talk to me about tuning devices

[94 Cobra 5.0]

I have searched the forums and didn't really get the answer that i was looking for so i figured that i would post this up.

trying to find out which device is better / easier to use / best bank for buck
tweecer r/t or the pms.

I found part of the answer to that question when i searched but am trying to get more specific feedback from users of these products.

backround on the car
1994 cobra
cai, 3.55 gears, rest of the car is stock......for now.

my intention for the car is probably just going to be a nice hci swap and some exhaust work. not really going for forced induction but you never know.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Yobi1Kanobi]

tweecer is going to give u more than u will need. and once you get the hang of it it isnt bad..you will have alot of help on here if you need it. and you will....

 

[Yobi1Kanobi]

the datalog feature is great too!!!! I really like my RT

 

[94 Cobra 5.0]

i was also trying to find installation instructions but maybe i didnt look hard enough. how hard is the tweecer to install?

 

[Mustangless]

pull out the eec and plug it in

 

[Zero Signal]

I have a TwEECer. I used it for a couple of years before pulling the motor. It works. It's not very user friendly and the program is pretty glitchy. Certain things annoyed me about it like having to click on cells instead of using the arrow and tab. Sometimes the tunes would go bad for some reason. The KAMRF values would start going crazy and I would have to reload the tune. One big gripe I have is that the program (CalEdit) is the exact opposite of streamlined. Going through the tabs and searching for the tables and functions you need to edit is clumsey and you only hope that the changes work. Sometimes it takes certain digits and not others so you have to constantly refresh/edit/save/save backups if it works.

The CalEdit has hundreds of scalars, functions and tables you can edit, but you only want to mess with a handful of them. When you choose the computer and strategy, it doesn't remove the irrelivant features for you so you have to sift through all of it. For example, there is a drop down menu where you can shoose that MAF curve. That menu has like 100 things in it you don't need which make dealing with the program annoying. Then you set the values and hope that they take. They usually do, but they get rounded in all sorts of strange ways when you refresh.

A lot of people don't seem to have a problem with that. Being an engineer, I get annoyed with clunky designs and that software is definitely that. But it does WORK. You have to know what you are doing and what you are looking at. You need to read up on everything on the internet. CalEdit has some documentation but I didn't find it that helpful. The internet has better information. It's getting better, but it's still confusing becuase many of the users have different EEC computers than ours so you have to know what you're reading.

Anyway, the tweecer WORKS, but CalEdit is not very well designed and you really need to know what you are doing. I knew what was going on, but I hated the trial and error associated with it and the lack of confidence I had with the program being glitch free. When I upload something to my EEC, I don't want a voice in the back of my head saying, I hope this doesn't glitch again.


Anyway, with that said, I'm going to be buying a PMS when I get the dough to put my car back together. I've seen it used and love how streamlined it is and would be more confident in it in general. I may start off with the Tweecer and if I can get the tune perfect without constantly screwing with it, I may keep it and not bother. I'm a tinkerer so that probably won't happen.

I don't want to bash it too bad becuase it works and you can get the result you want with it. I never would have getten the car running properly without it and it was all I could afford at the time. Plus the datalogging is super cool and almost essential to getting the tune nailed down. If you buy one, only buy the R/T. The PMS will datalog, but it takes more hardware.

 

[94 Cobra 5.0]

Thanks for the replies thus far. My plan is getting some needed things fixed on the car come tax return time. My budget is $2,000 but most of that is needed for general repairs. I want to throw some "fun" items on the car and thats one of the reasons why im looking into the computer system because of future mods.
My main problem is that my motor has around 156,000 miles on it and is leaking vital fluids like its going out of style, and have may other things that need to be fixed.
My list is quite extensive
All suspension components in the front and rear end.
rear diff rebuild trac-lock is starting to go.
clutch and flywheel needs re-done
and many other things.

but getting back to the tweecer, i dont think i will have a problem figuring out the system just because im good with computers and catch on quick. looks like the tweecer gets the nod

 

[nmcgrawj]

The tweecer opens up the stock computer, where as the PMS adds features. The tweecer is harder to use, goes deeper into the eec, etc. The PMS cant obtain just as good of tune and its much easier to use. Support is just as big as the support for a tweecer.

I've ran the PMS on a h/c/i 302 and a h/c/i 351w in my 95 and was able to tune both to run damn near as good as stock. My vote goes to the PMS. Some guys like spending hours figuring out how the tweecer and eec works, where as others just want the results. Look up the features of both and make the decision then.

 

[Zero Signal]

If you're good with computers, you may also hate CalEdit becuase you know how GOOD software should work.

Nonetheless, if you don't have much for mods, I wouldn't bother with it. I bought my TwEECer when my car was practically stock (had an intake/headers/exhaust). It didn't do anything for performance other than give me the ability to change the fan settings which was nice. The factory tune was just about right. A bit more timing squezed a tad bit of power in the top end but it was barely noticeable.

If you need such an extensive tune-up, you are better off with fixing things up first and throw in some 3.73s with the diff rebuild.

 

[blksn955.o]

The tweecer program does suck. However, you can get this program called Eec Annalizer (EA) and it will do a good bit of some of the more important things based off the datalogs collected. It has great help files and takes a bit of the head scratching out of the process.

Also the maker of EA has his own version of cal-edit called Binary Editor (BE). MANY of the tweecer users are moving over to that platform due to the ease of use and light years better development if not for the fact the creater updates and is working on a solid end product. It is a tad more complicated to get started but as more people post how they converted and become familure with it...things will get a lot better. I am looking very hard at making the move myself depending on some things go. I am not 100% sure if the need is there as my car seems to run for the most part ok since it is not that wild. Then again my KAM's never get to the point issues can pop up as it is a toy and not driven daily with the batt. undone incase it is some time before driven again.

My one complaint about the PMS is it takes a good bit more money to datalog and you will still not get access to the maftransfer. It works and has great dealer support with much greater ease of use. IMHO just bang for buck less features if you already have a laptop.

With any tuner it will only be as good as the one tuning the car. PMS, Tweecer, SCT, diablo, Moats, AEM, and FAST...each one will have its own details that one will have to know along with the details of the processor being tuned to be effective.

 

[final5-0]

I gottta echo a lot of what John said

I've fooled around with it a bit ... so here is my short take on it

The Tweecer can be a bit finicky at times

One real strong point about Tweecer is you get real time data that you can
capture to a file and analyze

Another strong point is you have access to most things that are needed
to really dig down deep and fine tune for stock like drivability

even though you got a lot of hot rod parts

that have thrown everything out of whack

from the pcm's perspective ... that is

In a nutshell ...

you use that data you captured to see what is really going on

then

you change the data in the pcm to reflect what you need
or should I say
what you THINK you need

Looking at the captured data after you made your changes

THEN ... you get the opportunity to smile or say I went the wrong way

The Tweecer is not user friendly
but
It can allow one to be very effective at dealing with drivability issues :Word:

Grady