Keeping up with Demand

[5_Liter_Eater]

I am writing this thread not to flame HPT but to bring up a trend that I have noticed within the last 6-9 months.

I had been using HPT happily to tune my old blown C5 without issue for some time and through the forum's help grew my tuning knowledge exponentially. My discontent started while tuning my '05 vette that I purchased last December. I have run across three things do not work: AC disable via TPS/RPM, DFCO and O2 switchpoints. Whether these things do not work because of bugs in the GM OS or bugs in the HPT Editor program I don't know but they show up in the editor as parameters to change and based on that I assume that the parameters do what they say. When things don't work in the editor it makes me doubt if other things are really working that are not easily verified. The above mentioned things are not huge problems although I would like to have all of them work. I realize that there are other features and bug fixes that trump these issues and I have been patiently awaiting 2.1.20 to see if any of these fixes are implemented. Furthermore I realize that there are still unknown things about the Gen Iv PCMs. Lastly I realize that HPT is working hard on getting Ford support production ready in 2.1.20 and are in beta for Dodge. I don't fault them for expanding their product line, not one bit. To my knowledge HPT will be the first software of it's kind to tune Ford and Dodge directly like we do now on GM and I applaud them for that. Us GM guys are feeling a bit ignored though and it seems like HPT is spreading themselves too thin. When bugfixes and features are requested the standard reply is that there are hundreds of cal's that need to be updated and tested but adding Ford and Dodge support will only increase this problem and then HPT will be hearing complaints from three times the customer base with that many more cal's that need updating. It seems like HPT is in that phase where they are still a relatively small company that is growing too fast to control. Even with the addition of Ford and Dodge and all the other GM PCM's that have been or are being added my perception is that it's still only Chris, Keith and Bill knocking things out (forgive me if I've left anyone out). It just seems like too much to handle. EFI Live is clearly pulling ahead in the GM space. They have more editable parameters, a virtual Gen 4 VE table and autotune. I have no intention of jumping ship but I think unless some things change, HPT's GM customer base/marketshare will slip. The additonal Ford customers will more than make up for this and maybe thats the business decision that has been made but I would like to suggest expanding to keep up with the demand rather than letting things slide.

[Bill@HPTuners]

While you have some valid points here's my .02 on things
a. having a parameter in a calibration doesn't mean its used in all calibrations, take lean cruise for example, or DOD, even though they may be located in all cals for a specific pcm it doesn't mean its activated in the calibration by GM.
b. as far as efilive pulling ahead in the GM market we have many parameters in gen 4, LMM, older vortec, etc, etc that they don't have so what does that say? They have their virtual VE thats great(which btw is still not public even though they said 4 days over a month ago), we are working on a different solution that I feel people will be very happy with. Autotune is great but not easy to impliment and will be free to any of our customers with an RTT enabled custom OS, their autotune is free with their $800 roadrunner setup.
c. Add in the fact that we had gen 4 tuning available a year before them, added p12 tuning before them, added alloytech, added old gm 4 cyl, offered v6 tuning before anyone, have the only 2 bar solution for 98's(without having to swap in a new pcm & repinning your current harness), had the first 2 bar for E40 pcms, have standalone datalogging for newer vehicles, another thing they still don't have after a year of talk. We have & will continue to provide the best GM tuning solution possible for our customers both personal & tunershop.
d. this is also the time of year when all the new models come out meaning we are getting some 30-40 definition new files sent to us to be added which takes time away from new developement, adding new parameters, etc.

Adding things in this industry is never an overnight thing, and adding things while ensuring they are issue free is even more difficult & time consuming. Saying they have 2 things(one of which isn't available yet) out before us doesn't a crisis make nor does it offset the dozens of things we had & will continue to have before them in the future

Not much more I can personally say so take it for what its worth.

[5_Liter_Eater]

Well, personally, do you think you guys are keeping up with demand? Or are you trying to do too much with not enough?

[Keith@HPTuners]

We are definately keeping up, thats for sure.

We have hired staff and are hiring more staff and engineers. We are implementing more solutions for growth. We have a very active distribution channel now, with many resellers. And we have several new products in the pipeline for deployment soon.

[CRASHNBURN]

Last I heard EFI LIVE has hit a bit of a snag on the LBZ & LMM DPS2 & DPS5. Some have heard that they might not be able to do it so I do understand that is this a hard thing to do. I am confident that you guys will figure it out.

[COWLGMC]

Great point Keith,but some of us including me, feel a little left out on some things.I am an extreme novice at tuning and learning as I go.I dont want to sound ignorant...but ...can you dummy up some of the terms or better explanations of what they do.Most tables in HP are very well described and some are not.. a min and max.Im not complaining I love my software for tuning my truck.I guess I dont have a point,just dont uderstand alot of the deep complexity of some of the software and then theres the rude reply for someone asking a(dumb) question,or maybe its just being blunt.If I ask a question about what to tune when I install headers a mod accuses me of blindly tuning!

[OneFastGT]

I know how BillW feels and the good news is you can fix it without having to change all the options of the software. When we load a PCM that for example lean cruise shows up yet we don't have aussi based PCM that can actually take those changes then we need some very technical documentation. And please pardon me if this exists and I have not see it. But if we had an options list that can be accesses via our HPT login and/or downloaded to our pc that lists options per this type of car/year/pcm..etc. That way if BillW were to make a change to whatever option and he didn't see it happen as he had instructed the program to then he could easily look at the technical documentation and say OK here in the list of things for my car's PCM that I can change... sweet now I know. Also you would be able to notes that say in process, not available, etc so that if a person wanted a option that didn't work went to the tech doc and found that it was in process/do able then that person would be able to know hey I can eventually program my car to startup when I fart at the outside of my doors window because of the reasonating vibrations will trigger the factory alarm which I have reprogrammed to start the car. OK hopefully I got a laugh from someone

Anywho my two cents worth

OneFastGT


PS: I two can't wait for all of the ford & dodge stuff without me having to purchase anything else except credits for said type!!! Very nice!! and the free updates for life is nice too

[Bill@HPTuners]

I dont want to sound ignorant...but ...can you dummy up some of the terms or better explanations of what they do.Most tables in HP are very well described and some are not.. a min and max.Im not complaining I love my software for tuning my truck.I guess I dont have a point,just dont uderstand alot of the deep complexity of some of the software and then theres the rude reply for someone asking a(dumb) question,or maybe its just being blunt.If I ask a question about what to tune when I install headers a mod accuses me of blindly tuning!

We generally can't pull descriptions out of thin air, whatever information is available to us is what we give to you and have tried pretty hard to fill in the blanks with the rest of the stuff on the forum.

We've tried to dumb down recalibrating a GM powertrain control module as far as we could but the teams of engineers working for GM don't always make it easy to dumb things down.

Your best bet is to read the stickies starting with this one http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11178 as well as the acronym's list in that same section of the forum for some of the more commonly used terms.

[Keith@HPTuners]

I understand what you mean about parameters showing up that do not affect your calibration.. there really is no easy way from a development standpoint to cure this. There will always be those special cases.

As far as documentation, the stickies on the forum need a major overhaul. I feel they are very hard to nagivate/use.. A proper sticky format with a list of common tuning problems and possible resolutions and suggestions would help a lot. This is somethign I will be working on with Bill in the immediate future.

This is a common issue we struggle with. There are so many neat things in our software but how do we inform the user? Unfortunately, nobody reads the help files and without visual aids, some of these features are hard to understand. We built some demo's to help show some of these features however, just as the sticky problem, more organization is needed here.

Right now it looks like 2.2.0 will be released in a couple of days, along with our new checkout system which will allow direct credit card processing and instant application key generation.. With this hurdle finally completed, many features will be implemented into the software that have been waiting a long time. At the same time I expect our information on the forum to become a lot more organized as well.

[Chris@HPTuners]

It's a constant challenge to keep up with our aggressive roadmaps, we are hiring staff (finding the right people is not easy) to tackle some issues but also the whole industry is battling the PCM's getting more complex and as many would agree "less logical" in their operation. Also, most vehicles have ECM + TCM thesedays which more than doubles the development effort and time. We have been pushing hard to get a few big things completed over the last few months and unfortunately some things have to take a lower priority. I'm not here to make excuses but we have been really snowed in the last 2 months - release 2.2 and other development projects have been taking a lot of time and we are planning timelines to meet some SEMA launch targets.

To address your specific issues, the AC disable feature is a joke from GM and is not logical in its operation - also i believe the ECM doesn't always have control of the AC clutch on some vehicles as the HVAC system is the boss. I'm aware of the O2 switch point issue and will add the extra limits needed although generally they are set well out of the way of "normal" values. Not sure why DFCO isn't working for you, if you have already emailed support then i will chase it up, otherwise email me a scan showing dfco failing to operate and also the tune corresponding to the scan.

Cheers,

Chris...

[COWLGMC]

Keep up the great work guys.

[TrekGTO]

Looks like when you License a car a list of features would show up and say do you want to continue. That would be a good place to add known bugs or a link to bugs and such. The part that says gna cost you X credits works every time.

[OneFastGT]

One thing that is for sure, your ability to keep contact with us the users is to me one of the best things about your company. I must say I am no expert and the demo's you guys have made are great and I hope to see many more.

Thanks
OneFastGT

edit: We posted at the same time so I read your post and I think it would be a annoying to see that every time in the actual software. Keith has noted that the info we need needs to be cleaned up and easier to find the stuff we need. Perhaps if they made the help file pull your pcm info (ex: 2007 Z06) and then the help menus will have list of current features for vehicle opened. Who knows.. I am happy that they are aware and know that we want it addressed.

[truckmann]

Very informative thread... I really look forward to better organization to the wealth of info that is here to continue my learning. I'll admit there are a few features I've heard EFI has that we don't which would be nice to have, but for the most part they are minor differences that I can also live without. Versatility was the main reason I chose HPT since I wanted to be able to tune not only my truck but my wife's Grand Am also. Now I have a friend interested in having some tuning done on his 2005 Mustang. So much to learn and so little time.

[EC_Tune]

BillW (5_Liter_Eater) the DFCO fuel does disable when you set the temps out of range, however the DFCO spark still gets pulled: don't know why. You can populate those tables with "normal running" values to keep the spark from dropping to 5 degrees or less when DFCO spark enables.

[12secSS]

There is also a thing called CFCO for manual cars. Often times coinfused with DFCO if not disabled.

Apart from that, I think Chris, Keith and Ken (as well as Jay and Bill) are doing an even better job now, then before more staff was added.

[TrekGTO]

BillW (5_Liter_Eater) the DFCO fuel does disable when you set the temps out of range, however the DFCO spark still gets pulled: don't know why. You can populate those tables with "normal running" values to keep the spark from dropping to 5 degrees or less when DFCO spark enables.

That is good to know

[5_Liter_Eater]

BillW (5_Liter_Eater) the DFCO fuel does disable when you set the temps out of range, however the DFCO spark still gets pulled: don't know why. You can populate those tables with "normal running" values to keep the spark from dropping to 5 degrees or less when DFCO spark enables.

I'll start another thread about my DFCO problem. All I see it doing is reducing timing at about one degree per second.

[Chris@HPTuners]

try setting the spark ramp in/out tables to 0