Why is Upsolute 1/2 the $Cost???
#46
12-22-2007, 11:31 PM
I think the best all-around exhaust is the Europipe II. Expensive
nowadays, but you just saved a grand, right?
nowadays, but you just saved a grand, right?
#48
12-23-2007, 07:23 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CIR PCA Region
Posts: 2,142
Rep Power: 132 
Taking this to the next level since some are quoting crank HP...these numbers are based on Wooosh's dyno numbers with a STOCK exhaust, UMW chip only. 1.1 bar boost (so gas is not really an issue as boost is street gas 93 boost tuned....the extra octane protects the engine but is not really taken advantage of....).
Divexxtreme posted AWD loss at 18.5 to 20%. Taking the best case scenerio of only 18.5 % here, the numbers are about (470 UMW/TJW mod HP) X 1.185 = 557 at the crank. If you belive Woosh's dyno. Even if you think the TJW mod ONLY helps mid curve and you go with his stock exhaust dyno number of 461 you get (x1.185) HP at 546.285.
Now for torque, which is what the UMW flash is really all about IMHO (I have had several driving instructors in my car and they cannot believe the torque, two of whom have other flashes in TT's BTW.....by big competetitors (bigger than upsolute).
Take woosh's stock torque of chip only: 434 then x1.185 and you get: 514.29. If you think his low number applies of 20 ft lbs (up to 30 was seen) then you get 454 x 1.185 = 538 lb ft.
Do you own math on this...it blows away many other chips out there. It tore up my stock clutch in under 24 hours and I have been driving clutches for 20+ years with never a problem...I am a good driver and relatively "nice" to my cars. I don't drop the clutch and drag race ever if you will.
I think that there is a huge difference in the quality of flashes out there. Huge. If you have one of these cars, the UMW flash alone is probably your best bang for the buck, period. And it is not cheap. More I cannot say, but let's just say Kevin's code represents the best of what is Bosch knowledge. To know more data about Bosch one would have to be an active F1 participant.
And even that is maybe not enough. Take a look at Woosh's curves in the "modified OEM exhaust" thread. The data are all there. They are much more flat.,,, the real world effect is the area under the curve. This is the "dose" if you will. What Kevin's code give you is a bigger "dose" of power and as big a "bolus" as anyone else. It keeps revs up for my LWFW too. Which is a nice bonus if you will. Keep this perspective in mind. One needs to integrate the curves to get the real "dose"... So to all the "doc's and phd's there...this is how one of us with multiple real doctorate degrees and a machinist background thinks. I am not saying I know 2% of what some of you guys know about cars. But, I can do math and I am not a mechanical kludge.
Each tuner ads something to our market. You have to give Kevin credit for the code (this is really remarkable when you realize his primary guru-ship is in the turbochargers themselves...). It is remarkable stuff. Take a look at Mikelly's comment above. He just dumped a CAI and such. I wanted that CAI to work...trust me. My only desire is a free (under 1000$) EP2. :-) If any of you are super wealthy santa claus types, feel free to drop one of those down my chimney. I'll deal with the dents and such it gets. :-)
To all, happy holidays.
JCB
Divexxtreme posted AWD loss at 18.5 to 20%. Taking the best case scenerio of only 18.5 % here, the numbers are about (470 UMW/TJW mod HP) X 1.185 = 557 at the crank. If you belive Woosh's dyno. Even if you think the TJW mod ONLY helps mid curve and you go with his stock exhaust dyno number of 461 you get (x1.185) HP at 546.285.
Now for torque, which is what the UMW flash is really all about IMHO (I have had several driving instructors in my car and they cannot believe the torque, two of whom have other flashes in TT's BTW.....by big competetitors (bigger than upsolute).
Take woosh's stock torque of chip only: 434 then x1.185 and you get: 514.29. If you think his low number applies of 20 ft lbs (up to 30 was seen) then you get 454 x 1.185 = 538 lb ft.
Do you own math on this...it blows away many other chips out there. It tore up my stock clutch in under 24 hours and I have been driving clutches for 20+ years with never a problem...I am a good driver and relatively "nice" to my cars. I don't drop the clutch and drag race ever if you will.
I think that there is a huge difference in the quality of flashes out there. Huge. If you have one of these cars, the UMW flash alone is probably your best bang for the buck, period. And it is not cheap. More I cannot say, but let's just say Kevin's code represents the best of what is Bosch knowledge. To know more data about Bosch one would have to be an active F1 participant.
And even that is maybe not enough. Take a look at Woosh's curves in the "modified OEM exhaust" thread. The data are all there. They are much more flat.,,, the real world effect is the area under the curve. This is the "dose" if you will. What Kevin's code give you is a bigger "dose" of power and as big a "bolus" as anyone else. It keeps revs up for my LWFW too. Which is a nice bonus if you will. Keep this perspective in mind. One needs to integrate the curves to get the real "dose"... So to all the "doc's and phd's there...this is how one of us with multiple real doctorate degrees and a machinist background thinks. I am not saying I know 2% of what some of you guys know about cars. But, I can do math and I am not a mechanical kludge.
Each tuner ads something to our market. You have to give Kevin credit for the code (this is really remarkable when you realize his primary guru-ship is in the turbochargers themselves...). It is remarkable stuff. Take a look at Mikelly's comment above. He just dumped a CAI and such. I wanted that CAI to work...trust me. My only desire is a free (under 1000$) EP2. :-) If any of you are super wealthy santa claus types, feel free to drop one of those down my chimney. I'll deal with the dents and such it gets. :-)
To all, happy holidays.
JCB
Last edited by jcb-memphis; 12-23-2007 at 07:51 AM.
#49
12-23-2007, 07:45 AM
Registered User
Yea, I'm 110% sold on Kevin's tune. There's a reason it costs more... Upsolute is leaving a ton of power and drivability on the table. As crazy as I am about John's DGI exhaust, I feel the same about the products Kevin sells. As to the comments about that AP airbox, well it's another math/physics thing. Seemed like the right thing to do to not use it. I lost $100 getting rid of it, and it was worth losing not having to deal with static from the vendor over shipping it back.
Mike
Mike
Last edited by Mikelly; 12-23-2007 at 07:56 AM.
#50
12-23-2007, 07:59 AM
If Upsolute is leaving a ton of power and drivability on the table how much HP and torque would I get with the UMW flash ?
With upsolute flash and europipe and K16/24 my car has 566hp and 790nm or 582lb ft torque.
I would like to know iF UMW could perform so much better and my K16/24 are no ZC..
What drivability concerns,my car runs perfekt and I also have the LWFW set up from FVD ,car never stalls ..
I'm sure UMW has a great flash for K16/24 but I don't believe Upsolute is bad at all..
With upsolute flash and europipe and K16/24 my car has 566hp and 790nm or 582lb ft torque.
I would like to know iF UMW could perform so much better and my K16/24 are no ZC..
What drivability concerns,my car runs perfekt and I also have the LWFW set up from FVD ,car never stalls ..
I'm sure UMW has a great flash for K16/24 but I don't believe Upsolute is bad at all..
#51
12-23-2007, 08:15 AM
Registered User
My car was making 510WHEEL HP/532#ft. of torque with the Upsolute tune/K16-K24 turbos/X50 intercoolers, Bailey DVs and a modified factory exhaust. I'll dyno my car after the new year and I guarantee I'll have picked up significant HP across the board on the chart and will be surprised if I don't max out at above 530 WHEEL HP (I don't factor BRAKE HP because its to subjective).
Anyone living in my general area is more than welcome to come experience Kevin's tune in person. You WILL be humbled. I was. Remember, two weeks ago I had the upsolute with the same setup I'm running right now. Other than the 5 bar fuel pressure regulator and new actuator springs, the software is all that's changed.
Also, My K16/K24s are about five years old... No Zero Clearance turbos here gang...
Mike
Anyone living in my general area is more than welcome to come experience Kevin's tune in person. You WILL be humbled. I was. Remember, two weeks ago I had the upsolute with the same setup I'm running right now. Other than the 5 bar fuel pressure regulator and new actuator springs, the software is all that's changed.
Also, My K16/K24s are about five years old... No Zero Clearance turbos here gang...
Mike
Last edited by Mikelly; 12-23-2007 at 08:22 AM.
#52
12-23-2007, 09:13 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CIR PCA Region
Posts: 2,142
Rep Power: 132
My numbers are for k16's (Wooosh's dyno data is k16 data, umw, stock exhaust). The tune was for 93 gas. 550hp and 530ish ftlbs with a stock exhaust and turbos....that is amazing stuff (crank numbers, with only 18.5% loss). Look at the data and curves from woosh (see his post #45 in the modified oem exhaust thread...). Here are his plots. This is his work. And, he is guru at dyno...wheel data afaik. Look at run 12 (red line on the left...). Look at the torque. Then, look up at the upsolute post of dyno. It is vastly different.
This is the basic issue people. For variability sake, the UMW numbers may all be better, but even if the peak numbers were exactly the same, look at the fall from the peak value. Kevin, notably, never posts numbers and such. He correctly realizes this kind of argument is pointless. I think Mikelly's offer is the best reason to trust the gestalt I am trying to share. But, these are the data. The run 12 data is for a big TJW mod exhaust. The lowest stuff is the stock exhaust. The UMW data is amazing. Just amazing. Until you have been in a car with the software, don't assume anything. I have been in four upsoluted cars and none are nearly as powerful as my car. And they all had fabspeed or similar exhausts save one with stock exhausts. One sounded lousy (really old evo unit that never could get sold on eBay....).
I have a TJW mod exhaust. No drone. You can do this for 50$.... I do plan to get an exhaust next...probably John D's. (nice job John!)
A wise person told me that my next issue may be not the exhaust and stock cat...but the intake plenum/filter....who knows. I am so happy right now with the car. It is a dd and absolutely a blast to drive in open country and in heavy traffic. It is just right, if you will. I am making the interior a bit "cooler" with some custom work. That is it.
Again, happy holidays.
JB
This is the basic issue people. For variability sake, the UMW numbers may all be better, but even if the peak numbers were exactly the same, look at the fall from the peak value. Kevin, notably, never posts numbers and such. He correctly realizes this kind of argument is pointless. I think Mikelly's offer is the best reason to trust the gestalt I am trying to share. But, these are the data. The run 12 data is for a big TJW mod exhaust. The lowest stuff is the stock exhaust. The UMW data is amazing. Just amazing. Until you have been in a car with the software, don't assume anything. I have been in four upsoluted cars and none are nearly as powerful as my car. And they all had fabspeed or similar exhausts save one with stock exhausts. One sounded lousy (really old evo unit that never could get sold on eBay....).
I have a TJW mod exhaust. No drone. You can do this for 50$.... I do plan to get an exhaust next...probably John D's. (nice job John!)
A wise person told me that my next issue may be not the exhaust and stock cat...but the intake plenum/filter....who knows. I am so happy right now with the car. It is a dd and absolutely a blast to drive in open country and in heavy traffic. It is just right, if you will. I am making the interior a bit "cooler" with some custom work. That is it.
Again, happy holidays.
JB
Last edited by jcb-memphis; 12-23-2007 at 09:33 AM.
#53
12-23-2007, 09:50 AM
Yea, I'm 110% sold on Kevin's tune. There's a reason it costs more... Upsolute is leaving a ton of power and drivability on the table. As crazy as I am about John's DGI exhaust, I feel the same about the products Kevin sells. As to the comments about that AP airbox, well it's another math/physics thing. Seemed like the right thing to do to not use it. I lost $100 getting rid of it, and it was worth losing not having to deal with static from the vendor over shipping it back.
Mike
Mike
I just ordered the UMW clutch kit w/ LWFW and can't wait to get that installed. Getting back to topic, I am a firm believer of you get what you pay for. Plus, the support and attention you'll get from Kevin is unmatched. Very similar to my experience with Kleemann for my E55.
Last edited by Dragon911TT; 12-23-2007 at 09:52 AM.
#54
12-23-2007, 10:07 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York City / Taipei
Posts: 282
Rep Power: 29 Taking this to the next level since some are quoting crank HP...these numbers are based on Wooosh's dyno numbers with a STOCK exhaust, UMW chip only. 1.1 bar boost (so gas is not really an issue as boost is street gas 93 boost tuned....the extra octane protects the engine but is not really taken advantage of....).
Divexxtreme posted AWD loss at 18.5 to 20%. Taking the best case scenerio of only 18.5 % here, the numbers are about (470 UMW/TJW mod HP) X 1.185 = 557 at the crank. If you belive Woosh's dyno. Even if you think the TJW mod ONLY helps mid curve and you go with his stock exhaust dyno number of 461 you get (x1.185) HP at 546.285.
Now for torque, which is what the UMW flash is really all about IMHO (I have had several driving instructors in my car and they cannot believe the torque, two of whom have other flashes in TT's BTW.....by big competetitors (bigger than upsolute).
Take woosh's stock torque of chip only: 434 then x1.185 and you get: 514.29. If you think his low number applies of 20 ft lbs (up to 30 was seen) then you get 454 x 1.185 = 538 lb ft.
Do you own math on this...it blows away many other chips out there. It tore up my stock clutch in under 24 hours and I have been driving clutches for 20+ years with never a problem...I am a good driver and relatively "nice" to my cars. I don't drop the clutch and drag race ever if you will.
I think that there is a huge difference in the quality of flashes out there. Huge. If you have one of these cars, the UMW flash alone is probably your best bang for the buck, period. And it is not cheap. More I cannot say, but let's just say Kevin's code represents the best of what is Bosch knowledge. To know more data about Bosch one would have to be an active F1 participant.
And even that is maybe not enough. Take a look at Woosh's curves in the "modified OEM exhaust" thread. The data are all there. They are much more flat.,,, the real world effect is the area under the curve. This is the "dose" if you will. What Kevin's code give you is a bigger "dose" of power and as big a "bolus" as anyone else. It keeps revs up for my LWFW too. Which is a nice bonus if you will. Keep this perspective in mind. One needs to integrate the curves to get the real "dose"... So to all the "doc's and phd's there...this is how one of us with multiple real doctorate degrees and a machinist background thinks. I am not saying I know 2% of what some of you guys know about cars. But, I can do math and I am not a mechanical kludge.
Each tuner ads something to our market. You have to give Kevin credit for the code (this is really remarkable when you realize his primary guru-ship is in the turbochargers themselves...). It is remarkable stuff. Take a look at Mikelly's comment above. He just dumped a CAI and such. I wanted that CAI to work...trust me. My only desire is a free (under 1000$) EP2. :-) If any of you are super wealthy santa claus types, feel free to drop one of those down my chimney. I'll deal with the dents and such it gets. :-)
To all, happy holidays.
JCB
Divexxtreme posted AWD loss at 18.5 to 20%. Taking the best case scenerio of only 18.5 % here, the numbers are about (470 UMW/TJW mod HP) X 1.185 = 557 at the crank. If you belive Woosh's dyno. Even if you think the TJW mod ONLY helps mid curve and you go with his stock exhaust dyno number of 461 you get (x1.185) HP at 546.285.
Now for torque, which is what the UMW flash is really all about IMHO (I have had several driving instructors in my car and they cannot believe the torque, two of whom have other flashes in TT's BTW.....by big competetitors (bigger than upsolute).
Take woosh's stock torque of chip only: 434 then x1.185 and you get: 514.29. If you think his low number applies of 20 ft lbs (up to 30 was seen) then you get 454 x 1.185 = 538 lb ft.
Do you own math on this...it blows away many other chips out there. It tore up my stock clutch in under 24 hours and I have been driving clutches for 20+ years with never a problem...I am a good driver and relatively "nice" to my cars. I don't drop the clutch and drag race ever if you will.
I think that there is a huge difference in the quality of flashes out there. Huge. If you have one of these cars, the UMW flash alone is probably your best bang for the buck, period. And it is not cheap. More I cannot say, but let's just say Kevin's code represents the best of what is Bosch knowledge. To know more data about Bosch one would have to be an active F1 participant.
And even that is maybe not enough. Take a look at Woosh's curves in the "modified OEM exhaust" thread. The data are all there. They are much more flat.,,, the real world effect is the area under the curve. This is the "dose" if you will. What Kevin's code give you is a bigger "dose" of power and as big a "bolus" as anyone else. It keeps revs up for my LWFW too. Which is a nice bonus if you will. Keep this perspective in mind. One needs to integrate the curves to get the real "dose"... So to all the "doc's and phd's there...this is how one of us with multiple real doctorate degrees and a machinist background thinks. I am not saying I know 2% of what some of you guys know about cars. But, I can do math and I am not a mechanical kludge.
Each tuner ads something to our market. You have to give Kevin credit for the code (this is really remarkable when you realize his primary guru-ship is in the turbochargers themselves...). It is remarkable stuff. Take a look at Mikelly's comment above. He just dumped a CAI and such. I wanted that CAI to work...trust me. My only desire is a free (under 1000$) EP2. :-) If any of you are super wealthy santa claus types, feel free to drop one of those down my chimney. I'll deal with the dents and such it gets. :-)
To all, happy holidays.
JCB
#55
12-23-2007, 10:15 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CIR PCA Region
Posts: 2,142
Rep Power: 132 Comparing number between 2 different dyno and without stock k16 baseline on the same dyno is just plain useless ,Dynojet is wellkown for happy number and usually reads 10~15% higher than a mustang dyno. On a mustang dyno , My k16 with upsolute and milltek exhaust did 420hp/488tq ,so if you were trying to say that 461 HP and 434 Tq on a dyno jet is more superior ,then you have to do it again.
I am quite sure that UMW software is giving a better curve with more power. Upsolute is a bargain, no argument there. If you are happy, that is all that matters. If we assume that there is NO WAY to effectively scale the graphs and have us ever agree.... :-) ... I just match the peak to the peak and look at the shape of the curve.....
Just me. In real life, you can always lie on the scale of things, but rarely in the shape of things (on a plot that is).
JB
#56
12-23-2007, 10:39 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York City / Taipei
Posts: 282
Rep Power: 29 I defer to Mikelly after 1/1 to look at things. Day to day variation is huge. The above is stock exhaust....and torque is peak/braking/gear???
I am quite sure that UMW software is giving a better curve with more power. Upsolute is a bargain, no argument there. If you are happy, that is all that matters. If we assume that there is NO WAY to effectively scale the graphs and have us ever agree.... :-) ... I just match the peak to the peak and look at the shape of the curve.....
Just me. In real life, you can always lie on the scale of things, but rarely in the shape of things (on a plot that is).
JB
I am quite sure that UMW software is giving a better curve with more power. Upsolute is a bargain, no argument there. If you are happy, that is all that matters. If we assume that there is NO WAY to effectively scale the graphs and have us ever agree.... :-) ... I just match the peak to the peak and look at the shape of the curve.....
Just me. In real life, you can always lie on the scale of things, but rarely in the shape of things (on a plot that is).
JB
#57
12-23-2007, 01:21 PM
Registered User
Well denial isn't just a word, it's a river, and I was in that "upsolute" boat right along with you guys... I'm telling you all just as I said to a couple guys in PM, I damned near called Kevin a BS artist after the first time I talked to him 10 months ago. He was so confident in his product being superior that I was turned off... I WAS WRONG. I wasted 10 months on a bad tune driving around with god only knows what AFRs, wastegates not working properly, and god only knows what else...
Again, I'll put my car up against any similarly modded upsolute car and if you beat me due to performance, I'll PAY FOR YOUR UPSOLUTE TUNE! WHEN I beat you, and I will, You'll have to come on here and tell the world. I'm that confident. Having experienced both first hand, there is no comparison, and that Upsolute isn't worth the performance you're losing. Until you experience it, you won't believe it.
Mike
Again, I'll put my car up against any similarly modded upsolute car and if you beat me due to performance, I'll PAY FOR YOUR UPSOLUTE TUNE! WHEN I beat you, and I will, You'll have to come on here and tell the world. I'm that confident. Having experienced both first hand, there is no comparison, and that Upsolute isn't worth the performance you're losing. Until you experience it, you won't believe it.
Mike
#58
12-23-2007, 04:25 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York City / Taipei
Posts: 282
Rep Power: 29 Well denial isn't just a word, it's a river, and I was in that "upsolute" boat right along with you guys... I'm telling you all just as I said to a couple guys in PM, I damned near called Kevin a BS artist after the first time I talked to him 10 months ago. He was so confident in his product being superior that I was turned off... I WAS WRONG. I wasted 10 months on a bad tune driving around with god only knows what AFRs, wastegates not working properly, and god only knows what else...
Again, I'll put my car up against any similarly modded upsolute car and if you beat me due to performance, I'll PAY FOR YOUR UPSOLUTE TUNE! WHEN I beat you, and I will, You'll have to come on here and tell the world. I'm that confident. Having experienced both first hand, there is no comparison, and that Upsolute isn't worth the performance you're losing. Until you experience it, you won't believe it.
Mike
Again, I'll put my car up against any similarly modded upsolute car and if you beat me due to performance, I'll PAY FOR YOUR UPSOLUTE TUNE! WHEN I beat you, and I will, You'll have to come on here and tell the world. I'm that confident. Having experienced both first hand, there is no comparison, and that Upsolute isn't worth the performance you're losing. Until you experience it, you won't believe it.
Mike
Last edited by nycsurfer; 12-23-2007 at 04:38 PM.
#59
12-23-2007, 05:14 PM
Registered User
Not bashing you guys, just giving you my first hand experience after 10 months of Upsolute and then 30 minutes with the UMW setup. Anyone with a K16/24 setup and upsolute tune want to get an idea, hit me offline or take my challenge!! I don't do strip clubs, not my scene...
I'm done... Back to your regularly scheduled program.
Mike
I'm done... Back to your regularly scheduled program.
Mike
