MTM piggy back ECU
08-27-2010, 09:45 PM
#11
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MTM provides no info because they're MTM. They make a crank hp claim (that's how they roll in Europe for some reason) and people buy and trust them. Not sure what went wrong here though.
FYI I don't trust ANYONE (tuners) till I see track proven results. Dynos don't mean jack **** in this world (of tuner provided dynos).
There are DOZENS of B6/7 S4 products that were just a scam. Everything from the classic sprintbooster to the GSG intake to $10,000 VF Engineering superchargers that deliver about 70crank hp but claim 160 crank hp.
All made unfounded promises...all cost S4 owners a fortune. You guys won't be any exception...you have the new car that was $55,000...and they'll do their best to sell you some crap because you're excited about your cars and ready to spend.
FYI I don't trust ANYONE (tuners) till I see track proven results. Dynos don't mean jack **** in this world (of tuner provided dynos).
There are DOZENS of B6/7 S4 products that were just a scam. Everything from the classic sprintbooster to the GSG intake to $10,000 VF Engineering superchargers that deliver about 70crank hp but claim 160 crank hp.
All made unfounded promises...all cost S4 owners a fortune. You guys won't be any exception...you have the new car that was $55,000...and they'll do their best to sell you some crap because you're excited about your cars and ready to spend.
08-31-2010, 06:24 AM
#14
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys, I just speak what I feel to be fact, and I don't sugar coat it.
When someone's idea of fact conflicts with your idea of a 'fact', you have two options
a) you can enter a calm, rational debate and provide information to support your own facts
b) you can react emotionally, give your facts no support, and instead flame and call the other person a hater. This is tantamount to intellectual submission...you can't support your argument, so you lash out instead. There are a few folks on various forums for whom this is the standard M.O.
Agreeing to disagree is something I'm happy to do...as is entering a debate where we see how your/my facts stack up, but you can bet your *** if someone reacts emotionally and talks **** about me, I won't sit back and take it.
When someone's idea of fact conflicts with your idea of a 'fact', you have two options
a) you can enter a calm, rational debate and provide information to support your own facts
b) you can react emotionally, give your facts no support, and instead flame and call the other person a hater. This is tantamount to intellectual submission...you can't support your argument, so you lash out instead. There are a few folks on various forums for whom this is the standard M.O.
Agreeing to disagree is something I'm happy to do...as is entering a debate where we see how your/my facts stack up, but you can bet your *** if someone reacts emotionally and talks **** about me, I won't sit back and take it.
08-31-2010, 09:35 AM
#15
Hey guys, I just speak what I feel to be fact, and I don't sugar coat it.
When someone's idea of fact conflicts with your idea of a 'fact', you have two options
a) you can enter a calm, rational debate and provide information to support your own facts
b) you can react emotionally, give your facts no support, and instead flame and call the other person a hater. This is tantamount to intellectual submission...you can't support your argument, so you lash out instead. There are a few folks on various forums for whom this is the standard M.O.
Agreeing to disagree is something I'm happy to do...as is entering a debate where we see how your/my facts stack up, but you can bet your *** if someone reacts emotionally and talks **** about me, I won't sit back and take it.
When someone's idea of fact conflicts with your idea of a 'fact', you have two options
a) you can enter a calm, rational debate and provide information to support your own facts
b) you can react emotionally, give your facts no support, and instead flame and call the other person a hater. This is tantamount to intellectual submission...you can't support your argument, so you lash out instead. There are a few folks on various forums for whom this is the standard M.O.
Agreeing to disagree is something I'm happy to do...as is entering a debate where we see how your/my facts stack up, but you can bet your *** if someone reacts emotionally and talks **** about me, I won't sit back and take it.
Last edited by tipsyhemi; 08-31-2010 at 11:10 AM.
08-31-2010, 10:24 AM
#16
AudiWorld Super User
Well the difference is "what I feel to be fact" and what actually is a fact is sometimes the difference between a lie and the truth.
I'm not about offing someone's head, but if something looks like a douche, and cleans like a douche, chances are it's a douche.
I'm not about offing someone's head, but if something looks like a douche, and cleans like a douche, chances are it's a douche.
08-31-2010, 08:02 PM
#17
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intellectual submission. NWS4guy and his friend Dr. Volkl are the poster children for this.
They have no facts...so they flame. They submit, intellectually. This is them tapping out. NWS4guy has posted a few good facts on AZ etc...although they weren't his facts. Most of his 'tutorial' on the TVS1320 was lifted directly from beemercer on EA. In college that gets you expelled.
09-01-2010, 04:29 AM
#18
AudiWorld Super User
^^^classic example of what I was referring to!
Intellectual submission. NWS4guy and his friend Dr. Volkl are the poster children for this.
They have no facts...so they flame. They submit, intellectually. This is them tapping out. NWS4guy has posted a few good facts on AZ etc...although they weren't his facts. Most of his 'tutorial' on the TVS1320 was lifted directly from beemercer on EA. In college that gets you expelled.
Intellectual submission. NWS4guy and his friend Dr. Volkl are the poster children for this.
They have no facts...so they flame. They submit, intellectually. This is them tapping out. NWS4guy has posted a few good facts on AZ etc...although they weren't his facts. Most of his 'tutorial' on the TVS1320 was lifted directly from beemercer on EA. In college that gets you expelled.
(Obligatory subject material) Forget the piggyback, wait for the actual programs to come out.
09-01-2010, 04:40 AM
#19
AudiWorld Super User
Odd, he posted on that original thread I created about the TVS SC we have and never said boo about my supposed plaigerism. I found and educated myself on the setup and system from OEM papers, their websites and discussions with people in the industry. Not sure what he posted, or when he posted it as I don't traffic EA, since it's S4 forum doens't generate more than about 1 new post a month the only time I have been over to look.
My thread started 1/11/10
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...charger-(Eaton)
*** Edit - I openly welcome anyone to show I copied anything from someone else's posts.
My thread started 1/11/10
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...charger-(Eaton)
*** Edit - I openly welcome anyone to show I copied anything from someone else's posts.
Last edited by NWS4Guy; 09-01-2010 at 04:49 AM.
09-01-2010, 08:53 AM
#20
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Odd, he posted on that original thread I created about the TVS SC we have and never said boo about my supposed plaigerism. I found and educated myself on the setup and system from OEM papers, their websites and discussions with people in the industry. Not sure what he posted, or when he posted it as I don't traffic EA, since it's S4 forum doens't generate more than about 1 new post a month the only time I have been over to look.
My thread started 1/11/10
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...charger-(Eaton)
*** Edit - I openly welcome anyone to show I copied anything from someone else's posts.
My thread started 1/11/10
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...charger-(Eaton)
*** Edit - I openly welcome anyone to show I copied anything from someone else's posts.
Anyway, beemercer himself mentioned on EA that you lifted some of his stuff and regurgitated it. That's fine...just saying that especially lately, your facts have been few and far between, choosing instead to flame than enter a discussion civilly.
You and volkl in the APR NUMBERS ARE OUT thread were told in not so many words by your own brethren that you were crossing the line with no real reason for doing so.
For like the 5th time...I'd be happy to discuss this stuff whether its here or anywhere else. I like examining performance and debating the merits of a modification plan, but I really don't get the emotional ****.
Even in this thread...look what I posted...then look at the reception from you and bruce. Needless negativity and flaming, then you try to blame me for sending it off the rails. Let's just grow the **** up? What do you say?