AEM EMS info?

[RedWagon]

Well I hav th option to buy a AEM EMS for a decent price from a local guy($900) that coms with a 3bar map, AIT and coolant sensors, and I was wondering what I should know about this EMS? I asked the seller why he's selling it cheap, and he said he bought the car with it and did't know how to tune the car and decided to go with DSMlink. Someone told me the car is lifeless when you plug it in until its tuned.

 

[bastarddsm]

i publicly announce my hate for dsmlink.

 

[2gGSX]

This is just an issue of cost v. benefit. How many people really absolutely need what a standalone offers? The point is Link is an easy to use product that works very well--not as the single best tuning solution offered, but just fine.

As far as the cost issue, while the OP had a chance at a cheap AEM setup, not everyone else does. Thus, the cost (to most people) for an AEM EMS with all the sensors you need along with the amount of downtime needed to learn and just get the car idling seems to outweigh the benefits that it offers (to most people).

 

[kenamond]

For the most part, I see folks arguing valid points here. In defense of those taking at all about DSMlink here, the OP did mention DSMlink and along with it its usability, and that opened the door for discussing that option. In defense of the AEM side, it's aparently among "the best". All of the pros/cons of each have been beaten to death. Some of the pros/cons are personal opinion or are otherwise weighted differently from person to person. I'd go with DSMlink because I know myself and know that although I *want* "the best", I can't afford it along with the other long list of mods I'd need before I could take advantage of it. I'd learn a hell of a lot with DSMlink and have some cash to spend on other critical upgrades on my wishlist. If someone handed me an additional $500 the day I was ready to purchase DSMlink, I'd probably buy AEM EMS instead. Others may rightly-so fear the learning curve of a more capable but more complex option.

So I think the thread should drop the debate or perhaps switch over to debating favorite colors to push it completely over the edge. The OP probably knows all he needed to know by now. I certainly learned a lot.

 

[JrCRXHF]

This post is getting nuts.

I bought AEM EMS and i am installing it now. I wanted to spend the extra money because down the road i am going to build much more power. I see DSMlink as a 1/2 way point that is good for most people. But i like to work on my car and to have settings to play with and make better.

So EMS was for me. If i don't like it i can sell it and get most of my money back and still have a clean factory wiring to plug something else into.

But i really like standalone's and the more things i can adjust if i want to the better.

 

[kenamond]

Before anyone else clicks the "Submit Reply" button, please read rule #2 in the red text above the message box. Everyone wants to get the last word, but it's gone too far IMHO. The amount of namecalling and insulting is starting to outweigh the technical content.

 

[rarson]

Yeah, I apologize. There's a bunch of nonsense BS floating around in this thread and I let it get to me. I'll try not to let it happen again.

DSM map is not a product ####o....its a project that many very bright people in the dsm world got together and brought us. Last I checked it was basically free. and it will do everything dsmlink will do and more for about $100.

So I can throw DSMap into my car and have the car run good right out of the box, with no tuning? I can connect my laptop to the OBD port and tune the car and datalog? I can use anti-lag, no-lift-to-shift, MAF compensation, RPM adjustments, and speed density approximations?

And that's not even scratching the surface of V2. When V3 arrives, it'll be a complete rework, with even more features like GM MAF support.

But regardless, dsmlink is a glorifed AFC without jacked up timing.

No, it's not. Either you don't understand how an AFC works or you don't understand how DSMLink works.

An AFC sits before the ECU and hacks the airflow signal to fool the ECU into think it is at lower load. That's it. The only thing the AFC can do is change the airflow signal that is being sent to the ECU.

DSMLink completely changes a lot of the programming of the stock ECU. The airflow signal reaches the ECU untouched. Tuning with DSMLink allows you to change how the ECU responds to the airflow, instead of having to hack the signal to try to fool the ECU into getting it to do what you want it to.

And an ems is a full standalone. IT IS AWESOME. Nothing compares to a full standalone in tuning ability.

Yeah, but most people can't program a standalone by themselves. DSMLink wasn't designed to replace full standalone units or even compete with them. It was designed to give people an easy way to tune their cars themselves by using the stock maps as a starting point to avoid the hassle of programming base maps.

 

[2gGSX]

What was brought into light was an actual flaw in dsmlink. The way you attempt to diffuse it, is not really helping the situation. Your inexperience is making you ignorant to the fact that globally removing timing is a monumentally ####ing stupid idea. Why should every area of the timing map, be affected, for what could be 1-2 loading cells total. Most these cars actually drive on the street right, so why wouldn't they want midrange. I could see maybe as a total drag car, you wouldn't care when you needed to remove timing, that your midrange does take a hit.

Let me pose a question for you in return then--just how much power do you actually lose from your midrange by pulling a few or even several degrees of timing?

 

[TJs91tsi]

I personally think that if the guy has a chance at getting an awsome tuning tool, AEM Ems, and he has the desire to actually tune his car himself and learn, (which is very important in diagnosis, car performance, self worth, hell everything and you know it.) And he has the mental capability, (you know if you do ) Then man go for the AEM. It might be a little more money initially, but isnt that a bargining chip when upping from a safc/translator to dsmlink?? "its just a little bit more money for alot more tunability!" .
Do you need to go with EMS ONLY if youre planning to max out link? Of course not.

Redwagon, Its up to you. If you feel you are truly smart enough to learn, and read which you will need to do, care enough about you being the one to tune it, and and are willing to get started slower with more seat time, but want a great system, go with the AEM for a good price.
If not, and you just want to get your car running so you can press the go pedal instantly, then there are other systems out there that will take you far as well with less patience... Just dont go with a maf translator or a safc...you can get way more tunability with a little bit more money. HAHA

And I think everyone knows why a map sensor is prefered.
Yes of course Maf/mas sensors do work and people have gotten power out of them. duh. And there are pros and cons,
But If map cars have a boost leak, we either run richer or theres no change, if my maf sensor car does, it runs leaner...scary, considering we all have or get boost leaks.

My map setup doesnt have a maf in the intake flow... huge difference? not terribly, but neither is that little ridge on the stock intake elbow, but we still shave that down. Damn right it helps, (the maf elimination) and isnt a little more power/quicker spool what all of us want? If you could eliminate some restriction in your intake right now, would you?

My map sensor costs 50 bucks new give or take... no need to port/hack/cut/ folt tab A to tab B etc... just mount and plug in, which means less intake conectors
How much are maf sensors getting to be? pricy. Fortunately the gm maf is very plentiful but, its still very finicky. And is effected by humidity, overruning, and you need some way to controll it. Maf translator? ugh. Link V3? non existent at the moment...

So I can throw DSMap into my car and have the car run good right out of the box, with no tuning?

Doesnt that depend on the level of mods, just like ANYthing else? With the 2.0 basemap, yes.

I can connect my laptop to the OBD port and tune the car and datalog?

You can connect your laptop to the ostrich and tune the car and datalog yes.

I can use anti-lag,

Yes

no-lift-to-shift,

yes

MAF compensation,

wouldnt need it.

RPM adjustments,

yes, rpm based, load based, add or subtract timing anywhere you need or dont need it,

and speed density approximations?

?? dont know. It is speed density and it's not approximate, is spot on.

Ds-map is an awsome program. It sounds like you dont know much about it as well. Dont knock it untill YOUVE tried it either.

No, it's not. Either you don't understand how an AFC works or you don't understand how DSMLink works.

An AFC sits before the ECU and hacks the airflow signal to fool the ECU into think it is at lower load. That's it. The only thing the AFC can do is change the airflow signal that is being sent to the ECU.

DSMLink completely changes a lot of the programming of the stock ECU. The airflow signal reaches the ECU untouched. Tuning with DSMLink allows you to change how the ECU responds to the airflow, instead of having to hack the signal to try to fool the ECU into getting it to do what you want it to.

I think you know that we all know what an AFC does. You know what he means. With the sliders and global corrections, you cant fine tune individual cells. When you make an adjustment, you make it either globally or with the slider which effects other areas too. Kinda like the, um, safc2.

But i will give it that.. I would run dsmlink anyday over an safc. And im glad we have so many better tuning solutions then we did years ago.

Yeah, but most people can't program a standalone by themselves. DSMLink wasn't designed to replace full standalone units or even compete with them. It was designed to give people an easy way to tune their cars themselves by using the stock maps as a starting point to avoid the hassle of programming base maps.

And thats where red wagon needs to make his decision, is he capable to read, comprehend then tune it based on a lot of reading and instructions?

This shouldnt be a pissing match. It simply should be redwagon deciding if he has the time, patience and man hours to tune with AEM.
Cost isnt really the decider, considering he could get it at the same price as link.
So, Redwagon.... Deal or no Deal??

Tyler./

 

[rarson]

Do you need to go with EMS ONLY if youre planning to max out link? Of course not.

Right, it's personal preference. But if you're thinking that you're going to "max out" DSMLink, then clearly you don't know enough about the product to make a decision on whether to buy it or not. That whole idea of "maxing it out" is absolutely absurd. Can anyone explain to me what this means or how you would possibly do that?

If you're looking for the absolute best possible tune, and you have the money to pay for the system and have someone tune it, then the AEM is definitely the better choice (you're nuts if you think you can tune the EMS yourself better than Brad Brooks). But DSMLink will get you pretty darn close without half the headache of learning the EMS and will be cheaper. So that's just part of the trade-off that one should consider when choosing an EMS.

Yes of course Maf/mas sensors do work and people have gotten power out of them. duh. And there are pros and cons,
But If map cars have a boost leak, we either run richer or theres no change, if my maf sensor car does, it runs leaner...scary, considering we all have or get boost leaks.

You might want to learn a little bit more about MAFs. There's no possible way the car would be running leaner if metered air is escaping, think about it. And MAFs are significantly more accurate for measuring airflow... why do you think they are used so often in new cars?

My map setup doesnt have a maf in the intake flow... huge difference? not terribly, but neither is that little ridge on the stock intake elbow, but we still shave that down. Damn right it helps, (the maf elimination) and isnt a little more power/quicker spool what all of us want? If you could eliminate some restriction in your intake right now, would you?

The differences you are talking about are small. You could tune the car better and gain more power than you would by swapping to a MAP setup. You might be eager to jump onto every little gain, but when you're looking at removing the MAF, there's probably other things you can improve before that. I'm still running a stock MAF in the stock location, and it doesn't appear to be holding me back at all.

My map sensor costs 50 bucks new give or take... no need to port/hack/cut/ folt tab A to tab B etc... just mount and plug in, which means less intake conectors
How much are maf sensors getting to be? pricy. Fortunately the gm maf is very plentiful but, its still very finicky. And is effected by humidity, overruning, and you need some way to controll it. Maf translator? ugh. Link V3? non existent at the moment...

My stock MAF was free. It came on the car. And I don't have any of the problems that you say the GM MAF suffers from.

Yes, Version 3 is not out yet. It turns out that reprogramming the ECU and adding features and improvements takes time, especially when you're still making updates to the software client, providing tech support, and selling V2. They're only two guys. I think we'll see it later this year though.

Not that I care, I'm still on V1. I'm looking forward to upgrading to V2 since there's still a lot of extra features I've never even used. After waiting years for the original DSMLink, waiting another couple for V3 just doesn't bother me at all.

Doesnt that depend on the level of mods, just like ANYthing else? With the 2.0 basemap, yes.

Uh, no. Why would it? You tell Tom and Dave what injectors you have and they burn the chip with a default that will get them running probably better than an AFC could ever get aftermarket injectors to run. Check the LTFT's and make an adjustment or two, and then you're off and able to focus on WOT tuning.

Yes yes wouldnt need it. yes, rpm based, load based, add or subtract timing anywhere you need or dont need it

I asked those questions because I was wondering if those features were possible, not because I thought that it didn't have them. Just FYI.

It is speed density and it's not approximate, is spot on.

There's no such thing as "spot on" speed density. Speed density IS an approximation, that's why there's no airflow sensor.

Ds-map is an awsome program. It sounds like you dont know much about it as well. Dont knock it untill YOUVE tried it either.

I'm not knocking it at all! If you read my previous posts, you'd see numerous times where I said "I'm sure it's a great product." I can't say if it is or isn't, because I haven't used it. I'M the one who ISN'T knocking a product that I don't use.

I think you know that we all know what an AFC does.

No, I don't. Let's continue reading...

You know what he means. With the sliders and global corrections, you cant fine tune individual cells. When you make an adjustment, you make it either globally or with the slider which effects other areas too. Kinda like the, um, safc2.

Nope. That's the last time I try to explain the difference between DSMLink and an AFC. You can call it a "big AFC" or whatever you want, but you're wrong.

If the interface is similar to an AFC, that's because the AFC is easy to use and most DSM guys had experience with it when DSMLink first came about (it was never intended to be a large production, high volume product, which is why V1 piracy was so rampant). It wasn't intended to be the best tuning tool ever, it was intended to provide much better tuning control while being as easy to use as possible. But that doesn't change the fact that DSMLink does not function, in any way whatsoever, like an AFC.

You guys are going on and on about individual cell tuning, completely missing the point that DSMLink was designed SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

And thats where red wagon needs to make his decision, is he capable to read, comprehend then tune it based on a lot of reading and instructions?

And does he even want to? A lot of us would choose not to when we can spend less money and more time actually driving our cars than fiddling with an EMS we didn't really need. I know I sure as hell don't need an AEM. I'm running a small 16g!

 

[TJs91tsi]

Right, it's personal preference. But if you're thinking that you're going to "max out" DSMLink, then clearly you don't know enough about the product to make a decision on whether to buy it or not. That whole idea of "maxing it out" is absolutely absurd. Can anyone explain to me what this means or how you would possibly do that?

Seriously? By having a setup that cant be controlled with just dsmlink or any piggyback. Where you need certain settings or features that dsmlink or any other piggy doesnt have. Or when you want a more precise system to squeeze out more HP.

You might want to learn a little bit more about MAFs. There's no possible way the car would be running leaner if metered air is escaping, think about it. And MAFs are significantly more accurate for measuring airflow... why do you think they are used so often in new cars?

My fault, i seem to be thinking about N/A cars. It still does it at idle causing problems.

The differences you are talking about are small. You could tune the car better and gain more power than you would by swapping to a MAP setup. You might be eager to jump onto every little gain, but when you're looking at removing the MAF, there's probably other things you can improve before that.

Yes you can tune and make more power with a maf in the way, but IF the restriction was gone, especially for us 1g guys, dont you think that tuning with it gone would yield more Hp then if it were there? Or at least move the power arround, spool faster...etc.

Of course there is easier ways to loose restrictions, that was never the point though. The point is that a maf IS more of a restriction than an IAT sensor, and restrictions do hold you back, maby not tremendously but they do. Thats one of the pros of speed density. Thats the point.. Thats all.
Do you think that John shep would leave a maf sensor sitting in his intake track because removing it wouldnt help him? Because the gains are imeasureable?

I'm still running a stock MAF in the stock location, and it doesn't appear to be holding me back at all.

"Appear." Thats the key word here. Obviously not tremendously though.
It, depends on personal goals man, whats good for you isnt good for me.

Question, If you wanted 1000hp, would it hold you back???

My stock MAF was free. It came on the car.

Im just talking here, theres no need to be a smart ass. The point was if one ever failed you would need to replace it..

And I don't have any of the problems that you say the GM MAF suffers from.

Thats awsome, your'e lucky. Or Perhaps you dont notice it. But your situation might be different from the hundreds of thousands of other dsms out there. Individual results do vary.
I had the gm-maf. I did plenty of research on it and found many people found that they were finicky, varied with every run, were effected by the weather...

Yes, Version 3 is not out yet. It turns out that reprogramming the ECU and adding features and improvements takes time, especially when you're still making updates to the software client, providing tech support, and selling V2. They're only two guys. I think we'll see it later this year though.

Not sure what youre telling me that for. It was a statement, it happens to not be out yet so relying on it as a tuning device at present doesnt help anyone.

Uh, no. Why would it? You tell Tom and Dave what injectors you have and they burn the chip with a default that will get them running probably better than an AFC could ever get aftermarket injectors to run. Check the LTFT's and make an adjustment or two, and then you're off and able to focus on WOT tuning.

Well thats good. It still needs tuning based on mods, it just happens to already be done for you and in the box.

I asked those questions because I was wondering if those features were possible, not because I thought that it didn't have them. Just FYI.

Im sorry but i see no difference. You thought it had those capabilities, but you were asking if they were possible? I dont get it.

There's no such thing as "spot on" speed density. Speed density IS an approximation, that's why there's no airflow sensor.

Well by that logic then, why are you asking if it has speed density approximations for?

I'm not knocking it at all! If you read my previous posts, you'd see numerous times where I said "I'm sure it's a great product." I can't say if it is or isn't, because I haven't used it. I'M the one who ISN'T knocking a product that I don't use.

I did read the whole thing, honestly dont remember that phrase.

No, I don't. Let's continue reading...

Yes professor. whoops, name calling. haha

Nope. That's the last time I try to explain the difference between DSMLink and an AFC. You can call it a "big AFC" or whatever you want, but you're wrong.

If the interface is similar to an AFC, that's because the AFC is easy to use and most DSM guys had experience with it when DSMLink first came about (it was never intended to be a large production, high volume product, which is why V1 piracy was so rampant). It wasn't intended to be the best tuning tool ever, it was intended to provide much better tuning control while being as easy to use as possible. But that doesn't change the fact that DSMLink does not function, in any way whatsoever, like an AFC.

Forget it, you're missing the point as well.
We know its better that an Afc, but the reasons that make it easier to use than a standalone are the same reasons that happen to give it some drawbacks. Do they make it a crap product? NO. But it still has some charictaristics of an afc, "without the crap timing." Again, much better than an Afc, NOT an Afc, but with drawbacks comparable to an Afc.

You guys are going on and on about individual cell tuning, completely missing the point that DSMLink was designed SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

Haha thats cute. Seems to be a sore spot. haha

No one ever said "Haha, they designed Dsmlink to be better than Aem but they couldnt! They tried their version of individual cell tuning but it didnt work."
""WE"" know it wasnt designed to do that!!! It has its advantages, but because it wasnt, its not as good as some products.

And does he even want to? A lot of us would choose not to when we can spend less money and more time actually driving our cars than fiddling with an EMS we didn't really need. I know I sure as hell don't need an AEM. I'm running a small 16g!

Exactly what I said, however, the price in this case is negligible. I dont think he has a $250 dollar eprom ecu yet.
But this Ems doesnt have to do with you, it has to do with him. What are HIS future plans? HIS mods? and does HE have the desire to truly learn how to tune his car. If he does, and really wants to be hands on and learn his car like the back side of his balls, then HE might just want the EMS. Yes it would be difficult to get going properly, some people dont mind that at all. But can you imagine how he would feel when he can say, "Oh I did it" when someone asks him who installed and tuned his Ems?
Its his call though. Only he can answer it by pondering over and answering questions i dont think any of us asked him yet. HAHA

Tyler./

 

[dsm-onster]

That's around 2.4% increase .

Que sera, sera! Why does dsmlink sell. "The dsmlink nazis"? This stereo type, invented by a member in this thread, could they be people who are satisfied?

You Ds-Map guys look to have a great system. I'm definatey infatuated. In fact, I WILL be running this on a local car that I have "free rein over". I run DSMLink in my FWD. I got it running the best it's ever run in minutes.

You're piece seams capable. Yet, DSMLink has gone 8.6 @ 168. Get dyno results, get track times instead of crying foul. It's $550. And ds-map is $275($75 for ostrich, $40 for IAT, $60 for MAP) plus a wideband ($250) to tune it all and see if your VE table is even correct. Ds-map has full map manipulation. Dsmlink IS more user-friendly. Dsmap does away with the maf. Dsmlink doesn't for now. Considering the price is the same for both, and dsmlink is coming out with MAP based metering and full table manipulation, what will you argue then? In the mean time, ds-map offers more but less proven for the same price and a little more study time. . . I mean I've got enough brains and reading time to learn how to hack a 931 EPROM bin. It's not like I havn't been able to go into DSMLink source code and manipulate each map cell. Can't I do the same with dsmlink? Pull the dsmlink eprom nemory board combo and have at it. It's easier with DSMap. But it's easier to drive my car to work than my 15mph Pick-em-up. Because dsmlink was plug-and-play with my PTE 650s and 2g maf in my 1G.

What the he!! ever. . . A good piece of equipment needs no defense. . . EVERYONE, nazis and mussolini, cap you arguements and answer the question.

 

[sbengineering]

having used all 3. DSmap, link, and AEM, i would recommend only a product you pay for. (product support, replacement items, etc. has its price for a reason).

DSMlink
-is not in anyway a piggyback system, however, you do need an add-on (translator)
-it works well, is robust, and the product support is amazing.
-i see it as a simple but highly effective. EMS system. (as it allows you to only control the
maps and trims that are most important for almost all users).
-its simplicity allows for any skill level to tune with only basic knowledge.

AEM
-is a well priced, full EMS system.
-Easy plug in. sensor setup is easy. install is very easy.
-in its basic state, it works very similar to the Link. (permitting you have good maps)
-it has so many options that many users get into trouble adjusting way to many variables.
-requires patience and time.

In a nutshell, if you want EMS style tuning, without wanting to spend a lot of time, and don't mind being restricted to what your allowed to do, use DSMlink

If you want EMS tuning, and have the patience, time, and problem solving abilities, nothing is better then the AEM.

 

[sbengineering]

also one more important thing.

Can you guys stop comparing tuning a car for the street with tuning a car for track.

The street has soo many variables, (accel, decel, hills, traffic, heat, crusing, etc) where as on a track your running WOT, thats it.

 

[dsm-onster]

having used all 3. DSmap, link, and AEM, i would recommend only a product you pay for. (product support, replacement items, etc. has its price for a reason).

That's a good point. I shipped my ecu to Thomas and Dave figured out why my ebay re-capped ecu wasn't working and fixed it for little to nothing.

 

[dsm-onster]

Not the many 9 second runs

After removing 3 honeycombs and backing out the screw, 312whp. . .

. . .Next test was ditching the 2G MAS/AFC/KD chip for DS-MAP. With timing and fuel dialed in exactly the same, the car put down 319.5whp, but on the road the car felt much snappier due to more optimal mid range fuel and timing numbers. Unfortunately I was still a few hp short of my goal, which was to beat a stock 996TT, which puts down around 325whp on our dyno. A friend offered me a real EVO 16G to test out, so of course on it went. First pull was 321whp which showed some promise, and I finished up with 332whp. . .

319.5/312 = 1.024 Apples to apples. Not ebay evo3 16g vs. MHI evo3 16g. That's still a good increase. 7.5 horsepower. Still no 4%.

You'll see more hp increase when switcing to a speed density sytem as you get to the end of the compressor/turbine flow capacity. 300hp or 3000hp. That being said, the evo3 16g is not nearly limited to 300whp. So yes a good testamony to MAP based systems. But. . . see above .

Good system and good job. I remember when pudhed posted the tunerpro dsm sd .xdf and .bin for us on dsm-ecu. Ds-map has come farther. And is working good for the backyard guys. AEM SD is working for the profesionals and so is. . . But, get Ray Peters in here to back up SD (and dsmap). It's potential is boundless.

 

[rarson]

I already ran 11's on a small 16g in a 2g (back in 2006). There's not too many people on dsmtimes.org who have done that. I don't need to remove the MAF. Maybe when I feel like giving myself a headache one day I'll screw around with trying to remove the MAF, but there's just no point right now, since I drive my car every day (on the same exact tune I ran at the track).

If you, rarson, built an MS why aren't you using it? Was it not "easy" enough for you to tune with?

I built it for my RX-7 when I lived on Guam. I don't have the car anymore. Therefore, I'm not using the Megasquirt. Do you know anything about RX-7s? I really think it's funny you think I'm some car ignoramus who is too stupid to tune a car "the real way." Perhaps it's just, "been there, done that" and I don't feel like going through the hassle all over again?

What kind of person chooses to make things more difficult for themselves? I don't get it.

Anyway, the whole point I'm trying to make, that you detractors seem to be ignoring, is that DSMLink makes tuning a whole lot easier for very little trade-off, if any. The best argument you can make against it is price, but it's still well worth what they charge for it and there's not very many options that are that much cheaper anyway, especially for a 2g.

But by far, what I can't get over is how bling5tatus seems to want to recommend anything BUT DSMLink. Everything is vastly superior to it in his book. Obviously, you have a grudge against it for who knows what reason. I think it's pretty odd that someone would have a grudge against a product they don't even have experience with. Maybe you should look into that.

A standalone isn't for everyone, and some people would rather be able to tune the car themselves easily without having to spend a long time setting up their car. Period. That's what DSMLink offers. It isn't a standalone, it's a programmable stock ECU with an easy interface. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would want to fool around with programming individual load cells on a street car, but if that's your cup of tea, that's great! I've already screwed around with various tuning solutions and DSMLink is by far the easiest and my favorite, because I don't have to mess with it forever to get the car running great.

I'm not going to keep arguing about this, because it's pointless and it's turned into a bitchfest. But the original poster asked about the AEM EMS because he didn't know anything about it. The average Tuners person who doesn't know anything about the EMS is going to be in over their head. The average Tuners person who doesn't know anything about DSMLink will be just fine with it. So, therefore, for you (bling5tatus) to try to tell that person that the EMS is the best for them just makes no sense whatsoever (especially considering you know nothing about this person or their tuning ability). You're doing people a disservice by slagging DSMLink and trying to keep them away from a product that you have no experience with.

But hey, who cares, giving out bad information over the internet seems to be something you enjoy. People like you are the reason why I tend to stay away from Tuners.

 

[rarson]

By the way, if you look at most of the guys running high-hp setups and AEMs, they're not tuning the cars themselves either. I suppose we should just shit all over those guys for being idiots who can't even tune their own cars!

 

[sbengineering]

By the way, if you look at most of the guys running high-hp setups and AEMs, they're not tuning the cars themselves either. I suppose we should just shit all over those guys for being idiots who can't even tune their own cars!

Self-tuned. take it back

 

[dsm-onster]

That would be hard to do. It's basically entropic. ...Oh, you mean you tuned your own EMS .

 

[rarson]

Self-tuned. take it back

I'm sure there are people who tune it themselves. I said most, not all.

The other day, I downloaded Ken Davis' 1017 hp dyno video. That's some crazy @#$%! His AEM was tuned by Brad Brooks. Tony Turk (35R, 600whp/392wtq @ 23.5psi on 94 octane, 721whp/486wtq @ 33psi on race gas), same thing.

But I'm sure they suck because they didn't tune the cars themselves. And they're members of the DSMLink forum too, so obviously they're complete idiots.

(BTW, the above comment was directed at bling5tatus, who seems to think that the only thing that matters is that a person learns to tune a standalone and that anyone who uses DSMLink is an idiot.)

I give props to you and anyone who has the discipline to learn the EMS and tune their car well with it. I just couldn't be bothered when DSMLink is easier and cheaper. I've tried Megasquirt, tuned a friend's Skyline with an Apexi PowerFC (with the damn Commander no less, talk about a pain in the ass!), used an AFC for a long time on my DSM... DSMLink just combines all the features I would want and need and makes tuning really easy, so I'm glad to not have to fool around with load matrices anymore.

I'd like to try the AEM someday... maybe I'll put the DSMLink in another car and make my 2g race-only. But I don't have the cash to blow on that right now.

 

[sbengineering]

I'm sure there are people who tune it themselves. I said most, not all.

Just trying to add some friendly sarcasm.

I go on the principle that the tuning process starts, when building the engine. all those factors directly play a part in the "turning the screw driver" or "pressing the keyboard keys" process.

 

[kenamond]

He will be leaps and bounds ahead of a lot of you "tuners" as you guys call yourselves.

I don't know why, but I took offense to that even though I don't own an aftermarket EMS. Maybe it's because I plan on getting DSMlink in the future and will therefore be insulted directly by the above statement when I eventually do. Anyway, it seems pretty harsh of a statement to me. I would think that I could use *any* EMS to the fullest extent of its abilities and then honestly say I tuned my car. I honestly don't believe what you said. I think "leaps and bounds" is more than a stretch of the truth, and the whole "as you guys call yourselves" is obviously an attack/insult.

Don't get me wrong...I'm not saying I could get as good of a tune out of any EMS, but successfully conquering the added complications of AEM by themselves does not alone define a tuner. Someone who can "max out" whatever EMS they have while understanding the limitations of the EMS and the issues involved in the tuning process deserve the tuner title (without the quotes)...in my opinion. And if money were no obstacle (but it is), I'd get AEM EMS. I want more power than stock fuel can support, and the timing problems of AFC are unacceptable *to me*. I'm confident that I'll be able to have fun tuning (yes, tuning) my car with DSMlink, learn a shitload in the process, and make my car much faster. I'm extermely confident that I'd do a great job at it (eventually and maybe after learning many lessons the hard way) and actually know what I was doing and why in the end. I may ultimately be happy with the result, or I may decide to upgrade to AEM to geek out even more on making my car better. I'll realize that DSMlink can't do everything, but if I did a good job with it, I'll certainly be proud of that accomplishment regarless of whether or not you think I'm worthy of a legitimate"tuner" title.

I think what I said repeats what several others have been saying in a different way. My situation isn't the same as everyone else's, and that will probably steer me toward DSMlink. You haven't yet convinced me that this will be a mistake. But I'll change my mind if you do a better job at convincing me. A bit more civility would help in this, though I certainly don't assume you care much about convincing me.

 

[rarson]

I think "leaps and bounds" is more than a stretch of the truth

I think most of what he posts in any given thread is more than a stretch of the truth. Somebody asked about spark plugs and he essentially stated that they are all the same.

Just trying to add some friendly sarcasm.

Yeah, thought so. I just wanted to be sure to cover my bases, though.

I go on the principle that the tuning process starts, when building the engine. all those factors directly play a part in the "turning the screw driver" or "pressing the keyboard keys" process.

I agree 100%. Tuning isn't just about programming the EMS, but selecting and matching all the parts to maximize the whole setup.

successfully conquering the added complications of AEM by themselves does not alone define a tuner. Someone who can "max out" whatever EMS they have while understanding the limitations of the EMS and the issues involved in the tuning process deserve the tuner title (without the quotes)...in my opinion.

Right. I don't walk around telling people that I'm a tuner. I don't consider myself one. I'm a guy who ended up with an Eclipse GSX and happened to find some information about the car on the internet. I learned, and I still am, as I went along. Why would I ever worry about gaining another 5% or whatever by switching to a vastly more complicated EMS when I'm doing this all for fun? I care not what you are doing with your car and your setup and your EMS. When I go to the track, I only intend to beat my own times, not anyone else's. I'm not an expert, so why try to pretend?

I went the complicated route, and it wasn't for me. Simplicity is a great thing. Especially on a street car. I work on my damn DSM enough as it is.

 

[kenamond]

I really don't want/intend to take sides here. I just want to keep the thread civilized. It's gotten a bit out of hand for my taste, but it's also got a lot of great information at the same time (get folks defensive and a lot of truth starts to emerge...along with some low blows and bickering). I'd prefer all personal attacks vanish but the thread continue. So I'm trying to moderate a bit and diffuse the situation if possible.

I know less than all of you about the finer points of EMS (just you wait though!!). I'm just a fly on the wall trying to learn, but the mudslinging is honestly bugging me.

Please...everyone try to end the personal battles if you can and try to have a civilized debate/discussion about the EMS options.

 

[rarson]

It's easy for someone to get attached to a product they've enjoyed great success with, and defend it bitterly. It's also easy for some people to form an opinion of a product without having experience with it and interject their opinion as if it were fact. I'm not specifically talking about anyone in this thread, but I've been learning about DSMs for at least 10 years now. There's been people like that since I started, on the Talon Digest and just about every forum I've ever seen. I take care to stomp out misinformation because I know how much it can suck for the new guy to take the wrong advice.

I think there's some good information in the thread. I know I've done my share (at least) of name-calling, but I was hoping that the mods would let it go (I know I've got some in return) in light of any useful information.

It's probably poignant to point out that tuning methods vary depending on the person who is doing the tuning. I said that focusing on timing is "ass-backwards," but perhaps that's a bit harsh. Personally, I choose to tune my car to my desired AFR and boost first, then worry about timing later.

But there's a reason for that. Advancing the timing only compensates for the fuel's inability to burn fast enough (sounds backwards, right? Because people are always telling you that race gas works better because it burns slower). Any gas, no matter what the type, will change its rate of burn when the air/fuel ratio changes. What this (obviously) means is that, if you can get the air and fuel to burn quickly at the desired air/fuel ratio, then you don't need additional timing. In fact, additional timing would be detrimental to power production, because the flame is going to propagate too early in the combustion cycle. This is why it makes no sense to me to focus on timing. Because timing is simply a method to correct for the amount of time it takes for the flame to propagate. The amount of mixing of the air/fuel mixture and concentration of it in the combustion chamber at TDC will also affect how fast the mixture burns (an engine with superior mixing will be able to run leaner and make more power without detonation). There's lots of different variables.

If you set timing too high, combustion takes place too early and the crank and rod aren't in the right position to leverage as much force as possible. If you set it too low, combustion take place too late, and you have the same problem. I can't really remember the "ideal" for maximum power but off the top of my head, I want to say 20° ATDC. But that's beside the point. The point is that additional timing does not always equate to additional power, so you shouldn't be tuning to maximize timing.

In a DSM, you're still igniting the mixture before TDC. So combustion pressure is being place upon the piston while it's still on its upward stroke. This can create a greater force on the piston during the downward stroke, but too much timing places excessive force during the upwards stroke and you lose power.

So to sum it up, there's a ton of different variables that affect the speed of burning the air/fuel mixture, and timing is a tool to adjust the time at which the mixture is ignited, in order to time the complete burn at the optimum time (for maximum leverage on the crankshaft). Therefore, increasing timing doesn't always equate to increasing power.

Timing seems to be a topic that isn't always well-understood. I think many people play around with it a little and think they "get it" without really understanding what is going on or why it's there. If my explanation hasn't made any sense to you, then try checking out Wikipedia or other links, there's a lot of good information out there. They should be able to help you understand what I'm trying to explain (I'll admit, I can't always word things as clearly as they can be worded).