LMS 3 bar V11 93 bounces off rev limiter

[StealBlueSho]

I don't think I'm the only one to say that this offer should have been made before now.

I think that’s a “Ding”...

 

[SM105K]

I would be more worried about the how mum they are about fixing the guinea pig car if it were to break during diagnosis.

 

[brucelinc]

I give Livernois credit for their offer to get to the bottom of this by having someone bring their car to them for evaluation. I understand some reluctance to do this due to additional wear/tear during the diagnosis. To be fair about the risk involved, keep in mind that there is also some element of risk when we datalog tunes from other tuners. Many of us have done that without much worry so I wouldn't be too concerned with Livernois' offer.

 

[shoblock]

I give Livernois credit for their offer to get to the bottom of this by having someone bring their car to them for evaluation. I understand some reluctance to do this due to additional wear/tear during the diagnosis. To be fair about the risk involved, keep in mind that there is also some element of risk when we datalog tunes from other tuners. Many of us have done that without much worry so I wouldn't be too concerned with Livernois' offer.

I'm not going to take my car to LMS. There is a big difference between datalogging a car that is shifting perfectly and a car that is not shifting, holding revs, or shifting like an old worn out C6 at 6000+ rpm. (Taking a LONG time to change gears).
So, you will be taking your car there?
Shoblock

 

[bpd1151]

I've had no problems as described in this thread, and I've been to LMS on multiple occasions to dyno my SHO.

Given the fact that LMS holds the platform record for speed (& formerly power, by a scant 3whp) with my SHO tyvm, I have no qualms and no hesitation whatsoever in bringing my SHO back to them once again.

And I will !

I am eagerly looking forward to my next dyno session (hopefully) this Spring, after I finish installing all of the next round of aftermarket/performance parts that I've been amassing the last 6 mo.'s or so!

Onto new records once again!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[StealBlueSho]

I've had no problems as described in this thread, and I've been to LMS on multiple occasions to dyno my SHO.

Given the fact that LMS holds the platform record for speed (& formerly power, by a scant 3whp) with my SHO tyvm, I have no qualms and no hesitation whatsoever in bringing my SHO back to them once again.

And I will !

I am eagerly looking forward to my next dyno session (hopefully) this Spring, after I finish installing all of the next round of aftermarket/performance parts that I've been amassing the last 6 mo.'s or so!

Onto new records once again!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

New records huh? You do have quite the pile of parts gathering in your garage!

 

[brucelinc]

I'm not going to take my car to LMS. There is a big difference between datalogging a car that is shifting perfectly and a car that is not shifting, holding revs, or shifting like an old worn out C6 at 6000+ rpm. (Taking a LONG time to change gears).
So, you will be taking your car there?
Shoblock

I understand what you are saying and respect your concerns. I don't even let a dealership tech test drive my cars unless I am with him. Would I take my car there if it had the issues that you are describing? I certainly wouldn't dismiss their offer out of hand. I would first request an in-person conversation with their leadership. I would want to know what process they would use with my car to get to the bottom of this and make it right. If I couldn't have that meeting, I probably wouldn't leave my car, either. However, if we could chat and I was satisfied with that conversation, I would give them the opportunity. If I still had concerns, I would consider it a lesson learned and move on. Sometimes, things just don't work out.

Best to you and your SHO.

 

[moonie]

I think that’s a “Ding”...

Correct, but it has nothing to do with them paying for a rental car... I didn't say I didn't ding them...

 

[moonie]

And I would absolutely let them diagnose my car for the betterment of their tune program and for this community. If I lived close enough.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

And I would absolutely let them diagnose my car for the betterment of their tune program and for this community. If I lived close enough.

Distance may not be such a problem we may be able to transport, shoot me a pm for the with your address and zip and ill see if i can work something out

 

[yaycandy]

Yea mine does it all the time. Dosnt matter if tcs is on or off. Paddleshifting or just letting it shift on its own. It does it about 50% of the time with mine when just letting it shift on its own and 100% of the time when paddleshifting. Just poor tune i guess. A friend of mine had nothing but trouble with livernois tunes also. Their canned tuned philosophy shows you what type of performance shop they are

 

[yaycandy]

Even with a new engine, same issue

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

Yea mine does it all the time. Dosnt matter if tcs is on or off. Paddleshifting or just letting it shift on its own. It does it about 50% of the time with mine when just letting it shift on its own and 100% of the time when paddleshifting. Just poor tune i guess. A friend of mine had nothing but trouble with livernois tunes also. Their canned tuned philosophy shows you what type of performance shop they are

Without more info we can't be certain on the SST shifting, but if you wait until 6300 to paddle you are going to smack the limiter, in SST mode you would probably have to hit the paddle at about 5800 to make up for the delay. As for the actual shifting issue it seems we keep beating up the same conversation over and over when we know what the issue is, we know how to definitively fix the stutter/no-shift but everyone seems to want us to tune around a problem. Simply put that is not how we do things, we care more about the safety of your engine than others it would seem. Everyone knows it's fuel pressure related, but very few want to actually fix the issue. That is ultimately what the problem here is, so it just confuses us why people want us to remove safety in the tune to band-aid it.

When you say canned tunes "show what kind of company" we take this as a compliment. Spending serious dyno time, time with our own cars, engine dyno time, lab time, and time with customer builds in person gives us advantages over any other company out there. Think about it this way. we are on version 16 since 2013, where as most other places are doing more revisions on that per customer. Why? because it's guess work. If people really knew the way the EcoBoost logic worked, it would take 1, maybe 2 revisions to get it right where it should be. So we can't agree with the suggested tone that our approach is inferior. We actually feel that everyone else is taking advantage of their customers by sending them out to do their work on data collection for them. Additionally, people need to stop thinking that "running fine" or "aren't experiencing issues" does not mean "the calibration is properly made" We created the solution for the real problem customers are experiencing on these cars, but because others will lean out the tune, and make them shift earlier than it should they get praised, while others look down on us for taking the only proper path for these cars: increasing fuel delivery capability.

All of what we are saying has been validated by customers that have elected to upgrade their HPFP, How many people out there can say they have any issue with our HPFP tune? I have never seen that on this board or any others because it actually fixes the issues. The only people who are having this issue are the people who do not have this pump, but people keep wanting us to risk burning up their engine to avoid purchasing a product that dramatically improves the safety and performance of their car. Quite counter-intuitive when you think about that people are wanting safe, powerful tunes, but go out of their way to avoid buying a part that helps to ensure the ability for a company to deliver a safe and powerful tune.

yes it's a little bit of a soap box rant, but people need to understand the difference in approach and see why one is correct, and the other is just masking the issue. It's not because we aren't capable of doing that, it's because we know that path leads down the road towards failure. Something we would never expect our customers to tolerate from us.

 

[yaycandy]

Without more info we can't be certain on the SST shifting, but if you wait until 6300 to paddle you are going to smack the limiter, in SST mode you would probably have to hit the paddle at about 5800 to make up for the delay. As for the actual shifting issue it seems we keep beating up the same conversation over and over when we know what the issue is, we know how to definitively fix the stutter/no-shift but everyone seems to want us to tune around a problem. Simply put that is not how we do things, we care more about the safety of your engine than others it would seem. Everyone knows it's fuel pressure related, but very few want to actually fix the issue. That is ultimately what the problem here is, so it just confuses us why people want us to remove safety in the tune to band-aid it.

When you say canned tunes "show what kind of company" we take this as a compliment. Spending serious dyno time, time with our own cars, engine dyno time, lab time, and time with customer builds in person gives us advantages over any other company out there. Think about it this way. we are on version 16 since 2013, where as most other places are doing more revisions on that per customer. Why? because it's guess work. If people really knew the way the EcoBoost logic worked, it would take 1, maybe 2 revisions to get it right where it should be. So we can't agree with the suggested tone that our approach is inferior. We actually feel that everyone else is taking advantage of their customers by sending them out to do their work on data collection for them. Additionally, people need to stop thinking that "running fine" or "aren't experiencing issues" does not mean "the calibration is properly made" We created the solution for the real problem customers are experiencing on these cars, but because others will lean out the tune, and make them shift earlier than it should they get praised, while others look down on us for taking the only proper path for these cars: increasing fuel delivery capability.

All of what we are saying has been validated by customers that have elected to upgrade their HPFP, How many people out there can say they have any issue with our HPFP tune? I have never seen that on this board or any others because it actually fixes the issues. The only people who are having this issue are the people who do not have this pump, but people keep wanting us to risk burning up their engine to avoid purchasing a product that dramatically improves the safety and performance of their car. Quite counter-intuitive when you think about that people are wanting safe, powerful tunes, but go out of their way to avoid buying a part that helps to ensure the ability for a company to deliver a safe and powerful tune.

yes it's a little bit of a soap box rant, but people need to understand the difference in approach and see why one is correct, and the other is just masking the issue. It's not because we aren't capable of doing that, it's because we know that path leads down the road towards failure. Something we would never expect our customers to tolerate from us.

Yep, in al my email back and forth with livernois and on their website. Nothing is said about using your pump on that tune. Ill talk to my lawyer. You just gave me all the info i need. You gave me a tune that required a better fuel pump without telling me. Ford has my engine and said timing and lean mixtures caused its failure. Now you say i need a correct high flow pump. Ill be in contact with the owner of livernois soon

 

[StealBlueSho]

I can vouch for the Firestorm HPFP from LMS coupled with their tune. It works well. No issues here. I have written reviews of it on the EBPF.

I have purchased a lot of different upgrades between my 2010 and 2016 SHO. The HPFP is by far one of the best purchases I have made.

Think of it this way.. you can by a CAI and an Exhaust system which do very little to nothing for your car. Or you can purchase a Firestorm/XDI HPFP which actually has real world data proven improvements for your tuned SHO... the price is equal either way you go.

 

[yaycandy]

“The only people who are having this issue are the people who do not have this pump, but people keep wanting us to risk burning up their engine to avoid purchasing a product that dramatically improves the safety and performance of their car. Quite counter-intuitive when you think about that people are wanting safe, powerful tunes, but go out of their way to avoid buying a part that helps to ensure the ability for a company to deliver a safe and powerful tune”

93 octane 3 bar tune on your website and in emails does not require a high flow fuel pump and in the email that i tell the tuner what mods i have, i never put a high flow fuel pump. So i got a tune that requires a high flow fuel pump? Haha you guys are funny. See you in court.

 

[yaycandy]

Without more info we can't be certain on the SST shifting, but if you wait until 6300 to paddle you are going to smack the limiter, in SST mode you would probably have to hit the paddle at about 5800 to make up for the delay. As for the actual shifting issue it seems we keep beating up the same conversation over and over when we know what the issue is, we know how to definitively fix the stutter/no-shift but everyone seems to want us to tune around a problem. Simply put that is not how we do things, we care more about the safety of your engine than others it would seem. Everyone knows it's fuel pressure related, but very few want to actually fix the issue. That is ultimately what the problem here is, so it just confuses us why people want us to remove safety in the tune to band-aid it.

When you say canned tunes "show what kind of company" we take this as a compliment. Spending serious dyno time, time with our own cars, engine dyno time, lab time, and time with customer builds in person gives us advantages over any other company out there. Think about it this way. we are on version 16 since 2013, where as most other places are doing more revisions on that per customer. Why? because it's guess work. If people really knew the way the EcoBoost logic worked, it would take 1, maybe 2 revisions to get it right where it should be. So we can't agree with the suggested tone that our approach is inferior. We actually feel that everyone else is taking advantage of their customers by sending them out to do their work on data collection for them. Additionally, people need to stop thinking that "running fine" or "aren't experiencing issues" does not mean "the calibration is properly made" We created the solution for the real problem customers are experiencing on these cars, but because others will lean out the tune, and make them shift earlier than it should they get praised, while others look down on us for taking the only proper path for these cars: increasing fuel delivery capability.

All of what we are saying has been validated by customers that have elected to upgrade their HPFP, How many people out there can say they have any issue with our HPFP tune? I have never seen that on this board or any others because it actually fixes the issues. The only people who are having this issue are the people who do not have this pump, but people keep wanting us to risk burning up their engine to avoid purchasing a product that dramatically improves the safety and performance of their car. Quite counter-intuitive when you think about that people are wanting safe, powerful tunes, but go out of their way to avoid buying a part that helps to ensure the ability for a company to deliver a safe and powerful tune.

yes it's a little bit of a soap box rant, but people need to understand the difference in approach and see why one is correct, and the other is just masking the issue. It's not because we aren't capable of doing that, it's because we know that path leads down the road towards failure. Something we would never expect our customers to tolerate from us.

Sorry Cody, i got upset when i read the 3rd paragraph. I 100% agree it would run better with a better fuel pump and its high on my list of future upgrades but when i called in last month to ask for a dyno tune session to tune for ARP turbo upgrades i was told no. That they do not tune for them but then you guys can send me a tune file that works correctly with a higher flow fuel pump, that i do not have or was not told anything about ever needing it

 

[SaveMelMac]

Then don’t offer a tune that you claim is “safe” without a HPFP.

 

[yaycandy]

Then don’t offer a tune that you claim is “safe” without a HPFP.

Heres the pack i got. Where does it say anything about high pressure fuel pump??

 

[Raging Bull]

Just wondering about the cars with low miles on them that have tunes on them knowing that the warranty’s can be voided if a tune is found, if and when u need a problem fixed. Wouldnt an aftermarket hpfp cause an issue right away with ford ? Or is it acceptable. The tune you can hide a ( lil) hee hee but I can’t change the fuel pump every time I go to the dealer no do I want too. If known I needed the pump I would have bought it when I bought the pkg from LMS. Never new that I needed it. May not have ordered anything then just saying. SHO confused !