Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com

Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/index.php)
-   Vendor and Seller review / feedback / experiences (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=75)
-   -   Trifecta Tune Review. (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65903)

Beauwulf 02-12-2010 06:17 PM

Trifecta Tune Review.
 
Well, unlike these other two gentleman, I have not had such a good experience with Vince. True, the tune does help drivability and the tranny does hit harder. But, unlike the other posters here, I have not had the customer service that one would expect as A PAYING CUSTOMER!

Since Vince's return, I've sent numerous E-mails to him with absolutely NO response! I believe I pissed him off by announcing the tune was not ready for release when both Scrming and my self posted little or no results from the tune. As far as I'm concerned, I'm going to find another tuner to work with!

Beauwulf 02-14-2010 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1481438)
Now, to get something off my chest:

The LLT programming is viable and has been viable since December. This has been proven on both bolt-on and forced-inducted LLT's. In stock form, the LLT is in an extremely high state of tune. Vince informed his testers that there may be little or no gains, and still I'm reading posts about flawed programming/poor customer service. If you're testing a performance product with the knowledge that it may have little or no affect on power, you don't announce that the product itself is flawed. And if you do, don't announce that you've been treated unfairly when said company cuts you off...

Scrming, thanks for your detailed/unbiased reviews :emoticon5:

- Nate

First off, I never said the program was flawed. I said (at that time) it wasn't ready IN MY VIEW as a tester. The claimed 20 HP gain was unrealized on mine and Scrming's cars. You guys have since come out with a rebuttal that the difference must have been due to the Airaid intake. Well, I have the Airaid and I have shown, in real world track testing that that is an inflated claim "in my opinion".

We ( the membership) see claims for new products all the time and it is up to us to test and evaluate these claims. I was providing, what I felt at the time was, a service to the members here by putting the claims to the test. What has surfaced since is, what I believe to be, the true colors of the people involved with this product.

nallen00 02-14-2010 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauwulf (Post 1481576)
What has surfaced since is, what I believe to be, the true colors of the people involved with this product.

If you're referring to our investment of more than $1000 for testing, and the more than $2000 of product that Trifecta and ARH have provided free-of-charge (for our project alone), then those are some brilliant colors you're talking about :thumbsup:

So Vince is evil, and it's his diabolical scheme to fleece an entire community with faulty product and unsubstantiated claims...? The only contribution you've made to this product are complaints, and you're complaining about the very caveat that was explained to you before testing began. You're also the only one complaining...

We'll have definitive numbers on the 24th. We're testing baseline (untuned), headers (untuned), and headers (tuned). Our tester is currently fitted with JBA shorties/no tune, which should give us solid data for comparison. I'll have results posted that evening.

- Nate

Beauwulf 02-14-2010 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1481880)
If you're referring to our investment of more than $1000 for testing, and the more than $2000 of product that Trifecta and ARH have provided free-of-charge (for our project alone), then those are some brilliant colors you're talking about :thumbsup:

So Vince is evil, and it's his diabolical scheme to fleece an entire community with faulty product and unsubstantiated claims...? The only contribution you've made to this product are complaints, and you're complaining about the very caveat that was explained to you before testing began. You're also the only one complaining...

We'll have definitive numbers on the 24th. We're testing baseline (untuned), headers (untuned), and headers (tuned). Our tester is currently fitted with JBA shorties/no tune, which should give us solid data for comparison. I'll have results posted that evening.

- Nate

I've made a fairly substantial investment to this as well. The cost of the product (though purchased at a discount it was NOT free) the time and expense of dyno time and track testing, and the chance I'm taking if things went badly in losing my engine/trans warranty.

You know, I could be wrong but I think I've seen this business plan before. You know the one where a company rushes a product to market with inflated claims. They know it will sell like hotcakes because there is no other competition (well except for Mac and Unix) then fix the problems latter. Well, I for one am not willing to wait for "Service Pack 2" to have a product deliver what was promised!

nallen00 02-14-2010 04:49 PM

You took these risks knowingly...that's how testing works. Slandering everyone involved doesn't change the fact there is nothing wrong with this product. We're dealing with an engine that has been developed to the very edge of its capabilities. If the engine is already at optimum tuning before we try to modify it, there won't be any gains. We’ve proven the ability to modify fuel ratios, ignition timing curves, cam timing profiles, etc. – all the pieces needed for performance-tuning.

- Nate

Beauwulf 02-14-2010 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1482115)
You took these risks knowingly...that's how testing works. Slandering everyone involved doesn't change the fact there is nothing wrong with this product. We're dealing with an engine that has been developed to the very edge of its capabilities. If the engine is already at optimum tuning before we try to modify it, there won't be any gains. Weve proven the ability to modify fuel ratios, ignition timing curves, cam timing profiles, etc. all the pieces needed for performance-tuning.

- Nate

I've been racing since the 70s. I know and accept the risks involved. That does NOT mitigate said risks in the knowing!

I have never stated that this product "does not work". My statement 4 weeks ago was for the membership as an advisory to give process time to "mature" before committing to a purchase that , ultimately, might not yield the claimed results. And, I was "on board" with this process up to the point where you got involved and I had no further responses from Vince.

As a paying customer, I have a right to get what I paid for and I don't feel that I did.

As to your claims of slander... I have stated my opinions on the matter and, the last time I checked, we still live in America so I am entitled to them.

So, I'm done with this discussion and, in my best Forest Gump impression "That's all I have to say about that!"

Beauwulf 02-14-2010 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1482337)
It was never claimed that you would see an increase in power. In fact, it was explained to you that there may not be any gain in power. This has been stated to exhaustion. You participated anyway, didn't see any gains, and proceeded to announce that the tuning didn't meet stated claims. What claims...? Our "claims" are dyno verified...

Correct.

OK, you dragged me back into this for one more post.

If you really want to "prove" the performance gains, pick someone in "neutral" territory who has an Airaid CAI installed and give him the tuning service. Let him pick a dyno and get baselines. then tune the car. After he drives the car for a week, go back to the same dyno and get the numbers... and, let's be sure the hood is closed on both sets of pulls.!

nallen00 02-14-2010 07:29 PM

Firstly, my tester is participating 100% free-of-charge. I don't agree with how the initial testing was conducted, but what's done is done. There are good reasons to use private owners for testing, and good reasons not to. It depends entirely on what you intend to accomplish. And if you do accept a private owner for testing, you have to eat the costs - it's just good business.

Secondly, the only remaining issues are tuning for forced inducted applications where there is a significant difference between reported MAF and what the PCM calculates should be entering the engine based on normally aspirated conditions. There are no other issues. If you're stock, don't waste your money. If you're modded, you will not realize the full potential of those modifications without tuning.

Lastly, everyone knew the risks going in. They accepted these risks. What's silly is later complaining about the risks should they ever surface.

However, you do raise a good point about Vince's availability. At present, Vince is the only person with the hardware/software to generate tunes, so this is a valid concern. Eventually, select dealers will have the ability to provide programming support, but I do not know when this will happen.

- Nate

scrming 02-14-2010 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1482530)
Firstly, my tester is participating 100% free-of-charge. I don't agree with how the initial testing was conducted, but what's done is done. There are good reasons to use private owners for testing, and good reasons not to. It depends entirely on what you intend to accomplish. And if you do accept a private owner for testing, you have to eat the costs - it's just good business.

Secondly, the only remaining issues are tuning for forced inducted applications where there is a significant difference between reported MAF and what the PCM calculates should be entering the engine based on normally aspirated conditions. There are no other issues. If you're stock, don't waste your money. If you're modded, you will not realize the full potential of those modifications without tuning.

Lastly, everyone knew the risks going in. They accepted these risks. What's silly is later complaining about the risks should they ever surface.

However, you do raise a good point about Vince's availability. At present, Vince is the only person with the hardware/software to generate tunes, so this is a valid concern. Eventually, select dealers will have the ability to provide programming support, but I do not know when this will happen.

- Nate

Silly? Only thing that got mentioned was that Vince was not responding to e-mails.... To which I say if it's important pick up the phone... which is what I do... But I hardly call that silly...

I don't think anyone is voicing any other concern but that... The TRUTH is the GROUP BUY announced while Vince was GONE forced Beauwulf and me to voice our concerns about the tune. We were both waiting for Vince to return and review all the data! But that GROUP BUY FORCED our hand and we posted our experience to that point! We were certainly being patient waiting for 3 weeks... I was all set to give Vince all the time he need to review things..

IMHO all this could have been avoided it the Alpha car has been 100% stock and the OTHER people involved would not have hyped the 24 RWHP / 17 RWTQ gain before THEY had all the details...

That being said I look forward to working with Vince improving my tranny and any future mods I do...

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS I AM LOOKING OUT FOR MY V6 CAMARO5 BROTHERS... NOT THE VENDORS.... it that gets me slapped, banned or worse so be....

67 GTO 02-14-2010 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrming (Post 1482609)
.... it that gets me slapped, banned or worse so be....

Banned from C5F? OK, one less I'll have to smack down..... :sm0: J/K

All the best.

nallen00 02-14-2010 08:53 PM

I've actually made a conscious effort to exclude you from this, but OK.

The gains are dyno verified, so there's nothing to hype. And there has never been a claim of increased power for stock LLTs. Instead of arguing with either of you, I conceded that there could be a problem, and waited for Vince to return. When Vince contacted me, I discussed your posts with him, and this was his response:

"I’m not surprised. I warned them ahead of time that there was no guarantee we’d see any gains in power at all, only that we’d tune it to the best of our ability based on the information we have. The LLT tune is viable now – we’re remote-tuning an LLT Camaro with twin turbos on it. We have dyno sheets proving a 20HP gain on the test car we used." - 01FEB10

Vince was aware of the group buy and ARH testing before he left...but...since the programming was still very new at the time, I took you at your word that there could be an issue with the tune. I later discovered that there wasn't, and that's been my only real gripe with either of you to date. We also discussed not selling the tune to stock LLT owners prior to his vacation, and that has been my position since posting the GB.

- Nate

scrming 02-14-2010 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nallen00 (Post 1482794)
I've actually made a conscious effort to exclude you from this, but OK.

The gains are dyno verified, so there's nothing to hype. And there has never been a claim of increased power for stock LLTs. Instead of arguing with either of you, I conceded that there could be a problem, and waited for Vince to return. When Vince contacted me, I discussed your posts with him, and this was his response:

"Im not surprised. I warned them ahead of time that there was no guarantee wed see any gains in power at all, only that wed tune it to the best of our ability based on the information we have. The LLT tune is viable now were remote-tuning an LLT Camaro with twin turbos on it. We have dyno sheets proving a 20HP gain on the test car we used." - 01FEB10

Vince was aware of the group buy and ARH testing before he left...but...since the programming was still very new at the time, I took you at your word that there could be an issue with the tune. I later discovered that there wasn't, and that's what we're discussing now. We did, however, discuss not selling the tune to stock LLT owners, and that has been my position since posting the GB.

- Nate

The gains were on a car with an AFTERMARKET INTAKE! I know EXACTLY what was said between Vince and myself! I was fully aware that there might be ZERO gains and I was perfectly FINE putting down my hard earned CASH knowing full well I might not see and dang thing!

Problem is every one jumped all over that 20 HP gains ignoring that fact that the car had and aftermarket intake and and possibly crappy gas!

And I'm not talking about the ARH/Tune group buy... I'm talking about the original TUNE group buy that was setup... I sure don't remember ANYONE saying oh, by the way might not see ANY gain! I don't remember anyone discussing THAT in THIS forum until Beauwulf and I spoke up!!! I don't think ANYONE was going to plop down $$$$ for no gains!

Like I said, Beauwulf and I were completely HAPPY waiting and giving Vince time he to digest everything until IMHO you came in here and stirred every thing up!

nallen00 02-14-2010 09:13 PM

Good luck to you :thumbsup:

scrming 02-14-2010 09:19 PM

And here's were you put words in my mouth:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpo...2&postcount=20

and I quote:

"Most of you are familiar with comments that have been made regarding the viability of Trifecta's LLT tune. These comments were made by Trifecta's own "beta testers", and did a very good job of convincing everyone that the LLT programming was ineffective/detrimental. I had my suspicions, but instead of waiting to discuss the issue with Vince, I went on the word of his testers. I should have waited:"

I NEVER said the programming was ineffective/detrimental! I simply said I saw NO GAINS... which you NOW admit is a possibility! So you tried to paint ME as the bad guy! And now you're back peddling...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.