Bruce, look I am not going to take your bait and play your childish games. You were the one that came on here with an attitude and started ranting. If you want to start an internet battle go elsewhere I have better things to do. I have proven about EVERY one of the rediculous "myths" wrong that you could throw out at your 16 and 18 year old audience that think your a tuning god. Yet many of them after seeing the results we were getting converter over and started building setups like ours. That pissed you off- well sorry, but I don't set out to appease you or anyone else. I am at the track to get results...plain and simple.
Not sure why your babbling about the 165 ECM, GO find the posts were it went EVERY bit as quick, actually quicker by a tad than the 730 ECM But for all intense purposes they ran identical - few hundredths off. Here is a video of it running 10.47.....hmmm that is a little quicker through the SAME MAF you said was maxed out at 11.0s.
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/Ski-10_47.wmv
The ONLY time it the 730 ECM went quicker was at NJ and I did not have a chance to test the MAF against it, cause I broke a rear spindle. Here is that run:
http://www.azzatochips.com/videos/10.33ski.wmv
There was NO difference between the two at ALL. And with the MUCH larger cam I am running now, the 730 ECM was MUCH worse trying to control it. The MAF did not even flitch at it, and ran it nearly perfect (But I am sure you contest that, that is fine- but look I am the one running the CAM and ECMs- NOT YOU so save the hot air, I could care less what you think).
And if all that is NOT enough, Corky is STILL running the 870 ECM, same exact setup as me, with a slightly a smaller cam - and during our visit to NJ last fall, he ran 10.27@132MPH, though the same MAF you said again was holding him/us back, and through the same injectors @ 45psi you said were static at 11.0s@123MPH. We are now making arund 100 hp more on what, AIR?
You had your little spys come to the track back when you contested what the 406s ran, and they verified what they saw was true. If you don't believe us today, haul your **** over to quaker and take a look and show us what you got.
The Jesse and Corky show will be back in OH soon for your viewing pleasure.
My decision to go to DFI gained me virtually nothing in ET, but the car is mUCH more consistant. What I dial in it runs - you know as well as I do - the stock ECM have too much garbage built into them and trim this and trim that - not enough to matter on your 800+ mile cruises - but it DOES matter when your trying to dial to .01sec consistantly and accurately. I was screwed out of several races last year when the car decided out of the blue to change .1 sec for no reason, then would run the numbers again next pass. Could have I dug into the code and perhaps manipulated it - but I don't care to do all that BS screwing around when its all there in a nice new neat package like DFI. Not to mention now I have complete control over the 6000+ RPM range that the stock systems give ZERO resolution for. You of all people that preach about resolution, should understand that. But again I Don't care if you like the decision I have made or not, or if you approve of it. Nor does anyone else probably care to hear your opinion of it all.
Again if you don't have anything to add to the ORIGINAL topic at hand, and just wish to armchair preach about what you know about tuning - save it - I have heard it all and don't particularly listen to people that can't get results on their own stuff. Just common sense- no offense.
Save the rebuttle reply, cause nobody gives a damn - I already admitted I am a liar and your right about everything. Like that you were right about our cars not being able to break into the 10s with the MAFs on them.
Now let focus on the regular schedule programming.