Met a local forum member at the dyno today and netted some very solid ECU tune only gains.

Stock: 407awhp/427awtq STD.

VMax Tuned: 520awhp/474awtq STD.

Gains of 113awhp/57awtq on 91 octane pump gas.

We expect another ~30awhp/25-30awtq when our +1.8psi pulley goes on.

This is the same ECU tuning that's presently on sale for $1000 + shipping. Please contact us at sales.vmaxtuning@gmail.com or call us directly at 949.264.3072.

Thank You
VMax

 

I'll get this question in before everyone else jumps on it.

What happened with the before run where it falls into a mess from ~5350rpm?

 

+1. If you extrapolate the stock curve, the peak would have come real close to the expected stock number of 467hp (0.85x550). I would suggest your actual gain was closer to 53 horses. Still would be interesting to find out what caused the indicated power disruption on the stock tune..

Even so, still an impressive output.

 

Same... There's no way you can use that before dyno to support your claim of +113whp. There's clearly a problem and your tune did not have that much of an increase. Aside from the fact that would mean 26% drive-train loss, it doesn't make sense to see a torque increase of less than half of the horsepower increase on these motors. A 60whp gain sounds more reasonable.

 

Honestly we have no idea. First this is the lowest reading stock 2016 F Type R we've seen. Second the loss in power with the stock programming is indicative of heat soak, however, we did not see the dip in any of the tuned pulls. Every stock pull showed the same loss in HP/TQ in the same area.

The customer (also a forum member) can back these statements as he watched the progression on the dyno today.



Thank You
VMax

 

We have seen non peak to peak gains of 110awhp+ and peak to peak over ~80awhp already on cars with linear stock curves. I'm not sure where you're getting 60awhp, but it's certainly not from our posted results.

Fact 1) Problem or not the car with stock file couldn't make over 400awhp and consistently showed the same loss in HP/TQ--would you rather we lied to you and painted lines in with MS Paint?

Fact 2) With our ECU tuning the same car made 520awhp and never showed a power reduction issue.

Fact 3) This was witnessed by the owner of the vehicle, and as far as tuning goes, it's not his first rodeo either.

edit: The stock pull used was actually the highest HP and TQ pull made with the OEM calibration.

Thank You
VMax

 

Let's not get carried away gents.

I was not knocking the result post tune (it speaks for itself, impressive!) i was more concerned about what was going on with the stock tune, because that's not normal.

If the power was dropping off like that on the street all the time then I bet the owner is all smiles now that the tune is in!

If it hadn't dropped off in the top end I would have expected maybe 450awhp at the most, so that would still be a ~60awhp gain, which is still very good.

 

Yes, we're finally getting real data from a tuner after all this time. Both the V6 and V8 VMax tunes are producing very impressive results.

 

Actually accurate DT loss measurements for front engined AWD cars are 22.5-25%. This is especially true with 20" wheels/tires and large steel brake rotors.

Car magazines aren't what they used to be but you can gain a lot of insight as to how much power and torque driveline and unsprung reciprocating mass have on cars via the latest C&D highlighting what the GT350R's CF wheels do for performance vs a GT350 wearing Al wheels. The differences are massive.

See attached.

Please also let us know where you have seen torque increases must be 50% of HP increases when tuning a specific vehicle, very interesting...

 

And i'm not saying the tune isn't good, or a large improvement. But you can't be giving out unreal expectations of 100+ gains with false data. People will think they will get this too (as you've advertised) and then be pissed when they only see 60.

 

Stohlen,

He's simply posting the data they recorded. Clearly there's something weird going on with the stock curves at the top end as was acknowledged. However, that doesn't change the fact that there were significant gains across the board.

 

Honestly there is nothing we or anyone in our position can do to make you like us, thankfully that's not our goal.

Our goal is to present factual and objective data to customers and let them derive and decide for themselves whatever conclusions they may from said data.

Instead of presuming we did something to the car to make it run like it did with the stock file, why not wait until the owner posts and ask him if it felt like a dog when stock.

The data is 100% spot on, I'm sorry if you can't handle us posting raw numbers from the dyno.

No one ever said "All" F Type R's will gain this much HP/TQ from a tune, it's just another example of dyno data for us to post. Much like James did with his F Type R, Unhingd with his V6S, etc.

IIRC you are the same member that bashed us for lower pulley pricing even though our suggested price was below the market average for such products already on the market for this brand. There are some people that will never be pleased, and that's pretty much all you can say.

Thank You
VMax

 

Nail on head Sir.

As much as anyone wants to extrapolate the stock curve to eliminate the real life dip in power everyone witnessed over multiple pulls, you are simply interjecting biased/subjective data where there was none prior.

Also extrapolating from midrange rpm on positive displacement blown engines will lead to erroneous data as the change in delta is not linear at redline.

 

All three stock runs attached. Note that we used the stock pull with the highest peak HP and TQ for the before/after tune comparison.

edit: Results from a Super-Flow AWD linked dyno on 93 octane (2016 F Type R) coming tomorrow, another forum member. Just a heads up, if this dyno is like other Super-Flows it will read moderately lower than a DJ. Like an old school Mustang Dyno before they had the ability to correct on par with a Dyno Jet. That means before and after gains will be smaller than with a DynoJet Dyno so be prepared!

Thank You
VMax

 

You can't jump to a conclusion that there is an "issue" with the car. The issue may very well be you and your inability to feel the power loss at higher RPM. Speaking for myself, I felt the car was very loud but slow stock, especially at the higher RPM range (5 < x < 6.5). After I received the tune from Vmax, the car had more power, not only where I wanted it but the lower end as well. As mentioned elsewhere, the car became fun to drive again.

A 25% power loss is very reasonable and realistic, considering the layout of the vehicle. Also, this is Jag's first year making the R as an AWD, who knows how inefficient and clunky it is. You shouldn't default to assuming VMax is trying to trick or defraud because they posted a dyno sheet. I can relate to what was said regarding individuals who will never be pleased. Having worked with many clients and vendors over the years, some people can never admit or be seen satisfied, say 'you're right' or 'I was wrong.'

 

Ok I have no stick in here, but have looked at multiple dyno results to also better understand my own results, and just want to share my thoughts.

Assuming drivetrain losses isn’t a good idea, as that is per dyno type already different. These differences are already caused by tire losses and different ways of strapping down the car on different sizes of drums and other sorts of different ways in measuring as well. Next to that I do not believe the drivetrain is automatically of a bad design just because Jaguar uses this for the 1st time in the Ftype R. I would give them more credit here.

Last but not least, as the awd works in such a way that all power can be directed to the rear wheels at higher speeds/full power (via an electronic clutch if I read the papers well), the actual drive train losses will be closer to a normal rwd car again (not the same as a small portion still gets lost in extra inertia of the front rotating parts).

Considering the stock dyno, there was indeed something wrong there, without a single doubt, so yes you can compare the figures and take that as a factual figure, though not something I would use personally.

Assuming the 1st part of the curve is about right, then an estimated line to 6000 rpm would be closer to 440 hp, which incidentally is in line with jamesjaguar results (stock result and ecu tune even)

 

This is awesome....reason #284 why dyno results only cause arguments. Once this f'ing snow melts - I'll give you all the good, bad and ugly on all this.

There's a bunch of different dyno's - but the track won't like and we'll be able to estimate power from the ET & trap.

 

It would be interesting to see the HP gain of a V6S. Would I be correct to assume that a tune like this would void my warranty?

 

Similar impressive gains were achieved on the V6S and published in the link below. Since there's no difference between the base V6 and the V6S engine other than OEM tune, a base car will show even bigger gains according to VMax.

https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...-153046/page6/

As for warranty questions, anyone who remaps their ECU with any non-OEM tune, should be prepared to have a warranty claim denied IF it's the result of a major engine malfunction requiring repair or replacement of the engine. However, the warranty for anything else is unaffected.

 

Does VMax have a tune for the XKR's?