What you are claiming is still false, use any word you like, the JB4 does not reduce/override/limit/disable/delete torque mapping/models/settings/parameters/edits. It can skew airflow models to increase boost, resulting in more torque/power.

I cannot speak on behalf of the ppl you see these "logs", but most of the tools out there don't even log the correct pids (HPTuners as the top contender with horrible values), some of the titles for the pid are wrong and/or the correction factor is offset. As for the correct pid that "displays" torque, any tuner can manipulate that value, same goes with things like EGT. Anything that is modelled is not a way to compare before vs after values unless it's an actual sensor reading the data.

Nonetheless, if you installed a JB4 on top of a tune and the car ran faster, sounds like you need to have a discussion with your tuner.

 

I understand you point the piggyback does not remove or change the torque values i know whay you mean ive tuned hundreds of bmws n54 m54 using tuner pro. The piggyback does hide sensor date making the ecu think it's not making the target torque numbers at the end of the day that we call that overriding torque numbers. And we don't need hp tuners read torque values all we need to see is maf flow numbers thats it nothing else. And finally I got thing against your or anybody here I was just sharing my experience I have nothing to win here im not advertising jb4 or any other piggyback just simply sharing what I've gone through while trying to go faster in these cars

 

See that's an issue as well, if you focus on MAF flow values, those are limited in ECU. So, if you find your vehicle runs faster with the JB4, and the ecu is already tuned. It would mean your ecu file is still hitting a limit for the parts combination you have installed, it does not mean JB4 is the good patch option. I appreciate that you are pushing this engine platform, but do proceed with caution if you run the JB4 device on top of a tune, being it seems there's calibration parameters needing to be edited in your file.

 

Torque is not power. You can have a hard torque limit for hardware protection and still add things like pulleys, tunes, etc. to make additional horsepower (really flattening the torque curve) past that peak torque value. It's not the most efficient way to improve the quarter mile time, but it will improve it...

 

could be that I have the older denso ecu I heard they aren't tuneble like the newer Bosch but for now this is what works for me I was stuck running mid 11s 121-122 for a long time. And for the transmission we applied more clapping force in the tune because i was having transmission slip issues.

 

2018 F-Type R with lower , upper, ECU TCU, intakes ( full stock exhaust) stock wheels (Alpha Jag Tuned )
Stock untouched unported or upgraded supercharger
No JB4 or hacks of any kind here 😆




Jaguar & Range Rover Performance Tuning | AlphaJagTuning

 

Well, you have my attention…

 

Nice! Is this with straight pump 93 octane, no race fuel, methanol, nitrous, etc?

 

Around 93-94 octane , no nitrous (cheater juice) , no methanol.

 

77 degrees isn’t ideal. Low 60s would be a big help. Also, are you brake launching? That can save a couple tenths easy.

 

I am brake launching, but according to ChatGPT, I’m doing it wrong. I know, go ahead and laugh at me - but plugging in my vehicle mods, latest time slips, weather, tire pressures, vehicle weight, fuel octane, etc… ChatGPT has given me a whole new strategy next time I’m at the track. In the least, it’s entertaining. If I follow the recommendations and it works, I’ll be very impressed.

It’s looking like maybe the low 70’s on Friday. That’s amazing for AZ and probably the last track day of the year before it’s miserable. I may go.

 

Fell free to reach out!
AlphaJags.com
Or what's up 16057282020

 

Spouting off from a position of ignorance, but could the traction control be kicking in? Since you have an R AWD, I'd try with traction control off and see what that does? Worth a try, Mine seems to jump out a little quicker with just a little spin. YMMV. let us know

 

Didn’t end up going to the track last Friday. Weather was good, but knew that even with a little ethanol and a decent launch I was probably in the 11.2 range at the very best.

I ordered an upper pulley and TCU tune through VAP.

Next track day is first week of April. Since it’s supposed to be 102F next Friday, I’m sure it will be hot then too. We’ll see what the weather is like as it gets closer.

 

@ER9240 You can also reach out to @TT_6SPD_95

Here is a link to some of his videos from a few years back, running a 10.8 with similar setup.

 

I saw that earlier. That sealed the deal for me. Give that guy a coupon code for his next purchase with VAP - he brought in some business for you all ! Lol.

🤜🏼💥🤛🏼

 

We got a little better than 10.89 while letting off pedal at 1000ft

 

We haven't taken a VAP Jag to the strip with any more than 660BHP except...... the FPace SVR with 800BHP and we snapped a driveshaft immediately. To the best of my knowledge, no one has taken the VAP 2300 kit to the strip yet. I'm aware that others claim much higher BHP figures from the 1900 but we certainly don't.

 

Wait.... you mean we ran 10.8 and 130MPH + 4 years ago?

 

exactly that sounds about right a 660hp f type should be in the high 10s at 128-130 and thats what we been seeing from the few f types that are running 10s so until I see an type trap close to 140 or at least 135 nobody is making over 700hp. I would like to see how one of your tvs2300 compared to my tvs1900