Features the UTEC REALLY REALLY Needs to compete with a Standalone
Dec 4, 2004, 01:23 PM
#16
And we need TurboXS to chime in at some point. 
Also, didn't someone write some code to make a gui interface for the UTEC? I thought I dled it somewhere.
Didn't get to test it though, as too lazy, then had a big problem with my evo traded it and have the MR now. Putting the UTEC back soon though.
Idle control btw is Key, help on a lot of things, injectors, cams, intakes especailly.
Oh btw, Jack, everytime I read your damn posts I tend to think wow what an F***ing genious. You into some sort of networking or Engineering?
You should also make a shop and tune. :-P
Tim
Also, didn't someone write some code to make a gui interface for the UTEC? I thought I dled it somewhere.
Didn't get to test it though, as too lazy, then had a big problem with my evo traded it and have the MR now. Putting the UTEC back soon though.
Idle control btw is Key, help on a lot of things, injectors, cams, intakes especailly.
Oh btw, Jack, everytime I read your damn posts I tend to think wow what an F***ing genious. You into some sort of networking or Engineering?
You should also make a shop and tune. :-P
Tim
Dec 4, 2004, 01:39 PM
#17
On an offtopic note, I am actually an engineer, I work in Information technology but have done lots of fabrication over the years. And actually I had been giving some serious thought to opening a shop, and there seems to be some prospects out there, but I am taking my life one day at a time.. If TurboXS had openings (and could afford me) I would jump on the opportunity.
and now back on topic..
I really believe in the TurboXS products, and the Evo UTEC is fairly new on the market, and has the potential for dominating the market because of its flexibility, it just needs a few tweaks.. I honestly would use all the TurboXS products if I had access to them.
and now back on topic..
I really believe in the TurboXS products, and the Evo UTEC is fairly new on the market, and has the potential for dominating the market because of its flexibility, it just needs a few tweaks.. I honestly would use all the TurboXS products if I had access to them.
Last edited by MalibuJack; Dec 4, 2004 at 01:50 PM.
Dec 4, 2004, 01:44 PM
#18
Oh, and the GUI dashboard was something I wrote.. Its actually a data logger with realtime dashboard display, I use it daily on my PDA, there are also several other user written apps. worth noting is the Utec Control Center v3 (UCC3) which is by far one of the best user supported apps I've ever seen, and a commercial product called Data Log Lab which is a log analysis application which I find indespensible for its graphing and ability to calculate horsepower numbers which seem to reflect numbers similar to a Mustang Dyno's numbers.
Like I said earlier, there's much more important features that I'd like to see than a GUI.. The user contributions, Apps, maps, etc.. are the Epitome of the purpose of the UTEC.
Like I said earlier, there's much more important features that I'd like to see than a GUI.. The user contributions, Apps, maps, etc.. are the Epitome of the purpose of the UTEC.
Dec 4, 2004, 03:56 PM
#20
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SLC UTAH
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This would definitley be some VERY VERY nice features for the UTEC. I am not expecting to see them anytime soon. Looking aat the Subaru market compared to the EVO market I think they are going to be working on the STI UTEC more then the EVO and WRX. Hell the STI can't even have a adjustable rev limter, I think if we wait another year we might see a couple of these features added but I am not holding my breath.
*this post is not bashing turboXS at all but just a observation of how the market is and way I would do it if I was turboXS. It is just the smart business choice.
Ben
*this post is not bashing turboXS at all but just a observation of how the market is and way I would do it if I was turboXS. It is just the smart business choice.
Ben
Last edited by bbbwrx; Dec 5, 2004 at 02:04 PM.
Dec 5, 2004, 02:08 PM
#23
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SLC UTAH
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry i made a type the STI "can't" adkust its rev limiter high because the ECU closes the throttle body as soon as you get to the limiter. That means that they UTEC is going to have to control the throttle.(FYI I know alot of you kow this but if you don't the STI has a drive by wire throttle so it is not adjusted by a cable it is done through the ECU.)
I also edited it in my other post.
Ben
I also edited it in my other post.
Ben
Dec 5, 2004, 03:13 PM
#25
where is TurboXS, when ready for it i wanna get the UTEC or the EMS but i havent done much research and turboXS seems like they lag on their updates and people are always complaining about how TurboXS made a product and they get around to updating it every now and again but really dont try to hard to make it the best thing on the market .... i could be ignorant tho
Dec 6, 2004, 07:57 AM
#27
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Guys,
The idle speed control and other idle function are indeed something we are possibly going to offer in the upcoming versions of UTEC software.
While all these features may seem like great additions, I really think most of them are band aids to patch the current software package (MAF Based). What we are in the process of working on is full on speed density. Honestly most of the fixes you ask for will be incorporated into the Speed Density features that make the benefits of the programming time two fold. It’s probably the most effective way to go since it will be considered killing two birds with one stone.
While the GUI sounds like a great option at this point it isn’t really as high of priority as the speed density features. In a way we want to have a prettier Interface but at the same time. I don’t want the pretty interface tech support issues. I mean for the most part the UTEC will work on anything with Terminal Emulation. When it comes to graphs and colors, no one thinks in 3D, some of us may think we do.
The UTEC is the Matrix! 
GUI interface will be approach at a later date, the interface is not the limiting factor at the moment.
Even with that said with the UTEC in current form it is capable of making more power and being very driveable. We have made 460+ whp with stock cams and MAF and my boss drives the car everyday, he loves it. The AMS guys, pre OLF made 500whp+ without a problem through the stock MAF. One of our first EVO VIII Customers Rick from San Antonio, just put down 520whp+ with the current revision of firmware.
Jermaine~
www.turboxs.com
301-977-4727
The idle speed control and other idle function are indeed something we are possibly going to offer in the upcoming versions of UTEC software.
While all these features may seem like great additions, I really think most of them are band aids to patch the current software package (MAF Based). What we are in the process of working on is full on speed density. Honestly most of the fixes you ask for will be incorporated into the Speed Density features that make the benefits of the programming time two fold. It’s probably the most effective way to go since it will be considered killing two birds with one stone.
While the GUI sounds like a great option at this point it isn’t really as high of priority as the speed density features. In a way we want to have a prettier Interface but at the same time. I don’t want the pretty interface tech support issues. I mean for the most part the UTEC will work on anything with Terminal Emulation. When it comes to graphs and colors, no one thinks in 3D, some of us may think we do.
The UTEC is the Matrix! GUI interface will be approach at a later date, the interface is not the limiting factor at the moment. Even with that said with the UTEC in current form it is capable of making more power and being very driveable. We have made 460+ whp with stock cams and MAF and my boss drives the car everyday, he loves it. The AMS guys, pre OLF made 500whp+ without a problem through the stock MAF. One of our first EVO VIII Customers Rick from San Antonio, just put down 520whp+ with the current revision of firmware.
Jermaine~
www.turboxs.com
301-977-4727
Last edited by Imprezd; Dec 6, 2004 at 08:01 AM.
Dec 6, 2004, 08:27 AM
#28
I happen to agree with most of what you said about MAF.. However the problem with the stock maf sensor isn't capacity in the least.. Its the sensitivity to disruptions in airflow and how altering how the intake air is drawn affects its ability to respond appropriately.
I definitely would like to see something as an option, I just don't like speed density for the minor drivability (error prone calculations) issues that I've seen working with mustangs and early GM's with speed density systems. (You think part throttle stumbles are bad now??)
I definitely would like to see something as an option, I just don't like speed density for the minor drivability (error prone calculations) issues that I've seen working with mustangs and early GM's with speed density systems. (You think part throttle stumbles are bad now??)
Dec 6, 2004, 08:39 AM
#29
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MalibuJack
I happen to agree with most of what you said about MAF.. However the problem with the stock maf sensor isn't capacity in the least.. Its the sensitivity to disruptions in airflow and how altering how the intake air is drawn affects its ability to respond appropriately.
I definitely would like to see something as an option, I just don't like speed density for the minor drivability (error prone calculations) issues that I've seen working with mustangs and early GM's with speed density systems. (You think part throttle stumbles are bad now??)
I definitely would like to see something as an option, I just don't like speed density for the minor drivability (error prone calculations) issues that I've seen working with mustangs and early GM's with speed density systems. (You think part throttle stumbles are bad now??)
The EVO's stock maf is awesome because it's so linear but, with it being so linear is it very sensitive at the same time. So even when you vent air back into the intake the car will stumble slightly because of the flow on the back side of the sensor. But take a look at your afr log i bet is relatively flat and dead on where ever you tune it.
The cars that come here and get tuned we haven't seen the part throttle stumbling issues. Previous version of firmware yes, new stuff nope.
Thanks,
Jermaine~
Dec 6, 2004, 08:43 AM
#30
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: MD
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Imprezd
Hello Guys,
The idle speed control and other idle function are indeed something we are possibly going to offer in the upcoming versions of UTEC software.
While all these features may seem like great additions, I really think most of them are band aids to patch the current software package (MAF Based). What we are in the process of working on is full on speed density. Honestly most of the fixes you ask for will be incorporated into the Speed Density features that make the benefits of the programming time two fold. It’s probably the most effective way to go since it will be considered killing two birds with one stone.
While the GUI sounds like a great option at this point it isn’t really as high of priority as the speed density features. In a way we want to have a prettier Interface but at the same time. I don’t want the pretty interface tech support issues. I mean for the most part the UTEC will work on anything with Terminal Emulation. When it comes to graphs and colors, no one thinks in 3D, some of us may think we do. The UTEC is the Matrix! GUI interface will be approach at a later date, the interface is not the limiting factor at the moment.
Even with that said with the UTEC in current form it is capable of making more power and being very driveable. We have made 460+ whp with stock cams and MAF and my boss drives the car everyday, he loves it. The AMS guys, pre OLF made 500whp+ without a problem through the stock MAF. One of our first EVO VIII Customers Rick from San Antonio, just put down 520whp+ with the current revision of firmware.
Jermaine~
www.turboxs.com
301-977-4727
The idle speed control and other idle function are indeed something we are possibly going to offer in the upcoming versions of UTEC software.
While all these features may seem like great additions, I really think most of them are band aids to patch the current software package (MAF Based). What we are in the process of working on is full on speed density. Honestly most of the fixes you ask for will be incorporated into the Speed Density features that make the benefits of the programming time two fold. It’s probably the most effective way to go since it will be considered killing two birds with one stone.
While the GUI sounds like a great option at this point it isn’t really as high of priority as the speed density features. In a way we want to have a prettier Interface but at the same time. I don’t want the pretty interface tech support issues. I mean for the most part the UTEC will work on anything with Terminal Emulation. When it comes to graphs and colors, no one thinks in 3D, some of us may think we do.
The UTEC is the Matrix! GUI interface will be approach at a later date, the interface is not the limiting factor at the moment. Even with that said with the UTEC in current form it is capable of making more power and being very driveable. We have made 460+ whp with stock cams and MAF and my boss drives the car everyday, he loves it. The AMS guys, pre OLF made 500whp+ without a problem through the stock MAF. One of our first EVO VIII Customers Rick from San Antonio, just put down 520whp+ with the current revision of firmware.
Jermaine~
www.turboxs.com
301-977-4727
!! any ETA on this??