I am out for now...thanks for everyone's input.
#46
You (brutus_tx) obviously care less about the true context of my postings and missed the facts of what I was saying and or asking altogether!
People were reporting considerable differences which is important to me to clearly understand prior to spending $$$
Keep in mind EC respond to my post and I recognized the data (photos of dyno etc.) was different from what was stated by them (680-720awhp). This caused me to inquire further for clarification nothing more! ...I assume anyone would have done the same?!?!
The differences that I found were as follows, which only led me to ask about the EC E85 tune, not blurt out opinions.
No one ever said anyone was not being "transparent" and I appreciate people speaking up on what they found concerning the tune overall. No one ever said EC was misrepresenting numbers, on the contrary I said they seemed of value and paid a compliment.
I guess I am out for now...thanks for everyone's input.
People were reporting considerable differences which is important to me to clearly understand prior to spending $$$
Keep in mind EC respond to my post and I recognized the data (photos of dyno etc.) was different from what was stated by them (680-720awhp). This caused me to inquire further for clarification nothing more! ...I assume anyone would have done the same?!?!
The differences that I found were as follows, which only led me to ask about the EC E85 tune, not blurt out opinions.
- E50 vs E85: brutus_tx reporting higher numbers due to different blend and other
- AWHP: Sebastain_Bird was reporting different HP based on both different blend/tune
- TQ: Torque was being reported differently
- AWD vs RWD: Sebastain_Bird was reporting differently based on his RWD M157 and other
- Ethenol Content: BCP was reporting different HP and thought it might be due to an uncertain ethenol content
- ETC: Etc...
No one ever said anyone was not being "transparent" and I appreciate people speaking up on what they found concerning the tune overall. No one ever said EC was misrepresenting numbers, on the contrary I said they seemed of value and paid a compliment.
I guess I am out for now...thanks for everyone's input.
My post was born out of frustration. What tweaked me was when BCP posted his dyno and you said it was mine....
I also understand you are just trying to get to the bottom of all the information being bandied about in here. As a fellow enthusiast, I agree 100% in your wanting to be absolutely sure of a product before purchasing.
One of the problems with all this transparency and differences in posted dynos is in the true variability of all these E85/E50 postings from various members. None of use are running an OTS tune. Everyone of them started life as a "Brutus_Tune", but were subsequently tweaked by Jerry for each individuals car and location. We have dynos from France, Texas, NY and California sprinkled throughout this forum from different dynos and different drive line configurations. They will all be different. What is UNIFORM across all platforms is the reported trap speed in the quarter. We are all trapping 129/130 regardless of car or location. I want people to start looking at those numbers. Absolute dyno numbers are meaningless as a true metric of performance. What they are good at is showing how the power is applied. If people would just look at the graph and not fixate on the numbers they would be much happier.
As you mentioned above,there is a apparent lack of information from EC regarding this tune This may partially be due to IP concerns regarding the tune. I get that as well. EC need to protect their investment.
The duty, as enthusiasts, then falls on us early adopters of the tune to answer those questions, if they won't.
Since this is EC's thread, I'm hopeful they will come in here and answer all your questions.
If this were to happen, it would definitely cut down on the number of PM's and What's App questions I field daily from fellow enthusiasts answering the same questions over and over.
Perhaps we need a Flex Fuel Tune FAQ thread!
#47
BCP, again thanks for all your input on this!! I would agree, the benefits to the particular E85 tune are such that the car can maintain emissions compliance and having the ECU capable of detecting fuel types i.e., 91/93 octane as well E85 without having to whip out the handheld and switch between the two.
I am still considering it, but wish you had the newer straight E85 tune and or comparable fuel ratios to support the overall claims of EC on the particular 2014 E63s M157 AWD . Yes, I know you said you have an updated version of the tune, but also said you were unsure of fuel ratios during your posted dyon test. Again my current 93 tune with spacers and mid pipes and plugs (only mods) is reporting an average of 600awhp and with 100 race gas mapping it is around 640awhp give or take. For me the 40awhp gain you are reporting without having to switch between mappings might not be worth it to me for the $$$, but the EC claims of a gains around of 80-120awhp from my current 93 tune of 600awhp would be well worth the money! ...Obvious reasons why I was going back and forth on this thread trying to get someone to show their dyno results from a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG M157 AWD car on the EC E85 tune.
I am still considering it, but wish you had the newer straight E85 tune and or comparable fuel ratios to support the overall claims of EC on the particular 2014 E63s M157 AWD . Yes, I know you said you have an updated version of the tune, but also said you were unsure of fuel ratios during your posted dyon test. Again my current 93 tune with spacers and mid pipes and plugs (only mods) is reporting an average of 600awhp and with 100 race gas mapping it is around 640awhp give or take. For me the 40awhp gain you are reporting without having to switch between mappings might not be worth it to me for the $$$, but the EC claims of a gains around of 80-120awhp from my current 93 tune of 600awhp would be well worth the money! ...Obvious reasons why I was going back and forth on this thread trying to get someone to show their dyno results from a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG M157 AWD car on the EC E85 tune.
Or, as stated, it could have been due to a lack of airflow on the dyno as previously mentioned. You'll see the car picked up 10awhp between the first two runs; that was the result of allowing it to sit and cool off a little, which led to IAT being 10 degrees cooler. All of the pulls were datalogged, and the IATs were still on the high side, hence my thread seeking input on aftermarket heat exchangers. It could have been a combination of the two, it is hard to say honestly. The car runs 129 just like the others, so the hp would have to be pretty similar being they are the same cars and nobody is running in mineshaft DA.
#48
Thanks for saying...I apologize as well. I know you have been more than patiently trying to feed the mouths of many questions including mine; thank you. I was comparing the graph (RPM range) from what I have to others especially the one BCP posted because it is very similar. I do also understand the value in the trap speed but was still also interested in understanding the differences is in all the data I previously mentioned. If I wasn't so lacking in functionality of the forums, I could show you mine, but I honestly do not know how post it here and cut and paste function doesn't seem to work??!!
Perhaps, you are right, maybe EC will chime in, but I do think all this has helped me get a better picture of the EC E85 tune overall. As previously stated, I do think it is a value to so many out there and certainly those exploring a tune for the first time! EC has certainly moved the needle light years among others (E85) and hats off to them for potentially saving others thousands of dollars on unnecessary mods producing similar or less than standard results for a whole lot more money. As someone on the forums once said, those suggesting you need mods are more than likely trying to sell them to you. A solid tune will always weight out and in case and point, the Eurocharge E85 tune is the best example!!!
Perhaps, you are right, maybe EC will chime in, but I do think all this has helped me get a better picture of the EC E85 tune overall. As previously stated, I do think it is a value to so many out there and certainly those exploring a tune for the first time! EC has certainly moved the needle light years among others (E85) and hats off to them for potentially saving others thousands of dollars on unnecessary mods producing similar or less than standard results for a whole lot more money. As someone on the forums once said, those suggesting you need mods are more than likely trying to sell them to you. A solid tune will always weight out and in case and point, the Eurocharge E85 tune is the best example!!!
The following users liked this post:
BCP (04-29-2020)
The following users liked this post:
MBHR (04-29-2020)
#50
@MBHR I hope you do go with the EC E85 tune just to feel how your car will be transformed into an absolute rocket!
Last edited by Sebastian Bird; 04-29-2020 at 03:40 PM.