# Quick Review: TTRS Tune: APR To United Motorsports



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

The ECU got back in last night, and I didn't have a chance to put it in until this morning. I say quick review, as I have all of 30-40 Miles on it,not much more, not much in the way of adaption time.As others have experienced, with APR, I've always had "misfires" under high gear/lower rpm / boost onset. With going to Stage2, I've began to suffer other higher RPM hiccups. After working with APR it was advised I need to move back to stage1 or run a low output stage2 file to correct the hiccups. It was surmised that the extra large 034 downpipe and other mods are exceeding their expected power and running into fueling problems. These problems only got worse when it was cold out. 

On the plug front, I tried everything I could from stockers re-gapped to .25, $$$ NGK Race @ .25, and I finally just bought a fresh set of OEM plugs and tossed them in, always the same issues. 
After speaking to someone who had the same issues, and moved to UM, I felt I needed to at least try this before writing it off, and I'm glad I did. 

UM Highlights: 

It was 28 degrees here this morning, and the car started and idled like it was 80. No crazy hiccups, no popping and weird throttle response and such when you first drive it cold, as smooth as butter. 

Took the car for a drive around the neighborhood to warm it up a bit and everything seems to be "smoother" for the lack of a better word. (think this is related to throttle response, more on that later) 

Once warmed up, I decided to try and induce the high gear misfires which have always been present. After about 10+ pulls form 60-80+ in 6th gear, and similar pulls in 5th, not one, just silky smooth power. 

Then came the true test, did the awful hiccups go away? YES. 
Several pulls 3rd through the end of 4th without a single hesitation, just smooth sailing all the way. This is @ 28 degrees mind you. Last week in the 40's I would get 3-6 hiccups in 4th gear alone. 

Key Differences between APR (other than no misfires/hiccups): 

Throttle response, it seems the UM tune favors the "non sport" side of the house. I saw it noted they got rid of some of the "jerky" nature of the sport mode, but kept everything else. 
As someone who's always driven in sport mode (seriously less than 5 minutes in non sport in a year maybe), this took a moment to get used to. Everything is done in a much more smooth/gradual fashion. 
Mashing the pedal gives the feeling of a boost curve vs a boost spike. Once underway, the power is awesome, just gets there in a smoother way vs a huge burst then leveling out. This certainly helps avoid wheelspin when it's this cold out. 

What's nice though is part throttle tip in, in say 6th is even more powerful feeling than full throttle on the APR tune. The tune seems to command the perfect amount of boost for instant passing power. Only once you want to go from say 1/4 to full throttle to you feel the gradual onset of max boost. 

I'm very satisfied with the new tune, my car feels great and doesn't drive like it has all kinds of problems any longer. I can take people for a ride without being embarrassed!I still need to put many more miles on it of course, and will add anything over time. 

Huge thanks to UM, I just wish they were around with this earlier before so many people started playing with plugs etc.


----------



## RisR32 (Aug 31, 2005)

hmmmmm........


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

the write up in much appreciated! Please do keep us posted as you put more miles on it...again thanks very much the input. Glad to hear you are enjoying the car again at its fullest potential!


----------



## Dan.S (Jan 3, 2012)

Show a graph reading of the boost curve, and the timing curve. If like to compare it to the stasis, revo, an APR I have seen.


----------



## Optimus812 (May 5, 2012)

Dan.S said:


> Show a graph reading of the boost curve, and the timing curve. If like to compare it to the stasis, revo, an APR I have seen.


 Agree, would love to see the boost curve from 3k to redline and compare it to the apr flash I'm currently running. 



Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

I'll get logs when I can guys, but this tune is seriously smooth and crazy powerful.

After many drives today, I can seriously say this tune is sneaky fast.
It doesn't feel peaky, it just ramps up and applies serious pressure to your chest and pulls hard right to redline. It's quite deceiving in traffic if you aren't paying attention.

A small squirt into power in 6th, you feel like you are are 80, but are creeping up on 100.
It's velvet sledgehammer, smooth and alarmingly quick without ever knowing...


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

all these reviews are nice and all, but people need to make side by side pulls in 3rd and higher


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

Jeff's UM tunes are very smooth. I have his tune on my 3.2 6MT and the car is super smooth through the rev range and is quite alive past 4000 rpm when the plenum switch happens.

Glad you like it!


----------



## Black BeauTTy (Jun 11, 2011)

tdi-bart said:


> all these reviews are nice and all, but people need to make side by side pulls in 3rd and higher


Honestly, "people" don't "need" to do anything. We're all busy enjoying our cars as we have them set up, and you are welcome to enjoy yours too.


----------



## drosspike (Mar 23, 2013)

Yes boost curve please.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Black BeauTTy said:


> Honestly, "people" don't "need" to do anything. We're all busy enjoying our cars as we have them set up, and you are welcome to enjoy yours too.


I'm not sure what's expected either. These are probably at most tenths of a second different in 0-100 or 1/4 mile runs.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

Any more impressions after you've had additional time in the car?


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

I will admit, I am thinking about making the switch from APR over to the UM Tune.

I am also experiencing the occasional misfires and with the stage 2 flash I immediately noticed hesitations at high rpm.

I am just having a hard time getting myself to dump another $900 into a tune when I already have paid for one.

Anyone know if UM is going to have a spring sale? Or if they will eventually support a stage 3 setup?


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

i would wait a bit if you're going to make a move. apparently they will be updating their software to include launch control and no lift shifting for the manual TTRS :thumbup:


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

croman44 said:


> I am just having a hard time getting myself to dump another $900 into a tune when I already have paid for one.


 After reading through these multiple UM threads it has got me thinking the same. I had problems with APR stage 1. When I went to stage 2 they gave me the LO file and I haven't had any problems, but I am apparently leaving a decent amount of power on the table. Not really looking forward to dropping another $900. I wish you could sell a tune, even if it was just half the money back.

Looking forward to seeing more comparison reviews and dynos of the UM tune from other members.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Marty said:


> Any more impressions after you've had additional time in the car?


The best way to put it is that the car feels like it has matured.
Less of an on/off switch, more progressive/smooth power delivery. I spent a whole tank of fuel feeling it out over the weekend, as autox season begins here next week. You can feed power coming out of a corner vs a huge spike that can upset the car, I think it will be most helpful in Autox as the car tends to get crazy coming out of corners on street tires. 

When you lay into it on the freeway in 4th gear, you feel power building over a second vs a spike and then smoothing out. It just pushes you into your seat, even at those speeds and 4th goes by in a blink. Its how I would imagine a larger displacement n/a motor would feel, progressive and always with more in reserve, vs giving you everything up front at 1/3 throttle and then nothing from there. It's simultaneously more powerful and yet deceivingly smooth.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

I have Revo stage 3 & Loba 500P. Car works perfectly and based on the logs I think it's the best you can achieve with this hybrid ... but I am quite interested about the no lift shift option. 

Anyone knows if this option would be available for a non UM software? - I want to keep the Revo software but to have this option flashed by UM (when and if it will be available).


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

cipsony said:


> I have Revo stage 3 & Loba 500P. Car works perfectly and based on the logs I think it's the best you can achieve with this hybrid ... but I am quite interested about the no lift shift option.
> 
> Anyone knows if this option would be available for a non UM software? - I want to keep the Revo software but to have this option flashed by UM (when and if it will be available).



Not to speak for them, but UM might be able to do a custom/remote tune. Doubt the LC/NLS would be available ala cart without their software.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

LynxFX said:


> After reading through these multiple UM threads it has got me thinking the same. I had problems with APR stage 1. When I went to stage 2 they gave me the LO file and I haven't had any problems, but I am apparently leaving a decent amount of power on the table. Not really looking forward to dropping another $900. I wish you could sell a tune, even if it was just half the money back.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing more comparison reviews and dynos of the UM tune from other members.


Have you guys considered asking APR for a return / refund (minus any fixed costs) due to the issues with the tune you're experiencing? This seems totally reasonable if it's not working as-expected.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Marty said:


> Have you guys considered asking APR for a return / refund (minus any fixed costs) due to the issues with the tune you're experiencing? This seems totally reasonable if it's not working as-expected.


They very clearly have a 30 day return policy.
I'm far from that, so there really isn't a case IMO.

Sometimes early adopters turn into beta testers by accident, lesson learned.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Unfortunately many people are attached to their software (me included) but I am willing to pay a fair amount to any company that can bring the "no lift shift" on my car, without changing my current software.

If that would be possible I guess the first company bringing this on the market would make some serious money.


----------



## Sylvain (Mar 17, 2013)

Is there anyone running ARP Stage 2 without any misfire/hiccup here?

When i read all your reviews, i can see missfires at low rpm on high gear for Stage 1 and hiccups at high rev with Stage 2 !!
If the only solution is the LO file with a 30hp drop, i'm starting to doubt now...


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

Sylvain said:


> Is there anyone running ARP Stage 2 without any misfire/hiccup here?
> 
> When i read all your reviews, i can see missfires at low rpm on high gear for Stage 1 and hiccups at high rev with Stage 2 !!
> If the only solution is the LO file with a 30hp drop, i'm starting to doubt now...


I am running the Stage 2 LO file with no issues. There just hasn't been any input from APR as to how much power was lost with LO.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

LynxFX said:


> I am running the Stage 2 LO file with no issues. There just hasn't been any input from APR as to how much power was lost with LO.


Supposedly around "10%" less boost, whatever that equates to in HP land, who knows.

If you are happy with your tune, and have no problems, I supposed I probably wouldn't switch either. 

The purpose of my post wasn't to bash the APR tune in any way. I was one of the few people that actually switched from 1 tune to another and could offer some comparison and input on the matter, that is all.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

that 10% less boost number is what is concerning imo:

As per Jeff on their tuning program:

"Channel 12: Boost adjustment
-take the desired boost divide by 10, enter this number.
Example: 
to run 2000mb max pressure, enter '200'
to run 2250mb max pressure, enter '225'
to run MAX pressure, enter '255'
to run STOCK pressure curve, enter '179'"

IF stock is 1790mb and the most boost pressure possible is 2500mb, and let's assume for argument sake APR is using 2500mb max boost for a nice round number, then 10% less boost is = 2250.

The difference between 1790 and 2500 is 710mb. So if you are down 250mb, you are generating (250/710 = 35%) 35% less boost with the 1.2 file! That is a huge difference. Prove me wrong but that is what the numbers tell me.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> that 10% less boost number is what is concerning imo:
> 
> As per Jeff on their tuning program:
> 
> ...



Max is 2550, you certainly aren't going to get the car to report anything past that anyway via logging. 

10% is probably 10% less than what they ran previously. In general most tunes command around ~21-22psi so far. 10% would be about 2-3psi less. IIRC 9-10hp is on the high side of hp per psi efficiency. I'd say you'd miss at most 18-25hp. At power levels of 400+hp some people may not even tell the difference depending on how they drive the car.

At the end of the day, people have to try and decide for themselves.
Did It suck to buy a 2nd tune? Yes
Am I glad I did it? Absolutely.


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

That is quite a drop if it worked out like those numbers. From what I recall APR said that they dropped max boost over a certain RPM range ~3k-4k which is where most of the "misfires" were happening. Hopefully Arin chimes in soon if APR hasn't all but forgotten about their stage 2 tune.

My experience with the two tunes, stage 1 had a slight delay then brutal acceleration compared to stock. When I went to stage 2 LO the acceleration wasn't as intense but it was instant and a more smooth power curve. Since I never did do a dyno I have no idea what the power difference actually is. Unofficial 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are about the same for me. The power delivery is just a lot smoother and I feel like 60-80 is faster as well. 

I'm well past my 30 days so nothing I can do to get any refund. I do love the sound of their downpipe.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Max is 2550, you certainly aren't going to get the car to report anything past that anyway via logging.
> 
> 10% is probably 10% less than what they ran previously. In general most tunes command around ~21-22psi so far. 10% would be about 2-3psi less. IIRC 9-10hp is on the high side of hp per psi efficiency. I'd say you'd miss at most 18-25hp. At power levels of 400+hp some people may not even tell the difference depending on how they drive the car.
> 
> ...


my point here is that a 10% absolute change in max boost pressure = 35% relative decrease in boost compared to stock configuration. what that equates to in real world numbers is a mystery because we have no comparison dyno's.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

canuckttrs said:


> my point here is that a 10% absolute change in max boost pressure = 35% relative decrease in boost compared to stock configuration. what that equates to in real world numbers is a mystery because we have no comparison dyno's.


It may not end up being that much depending on where in the rev range that drop occurs, how much less heat is generated and how much more timing advance there is.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

IMHO: You want the car to behave perfectly with any boost the turbo can make and this is why:
- once you go fully decat + bigger IC + colder temps + better intake + ... you will be able to get more air in and out through the engine --> this will get you a better engine response, more power, better acceleration and ultimately a better car --> if the software can't "handle" properly what the stage 1 turbo can output .... what happens when you can get more from the turbo? More misfires?
- Those that go eventually for stage 3 or 4 are paying something like 1000 Euro / 10-15 Hp --> It would be a pity not to have the maximum potential with stage 1 or 2 when you pay much less for the same number of hp. I say "go with the best tuner that proved the best results" as the difference in payment is small anyway.
- Yes, some may not feel a difference of ~20-30 hp and say "i can leave without 10-20 hp". But what if you want to go further and pay 1000 Euros for an IC that gives you 15-20hp? Wouldn't you rather have the proper software that gives you those hp with the stock IC and still have the option for something extra?


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

cipsony said:


> what happens when you can get more from the turbo?


What happens is you end up with huge hesitations on the top end of the range in high gears under load. Between 4-7K the car just stops accelerating and takes off again about 4-5 times per gear.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

joneze93tsi said:


> What happens is you end up with huge hesitations on the top end of the range in high gears under load. Between 4-7K the car just stops accelerating and takes off again about 4-5 times per gear.


Apparently this doesn't happen with my car or yours as we choose the proper software


----------



## illgetyou22 (Aug 26, 2008)

joneze93tsi good talking to you on the phone im glad your enjoying the tune :thumbup:

croman44 we are having a sale for the wookies in the woods event wich would give you $50 if that helps you out at all, but I would need the box before the 7th .


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

illgetyou22 said:


> joneze93tsi good talking to you on the phone im glad your enjoying the tune :thumbup:
> 
> croman44 we are having a sale for the wookies in the woods event wich would give you $50 if that helps you out at all, but I would need the box before the 7th .


why don't you guys come out west and do some sort of event so i can get a tune!


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> why don't you guys come out west and do some sort of event so i can get a tune!


1. Pull ECU out.
2. Send to UM.
3. PROFIT


----------



## illgetyou22 (Aug 26, 2008)

By the way adjustable lauch and no lift shift is all set, just put it on a customers TTRS this afternoon


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

illgetyou22 said:


> By the way adjustable lauch and no lift shift is all set, just put it on a customers TTRS this afternoon


 So how exactly does this work? Where do you make the adjustments and is it really no lift on a manual?


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

LynxFX said:


> So how exactly does this work? Where do you make the adjustments and is it really no lift on a manual?


i'll just take a guess here but from what i understand...

launch control = clutch depressed, wot, 1st gear...then release clutch and hold on for dear life. :laugh:

nls = wot and then shift gears using clutch, computer takes care of rpm etc.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

What kind of boost is being built? :laugh:
Is this something I can get added via loaner tool? :wave:


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> i'll just take a guess here but from what i understand...
> 
> launch control = clutch depressed, wot, 1st gear...then release clutch and hold on for dear life. :laugh:
> 
> nls = wot and then shift gears using clutch, computer takes care of rpm etc.


That would be pretty amazing. Now I'm really curious about UM's tune. Can't wait to see some feed back from people with the tune after a few months.


----------



## 1TT1 (Sep 27, 2007)

Probably same as this...


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

1TT1 said:


> Probably same as this...



Not really,
This is going to be building positive pressure before launch.
We'll be able to leave the line with boost, and with AWD, have no problem managing it.

The ZL1 is using traction control to get the best launch possible by monitoring wheelspin via the abs sensors and adjusting the throttle/abs as necessary.


ZL1 LOL


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

1TT1 said:


> Probably same as this...


looks pretty slow...


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

joneze93tsi said:


> Max is 2550, you certainly aren't going to get the car to report anything past that anyway via logging.



Have a look at some log data in UM software.
Block 115 Field 4 (actual boost pressure) 
This will read above 2550mb. 

This is another small detail Matt did.

Useful for logging boost.


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Jefnes3 said:


> Have a look at some log data in UM software.
> Block 115 Field 4 (actual boost pressure)
> This will read above 2550mb.
> 
> ...


Awesome, thanks!


----------



## NoogManTTRS (Mar 28, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> looks pretty slow...


LOL, it does!

Well, it looks like the launch control and no lift is done, so I need to get on it. Canuck, you went with the 034 downpipe didn't you? I need to get that part of the process started. Going to keep stock sports exhaust, but may do 2ndary cat bypass........what are your thoughts? Would like Joneze opinion too. The car is still much too quiet (even with flapper mod), but I don't want it to sound like a tractor.....lol! :laugh:


----------



## NoogManTTRS (Mar 28, 2013)

BTW........Jeff, If I pull my TT-RS ECU and Fedex it overnight to you (unless you have a dealer near Charlotte, NC that can do it), what is typical turn around time for a bench flash with you guys?





Jefnes3 said:


> Have a look at some log data in UM software.
> Block 115 Field 4 (actual boost pressure)
> This will read above 2550mb.
> 
> ...


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

NoogManTTRS said:


> LOL, it does!
> 
> Well, it looks like the launch control and no lift is done, so I need to get on it. Canuck, you went with the 034 downpipe didn't you? I need to get that part of the process started. Going to keep stock sports exhaust, but may do 2ndary cat bypass........what are your thoughts? Would like Joneze opinion too. The car is still much too quiet (even with flapper mod), but I don't want it to sound like a tractor.....lol! :laugh:


I have the 034 Downpipe-->Milltek Secondary Deletes & Flapper Mod.

I love it, it's *loud* to some, but perfect to me. I posted a video from a go-pro attached to the rear bumper a while ago. Doesn't really do it any justice to be honest. If you were concerned, you could always keep the flapper so you could quiet it down a bit if you had to.

Listen with headphones for best results:


----------



## 1TT1 (Sep 27, 2007)

joneze93tsi said:


> Not really,
> This is going to be building positive pressure before launch.
> We'll be able to leave the line with boost, and with AWD, have no problem managing it.
> 
> ...


Lol! Just a general explanation of how No lift shift might work to whoever was wondering earlier. Anyway, I wish Audi let us have those as std features.


----------



## NoogManTTRS (Mar 28, 2013)

joneze93tsi said:


> I have the 034 Downpipe-->Milltek Secondary Deletes & Flapper Mod.
> 
> I love it, it's *loud* to some, but perfect to me. I posted a video from a go-pro attached to the rear bumper a while ago. Doesn't really do it any justice to be honest. If you were concerned, you could always keep the flapper so you could quiet it down a bit if you had to.
> 
> Listen with headphones for best results:


That sounds really nice.......that's more like it! Any reason why you went with the Milltek cat deletes over the 034's?


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

NoogManTTRS said:


> That sounds really nice.......that's more like it! Any reason why you went with the Milltek cat deletes over the 034's?



A year ago, there were no 034 pipes 

Today, they are the obvious choice IMO, larger diameter to mate up to the 034 DP, which is just monstrous.


----------



## illgetyou22 (Aug 26, 2008)

NoogManTTRS - Give me a call and I can tell you what the schedule looks like, I can usually get it back to you in one to two days (203)889-0008.



joneze93tsi - Jeff told me he hooked you up with Brian Lui give me a call if you have any other questions.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

illgetyou22 said:


> joneze93tsi good talking to you on the phone im glad your enjoying the tune :thumbup:
> 
> croman44 we are having a sale for the wookies in the woods event wich would give you $50 if that helps you out at all, but I would need the box before the 7th .


I have somone local to me that is one of your shops. Can I just go into the shop before the 7th and have it done there with the sale?

Do they need to still take it out and ship it to you or can they do it locally? I have had my car flashed before so I know that when I did the APR Stage 2 they were able to use the port instead of removing the ecu again.

Let me know

Thanks


----------



## Optimus812 (May 5, 2012)

illgetyou22 said:


> By the way adjustable lauch and no lift shift is all set, just put it on a customers TTRS this afternoon


Wow, launch control.. Now that really makes this tune tempting! Building some boost off the line would really make for a spirited launch to 60


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Optimus812 said:


> Wow, launch control.. Now that really makes this tune tempting! Building some boost off the line would really make for a spirited launch to 60


And no lift shift.
This will substantially drop your 1/4 mile time if you aren't a pro driver. :thumbup:

Can't wait to get this added to the tune, and hit up a local 1/4 mile day soon!


----------



## illgetyou22 (Aug 26, 2008)

croman44 -Give me a call I might be able to help you out number in above post.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

NoogManTTRS said:


> LOL, it does!
> 
> Well, it looks like the launch control and no lift is done, so I need to get on it. Canuck, you went with the 034 downpipe didn't you? I need to get that part of the process started. Going to keep stock sports exhaust, but may do 2ndary cat bypass........what are your thoughts? Would like Joneze opinion too. The car is still much too quiet (even with flapper mod), but I don't want it to sound like a tractor.....lol! :laugh:


Yup, i kept the stock mid pipes because i don't like loud anymore and you're right, the RS sounds like a tractor without the sound dampening of cats etc imo. With the 034 dp, you'll hear more turbo noises and a bit more overall noise but it's not intrusive thankfully. If you want more sound, just drive around in sport mode with the flaps open all the time. You can always do the midpipes later, it's a simple diy job anyways.

If you go for the 034 DP, you should know that the brackets they supply don't fit the car properly. My shop had to trim here and there to make them fit, they were suprised at the fitment issues and how the brackets didn't line up with stock parts. Below are a few of the pics they sent me to show how off it really was.... Cost me more money because the shop had to spend time modifying things to make it work.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> Yup, i kept the stock mid pipes because i don't like loud anymore and you're right, the RS sounds like a tractor without the sound dampening of cats etc imo. With the 034 dp, you'll hear more turbo noises and a bit more overall noise but it's not intrusive thankfully. If you want more sound, just drive around in sport mode with the flaps open all the time. You can always do the midpipes later, it's a simple diy job anyways.
> 
> If you go for the 034 DP, you should know that the brackets they supply don't fit the car properly. My shop had to trim here and there to make them fit, they were suprised at the fitment issues and how the brackets didn't line up with stock parts. Below are a few of the pics they sent me to show how off it really was.... Cost me more money because the shop had to spend time modifying things to make it work.





Thought I was the only one.LOL
034 insisted they are all made on a JIG and there is no way there is a fitment problem, and it's just that I was doing it wrong. All kinds of weird alignment problems.:banghead:


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Thought I was the only one.LOL
> 034 insisted they are all made on a JIG and there is no way there is a fitment problem, and it's just that I was doing it wrong. All kinds of weird alignment problems.:banghead:


Misery loves company it seems 

Unfortunately 034 is 2fer2 in regards to problems with orders.
1. original sway bar didn't really fit properly imo although i just received their updated one.
2. 034dp brackets don't fit right either, needs modifications.

all the trouble they go to creating these pieces, the rule: measure twice cut once! would apply. 
or measure three times if necessary! 
add in the APR issues and tuning is just not that much fun so far... 

sadly, the most satisfying mod so far has been the new brake pads to eliminate squeals.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> Misery loves company it seems
> 
> Unfortunately 034 is 2fer2 in regards to problems with orders.
> 1. original sway bar didn't really fit properly imo although i just received their updated one.
> ...



Went through the same swaybard troubles as well.

Car is finally well sorted now though.
034 Downpipe fits without banging around. *for now*
034 Sway fits without scraping after shims.
UM Tune fixed all the popping and hiccups.
PFC08 Pads squeal but will eject eyeballs on every stop.

Still waiting on the XP12's for the rear, the HPA Controller, and to finally get around to installing the WMI Kit. I think the WMI & UM tune are really going to play well together. :laugh:


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Went through the same swaybard troubles as well.
> 
> Car is finally well sorted now though.
> 034 Downpipe fits without banging around. *for now*
> ...


considering VW Racing lower motor mount at all? i'm also looking at the Tyrol subframe collar kit to tighten things up a bit. those look like worthwhile mods imo.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> considering VW Racing lower motor mount at all? i'm also looking at the Tyrol subframe collar kit to tighten things up a bit. those look like worthwhile mods imo.



I have the BFI lower mount insert (green one).
Seems to work very well. It def. introduces some additional vibration into the cabin/car, but that doesn't really bother me.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> I have the BFI lower mount insert (green one).
> Seems to work very well. It def. introduces some additional vibration into the cabin/car, but that doesn't really bother me.


are you able to update the UM tune with local tuner to include launch control etc...?


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> are you able to update the UM tune with local tuner to include launch control etc...?


Yes sir,
There is a guy a couple hours way that I will be working with. Can't wait to hit up the 1/4 mile after that!


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Yes sir,
> There is a guy a couple hours way that I will be working with. Can't wait to hit up the 1/4 mile after that!


looking forward to your reaction and videos too!


----------



## 1QWIKWHP (Oct 19, 2012)

Just wanted to thank Jeff and crew at UM 
for the remap everything looks to be good but post a review once I 
get some time to put in some miles on car.
Just a FYI look out for these guys Jeff and Tom to 
do big things in the coming year you should see what there 
working on in shop.


----------



## Timster (May 23, 2012)

can someone who knows explain how to run the launch control and NLS


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

1QWIKWHP said:


> Just wanted to thank Jeff and crew at UM
> for the remap everything looks to be good but post a review once I
> get some time to put in some miles on car.
> Just a FYI look out for these guys Jeff and Tom to
> ...


Welcome to the club!


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

Is there any kind of 30 day refund offered on the UM tune? Or a 30 day trial period?

I think that would help some people pull the trigger.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> that 10% less boost number is what is concerning imo:
> 
> As per Jeff on their tuning program:
> 
> ...


Completely wrong. You need to understand vagcom fully to come to the correct figure.

10% less on the APR boost would be minus 0.155 bar at worst. So around 1.45bar with low output file. Stock is what, 1.2 bar? I don't know what the max boost APR runs but what I've written should be roughly right.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Poverty said:


> Completely wrong. You need to understand vagcom fully to come to the correct figure.
> 
> 10% less on the APR boost would be minus 0.155 bar at worst. So around 1.45bar with low output file. Stock is what, 1.2 bar? I don't know what the max boost APR runs but what I've written should be roughly right.


all estimations and no facts. anyone else?


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> all estimations and no facts. anyone else?


You can't even read vagcom boost pressure right so you are way out.

Tell me how much bar of boost pressure do most tunes run? What the max boost the TTRS can run with the stock overboost protection still in place. Once you know those take 10% off that and you will clearly see that your figures are just plain wrong


----------



## LongviewTx (Dec 26, 1999)

For clarification of data logged:

*Boost* is that value of pressure above atmospheric induced by the turbo

*Max* pressure is the boost + the atmospheric value.

Just don't confuse the two parameters in the conversation.

Both of these values are logged


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

LongviewTx said:


> For clarification of data logged:
> 
> *Boost* is that value of pressure above atmospheric induced by the turbo
> 
> ...


Ahhh you spoilt it, I was waiting to see if he could work it out himself


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

Poverty said:


> Completely wrong. You need to understand vagcom fully to come to the correct figure.
> 
> 10% less on the APR boost would be minus 0.155 bar at worst. So around 1.45bar with low output file. Stock is what, 1.2 bar? I don't know what the max boost APR runs but what I've written should be roughly right.


Well, your numbers don't add up. To get to 1.45 they would have to be running 1.6 atm b/c 1.6 *.9 is 1.44. To remove .155 they would have to be running 1.55 because 1.55 *.1 is .155. So, they can't possibly be running 1.45 and removing .155 as their 10%. If they were running 1.55 and removed .155 they would then be running 1.395. But that is just to say something in your calc is wrong.

But let's assume they removed the .155 which means they started at 1.55 and ended up at 1.395. Stock is 1.2 so they increased over stock originally 1.2 to 1.55 or a total of 29.2% (1.55/1.2). If they are now running 1.395 they would only be increasing by 16% (1.395/1.2). That means they reduced their increased boost by 45%. (16/29 is .55 which means it was reduced by .45)

If it works like that...


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

the most i have seen in my log file is 2530mbars
altitude is about 1000 where i am

so that means its 1.53bar of boost, or 22psi, but 1.55bar is probably the absolute max (22.5psi)


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

lpriley32 said:


> Well, your numbers don't add up. To get to 1.45 they would have to be running 1.6 atm b/c 1.6 *.9 is 1.44. To remove .155 they would have to be running 1.55 because 1.55 *.1 is .155. So, they can't possibly be running 1.45 and removing .155 as their 10%. If they were running 1.55 and removed .155 they would then be running 1.395. But that is just to say something in your calc is wrong.
> 
> But let's assume they removed the .155 which means they started at 1.55 and ended up at 1.395. Stock is 1.2 so they increased over stock originally 1.2 to 1.55 or a total of 29.2% (1.55/1.2). If they are now running 1.395 they would only be increasing by 16% (1.395/1.2). That means they reduced their increased boost by 45%. (16/29 is .55 which means it was reduced by .45)
> 
> If it works like that...



I said roughly right, didn't get the calulator out


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

Poverty said:


> I said roughly right, didn't get the calulator out


right, which is why i did the math...and it would seem that a 10% decrease in boost would equal almost half of the original increase over stock. I would say that is fairly substantial.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

I wonder if the stage 2 low output is slower or faster than the stage 1? ))


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Poverty said:


> Completely wrong. You need to understand vagcom fully to come to the correct figure.
> 
> 10% less on the APR boost would be minus 0.155 bar at worst. So around 1.45bar with low output file. Stock is what, 1.2 bar? I don't know what the max boost APR runs but what I've written should be roughly right.


As pointed out your numbers are wrong but the point of my post is that a 10% absolute reduction in boost is a huge relative one. Look up the definitions of absolute and relative and you'll understand.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

cipsony said:


> I wonder if the stage 2 low output is slower or faster than the stage 1? ))


Great question! 

Too bad APR does not have a dyno graph comparing all 3 tunes.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

I asked about this and I was told that the stage 2 lo output was about equal to the stage 1 normal. 

Which brought up the question to me of "why in the heck did I pay to go stage"?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

The reduction in power is so small many cannot tell a difference. 10% is a rough estimate for someone in a really cold environment running more boost than we were seeing here in a warmer climate when we produced the original dyno graphs. It should be roughly the same as what other tuners are producing in terms of boost. 

None of that matters much anyways. We have a car in house and we're actively looking into the complaints some customers have had. If necessary, we'll update a free software update.


----------



## 034Motorsport (Apr 16, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> If you go for the 034 DP, you should know that the brackets they supply don't fit the car properly. My shop had to trim here and there to make them fit, they were suprised at the fitment issues and how the brackets didn't line up with stock parts. Below are a few of the pics they sent me to show how off it really was.... Cost me more money because the shop had to spend time modifying things to make it work.


These two pictures make it look like the installer didn't utilize the slotted brackets correctly. The bracket on the right (top picture) looks like it can easily be shifted over more than enough to allow the holes to line up.

The brackets are slotted to allow for positioning of the hangers depending on the installation on the subframe, which can vary from car to car.

I'm not sure if anything would have needed modification had the brackets been used as intended.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

And this thread has now gone completely off topic, oh well.

In any event, I participate in the first autocross on the season this last weekend. Spent much of the day trying to get any traction at all (40's in the morning and 50's afternoon) it sure was fun to get out do do something fun with the car finally. 












WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> These two pictures make it look like the installer didn't utilize the slotted brackets correctly. The bracket on the right (top picture) looks like it can easily be shifted over more than enough to allow the holes to line up.
> 
> The brackets are slotted to allow for positioning of the hangers depending on the installation on the subframe, which can vary from car to car.
> 
> I'm not sure if anything would have needed modification had the brackets been used as intended.


I don't think my local techs are n00bs when it comes to modifying vehicles, they work on VAG cars all day long and are an APR dealer.


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

canuckttrs said:


> I don't think my local techs are n00bs when it comes to modifying vehicles, they work on VAG cars all day long and are an APR dealer.




And this is what bothers me the most. 034 recommends professional installation (which I still hope I could do myself), but they can’t seem to figure it out?

I've installed a DP on a Golf R which is a very similar install. (The driveshaft is needed to be removed)...so I think I could do it myself.

Also, APR's DP install directions don’t mention removing the dogbone mount, or engine mount to install their downpipe. Is this step really necessary?


----------



## 034Motorsport (Apr 16, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> I don't think my local techs are n00bs when it comes to modifying vehicles, they work on VAG cars all day long and are an APR dealer.


All I can do is look at the pictures that you posted, the first of which clearly show that the supplied bracket is maxed out to the left in its adjustment range.

That leaves more than enough room to move it over to the right enough to get the bolt holes to line up, based on the second picture I quoted.

I never called anyone a n00b, but it's the only conclusion I can come to based on your pictures and the numerous installations we've done in house. 

I have created a pictorial guide, using the pictures you posted, to explain what I suggested above. :thumbup:










Out of curiosity, did you or your installer attempt to call us when the supposed issue came up?


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> All I can do is look at the pictures that you posted, the first of which clearly show that the supplied bracket is maxed out to the left in its adjustment range.
> 
> That leaves more than enough room to move it over to the right enough to get the bolt holes to line up, based on the second picture I quoted.
> 
> ...


they told me that the brackets would NOT line up no matter how hard they tried. just relaying information to everyone here about my personal experience with the installation process.


----------



## rp5311 (Jun 28, 2012)

Thats good news, IMO you should bring back the increased Idle on a cold start up. Thanks Arin keep us updated please.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

Back on topic: Arin any ETA on this software update. I am about a week into my tune and intend to return it and switch to the UM tune, if the misfires are not corrected ASAP. 

I appreciate that APR is looking into the issue, but the explanation that this problem is rare seems hollow to me. I am new to Audi, but I was under the impression that APR was the standard bearer for Audi tunes. Why has APR thus far been unable to properly respond to the issue?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> Back on topic: Arin any ETA on this software update. I am about a week into my tune and intend to return it and switch to the UM tune, if the misfires are not corrected ASAP.
> 
> I appreciate that APR is looking into the issue, but the explanation that this problem is rare seems hollow to me. I am new to Audi, but I was under the impression that APR was the standard bearer for Audi tunes. Why has APR thus far been unable to properly respond to the issue?


We released TTRS software in 2010 and for several years had many happy customers across the globe. Only recently have we heard of a hand full of customers experiencing issues, while others continue to enjoy the software, completely problem free, including our own in house vehicle.

When a customer reports a problem, we look into it. Unfortunately it's always cut and dry. A customer can say, "I have a problem" but explaining the problem can be rather difficult for some to do. The best ways to diagnose the problems are with data logs from either the customer or an APR dealer. We saw very few data logs and the data we had made it hard to pin point the issue so we asked to get a car in house with the issue so we could diagnose it further. 

Our calibrations were making more midrange boost compared to many of our competitors and we found some would experience issues with these high boost levels. Some reported the problem went away with hardware changes (spark plugs, coil packs) while others stated they were problem free once changing fuels. As you can see, this makes remote diagnosis difficult, especially since only a small group of people report problem compared to the amount flashes. We did offered a slightly lower boosting file for other customers which was reported to clear up the issue. 

Some are still unhappy with the fact this file name is labeled "LO", even though the boost levels are similar to what other tunes are producing, so we now have a vehicle in house which we'll recalibrate from the ground up. Our new lead calibrator, Eric, is on the project. He comes from a line of OEM and aftermarket tuning with many years under his belt, so he's confident you'll enjoy the changes he's going to make. We've listened to feedback from everyone and we'll address every concern out there and we'll also search for more power, better spool, and other features in the process that we've already exploited through development of our stage 3 system. The TTRS is being worked on this week and next before our calibrators head across seas to work on software in other markets. I'm hoping we'll have a revision next week. :thumbup:


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

For the record, if you want another sample car with the misfire problem, I am willing to drive from Houston to your facility and donate my car for a few days. Maybe you could throw on a down pipe for my troubles!


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> For the record, if you want another sample car with the misfire problem, I am willing to drive from Houston to your facility and donate my car for a few days. Maybe you could throw on a down pipe for my troubles!


why not give another tuner a try if you're having troubles?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> For the record, if you want another sample car with the misfire problem, I am willing to drive from Houston to your facility and donate my car for a few days. Maybe you could throw on a down pipe for my troubles!


Thank you William, I'll keep that in mind and I'm pleased to see you're willing to help. 

I think we'll be able to get it sorted with the vehicle we have here, so hopefully the drive will be as short as a trip to your local APR dealer for a Free update. 

Again, thank you.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

As I have previously stated before I have the same "hiccup / hesitation / misfire" problem with my APR tune that many have discussed. 

I discussed the issue with my tuner today. He what others on this forum have said, specifically that APR is aware of the problem and they have now isolated and modified the tune to remove the problem. Due to the fact that APR is very busy right now, they said they will probably not upload the new file for a couple of weeks." I don't think any of this is new info, but just another source of confirmation.

I am very interested in switching to the UM tune because of the following reasons:
(please advise if I have misunderstood any of these features)

1. No hiccup / hesitation / misfire problem

2. User adjustable Octane / boost control

3. Launch control

HERE IS SOMETHING NEW... my tuner told me today that if I switch to UM, he will have to send my ECU to UM because every time he has tried to switch an ECU from APR to UM, the ECU developed an unrecoverable problem. 

Has anyone heard of this? 

Why would sending it to UM be any different than my tuner swapping out the program? An ECU flash is an ECU flash right? 

Also, what does it mean if the file is corrupted and unrecoverable? 

Does that mean I have to purchase an entirely new ECU? If so, what is the cost of something like that? 

I suppose that if I am going to run the risk of destroying my ECU, I will probably wait until the APR fix comes out and see if it really works.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

William,

You have to ship the ECU to UM anyway as far as I know...

I went from a APR ecu, which I shipped to UM, and they had no problem re-programming it.
I much prefer everything about the UM tune vs APR, not to mention the extra features..


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> Why would sending it to UM be any different than my tuner swapping out the program? An ECU flash is an ECU flash right?


If you want the technical explanation of why you have to send it, call the guys at UM.

You DO have to send the ecu to UM headquarters for the FIRST TIME ONLY because they have to unlock it to make it writeable or something to that effect. Your local UM dealer CANNOT unlock the ecu on their own.

I sent my ecu to UM and they did not destroy it...lol. Actually they fixed the error created by APR in addition to adding a whole bunch of goodness.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> If you want the technical explanation of why you have to send it, call the guys at UM.
> 
> You DO have to send the ecu to UM headquarters for the FIRST TIME ONLY because they have to unlock it to make it writeable or something to that effect. Your local UM dealer CANNOT unlock the ecu on their own.
> 
> I sent my ecu to UM and they did not destroy it...lol. Actually they fixed the error created by APR in addition to adding a whole bunch of goodness.


You have to ship the ECU to APR or UM for the first time.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

joneze93tsi said:


> You have to ship the ECU to APR or UM for the first time.


APR dealers can flash the newer, encrypted ECUs in house without ever sending it to APR. They've had this ability since August of last year.

*Edit Press Release:*
http://www.goapr.com/news/2012/08/1...0-in-house-dealer-ecu-flashing-now-available/


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> APR dealers can flash the newer, encrypted ECUs in house without ever sending it to APR. They've had this ability since August of last year.
> 
> *Edit Press Release:*
> http://www.goapr.com/news/2012/08/1...0-in-house-dealer-ecu-flashing-now-available/


That's sweet.

Every APR dealer in the country has one, or just a select few?
The local shop I usually deal with doesn't seem to have a CCD device, only the UPD.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

joneze93tsi said:


> That's sweet.
> 
> Every APR dealer in the country has one, or just a select few?
> The local shop I usually deal with doesn't seem to have a CCD device, only the UPD.


Almost every dealer does. Very few don't, and those are typically the smaller shops, or subdealers. 

Your local dealer has two locations, so he probably has it at the other shop as he does business there.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

joneze93tsi said:


> You have to ship the ECU to APR or UM for the first time.


I did not ship my ECU to APR. My tuner installed the APR program in front of me. It took about 20 minutes.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Williamttrs,

Have you tried the updated software we released several months back? It cleared up issues some others were seeing. Also, as you mentioned above, we are in the process of looking over everything now. The engineers were already able to pick up better spool and more midrange power from where we were before. I think if you hold out, you'll be happy with the update, and it will be free. 

Thank you

-Arin


----------



## 1TT1 (Sep 27, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> Williamttrs,
> 
> Have you tried the updated software we released several months back? It cleared up issues some others were seeing. Also, as you mentioned above, we are in the process of looking over everything now. The engineers were already able to pick up better spool and more midrange power from where we were before. I think if you hold out, you'll be happy with the update, and it will be free.
> 
> ...


Any plans to add launch control and no lift shifts like UM? Going for stage 1 or 2 soon but still trying to decide which tune to get.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

1TT1 said:


> Any plans to add launch control and no lift shifts like UM? Going for stage 1 or 2 soon but still trying to decide which tune to get.


APR still hasn't enabled the "program switching" for the TT-RS which has been "in progress" since it was first released...


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> Williamttrs,
> 
> Have you tried the updated software we released several months back? It cleared up issues some others were seeing. Also, as you mentioned above, we are in the process of looking over everything now. The engineers were already able to pick up better spool and more midrange power from where we were before. I think if you hold out, you'll be happy with the update, and it will be free.
> 
> ...


Hi Arin,

All I know is that my tune was performed a little over two weeks ago and the 91 Octane map was used. My tuner logged into the APR site to get the map. So I assume the map was the most up to date map. Here are my reservations about sticking with the APR tune.

1. Less features than the UM tune.

2. APR slow response to the tune issues

3. APR response today regarding the specific question of extending the money back guarantee for an additional 30 days after the "fix" comes out. This seems highly reasonable and given the fact that I had every intention of purchasing a "non-defective" product, quite generous on my part. However, the APR rep told my tuner that even though he was aware of the issue, he could not authorize an extension and would run the request up the chain of command. 

Here is what I would expect from a company that made a mistake (which by the way I hold no ill will against mistakes). "Mr. Customer we are very sorry that some unexpected problems occurred. We know this has inconvenienced you and we want to offer you an extension of our money back guarantee and .... We hope you will allow us the opportunity to earn back your trust." 

This kind of response would have engendered admiration and loyalty on my part and I would not be considering switching to UM. The UM tune has some bells and whistles that I already knew about prior to purchasing the APR tune. However, I chose APR because I was under the impression that APR was the GOLD STANDARD when it came to aftermarket performance for Audi. Thus far, I have been disappointed. 

If right here and right now, Arin, you are willing to state to me and everyone else that the guarantee will be honored a full 30 days after the updated map comes out and that I will be entitled to switchable map feature when this comes out, then I will wait a little while longer. What do you say Arin? The ball is in your court!


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

Marty said:


> APR still hasn't enabled the "program switching" for the TT-RS which has been "in progress" since it was first released...


That is a bit frustrating and the "promises" of future features that have yet to materialize is a bigger issue to me than the actual lack of the feature. 

My only eservation with the UM tune is that I will have to send the ECU to them. I know it is only 3 days, but it is a lot of hassle.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> My only eservation with the UM tune is that I will have to send the ECU to them. I know it is only 3 days, but it is a lot of hassle.



It's worth it.
Log in, change to any octane you want, anytime you want.
No 93 & 100 octane files that you have to go back and have flashed at the dealer.
Ability to adjust boost.

Ability to drive in a bad area and lower octane enough to run awful gas if you have to until the next city.

Not to mention NLS & LC.

I much prefer the powerband on UM vs APR as well.
Father recently took it for a ride and his account of the power delivery is that it's a warp drive.
It just builds up and you are suddenly rushing through space faster than you'd imagine.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> That is a bit frustrating and the "promises" of future features that have yet to materialize is a bigger issue to me than the actual lack of the feature.
> 
> My only eservation with the UM tune is that I will have to send the ECU to them. I know it is only 3 days, but it is a lot of hassle.


Yes, the UM tune is a lot of hassle. I really hate having a tune that is smooth, powerful and trouble free.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> Yes, the UM tune is a lot of hassle. I really hate having a tune that is smooth, powerful and trouble free.


This is why so many people on here have a hard time with you. 

He has a valid concern about being without his car for a few days. No need to be a jerk about it. 

I for one am anxious to see what he decides to do and how it works out.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> Yes, the UM tune is a lot of hassle. I really hate having a tune that is smooth, powerful and trouble free.


I choose to take that as a friendly jab. It is true that a tune that works as promised with cool bells and whistles will be less hassle and more fun, but I only have the written word of a few people to base this claim on. Need I remind you that there are many claims on this forum and every similar forum that are not totally accurate. Healthy skepticism is good protection from getting "taken." 

As for my particular hassle, it is about a 40 minute drive to my tuner and with an ECU removal and ship out, I will have to coordinate and pay for a rental car and drive to and from the shop twice. This is not the end of the world, but hey I expected my APR tune to work as advertised. 

I am not bitter or upset about the whole thing. Life is not perfect and it is easier to take things in stride, rather than get all worked up about little things. I am about 80% sure I will go with the UM tune, but I will wait on some additional info from my tuner and Arin before I make the decision.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

croman44 said:


> This is why so many people on here have a hard time with you.
> 
> He has a valid concern about being without his car for a few days. No need to be a jerk about it.
> 
> I for one am anxious to see what he decides to do and how it works out.


I hope he keeps the apr tune so we can all see what apr does.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> I choose to take that as a friendly jab. It is true that a tune that works as promised with cool bells and whistles will be less hassle and more fun, but I only have the written word of a few people to base this claim on. Need I remind you that there are many claims on this forum and every similar forum that are not totally accurate. Healthy skepticism is good protection from getting "taken."
> 
> As for my particular hassle, it is about a 40 minute drive to my tuner and with an ECU removal and ship out, I will have to coordinate and pay for a rental car and drive to and from the shop twice. In This is not the end of the world, but hey I expected my APR tune to work as advertised.
> 
> I am not bitter or upset about the whole thing. Life is not perfect and it is easier to take things in stride, rather than get all worked up about little things. I am about 80% sure I will go with the UM tune, but I will wait on some additional info from my tuner and Arin before I make the decision.


I went through a lot more hassle and expense to get the UM tune but that's what it takes sometimes when things don't work out well in the tuning game we have chosen to play. Might as well get what you want if you're on the path already.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> It's worth it.
> Log in, change to any octane you want, anytime you want.
> No 93 & 100 octane files that you have to go back and have flashed at the dealer.
> Ability to adjust boost.
> ...


Second gear is just ridiculous.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> I went through a lot more hassle and expense to get the UM tune but that's what it takes sometimes when things don't work out well in the tuning game we have chosen to play. Might as well get what you want if you're on the path already.


I think this brings up an interesting and often discussed philosophical question. Though it is normally discussed in more anecdotal terms.

You and some others seem to imply that there is only one game "the tuning game," and part of this game is an inherit extraordinary amount of risk. Thus, no one playing the game should complain or be in the least bit disturbed by extra time and expense associated with the game.

I believe there is not one game, but many games based on a common theme. The theme is to have fun. If having fun for you is taking a lot of risk and then figuring out how to fix the problems, then great. I have had this mind set at times. However, after having some really bad experiences with cars over the last half decade, I have decided that I want to be a little more cautious and try to avoid nightmares that involve a lot of money, a lot of wasted time and a lot of attorneys. Someone would have to be a massicist to think that is fun. 

Also, I think it is either incompetence or fraud for someone to make a crappy product and proclaim it is the best whatever. They then take your money, and leave you with a big bag of **** on the hood of your car. Now you get to drive around with that pile of crap smelling up your 60K ride for a while and you have less dollars in your bank account. We should all be offended when this happens.

So for me, fun is taking calculated risks and reaping the rewards when the risk pays off and minimizing the downside. This is the heart of why I chose APR in the first place... the GOLD STANDARD in tuning. One misstep does not make APR bad, but it also does not inspire confidence. 

You are absolutely right about one things. If you don't have to settle for something, then don't. If I stay with APR or switch to UM, it will be because it is what I want and not because of a little hassle. Theoretically, if APR produces a more powerful tune in a couple of weeks and introduces the switching feature, then I will have the best of both worlds. I think this is going to boil down to what I learn in the next day or two.


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> I think this brings up an interesting and often discussed philosophical question. Though it is normally discussed in more anecdotal terms.
> 
> You and some others seem to imply that there is only one game "the tuning game," and part of this game is an inherit extraordinary amount of risk. Thus, no one playing the game should complain or be in the least bit disturbed by extra time and expense associated with the game.
> 
> ...


the odds of getting program switching in the next few weeks is unlikely because, as Marty pointed out, it has been "coming" since the tune was released last year.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Again, this isn't supposed to be a bash APR thread.....

It was meant to discuss the differences between the two to help others make a decision.
Ultimately, you will need to do what you feel is best, and in your own interest.
Either way, these are pretty incredible cars!


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

It's very interesting to read a battle of words and no proof at all coming from any of the 2 warriors: APR & UM. 
I think people should ask a few questions before deciding to go with any of them:

1) UM ! --> Is there any TT RS with no lift shift and launch control? Can we see a movie of how it actually works? It looks to me that those guys "promoting" this software (joneze93tsi, canuckttrs) are somehow avoiding to speak about this "promised functionality". Is it working on your cars or not?
2) If this functionality is not available yet do you get a refund if it will not be available in the next 3 months? 
3) Question for UM: Is that hard to take a car on a drag strip after you put a software on it? or at least make a movie or something?

4) APR ! --> They came on the market and said (through Povery and Jonny C) that it is the fastest stage 1 & 2 (much faster than Revo, MRC or others) because it has more torque, more power, better response. Based on the evidence (movies with cars racing) it proved it is not.
5) After they released the "miracle" software they came with a new map to sort the misfire problems. The new map looks to be "slower" than the initial one but still faster than the competition maps !!! Now they are promising a new map that will sort the misfires and will have more torque, better spooling and response than the initial 1. So to recap:
APR future map > APR map 1 > APR Lo map > MRC & Revo & Giac & ...
6) Question for APR: How come you didn't make the map with better spooling, response ... in the first place? Did you get smarter from last year? REVO (for example) states they have the same map from the beginning to which they just made minor adjustments that didn't make the car faster nor slower. MRC: I don't remember them speaking about different maps that got better and better as I'm sure they tried to extract the maximum from the initial attempt. Giac: probably the same.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

cipsony said:


> It's very interesting to read a battle of words and no proof at all coming from any of the 2 warriors: APR & UM.
> I think people should ask a few questions before deciding to go with any of them:
> 
> 1) UM ! --> Is there any TT RS with no lift shift and launch control? Can we see a movie of how it actually works? It looks to me that those guys "promoting" this software (joneze93tsi, canuckttrs) are somehow avoiding to speak about this "promised functionality". Is it working on your cars or not?
> ...




Are you assuming NLS/LC is just a made up features?
I haven't had it added to my tune yet, but should at the end of the month when I drive up to my local UM dealer. Canuck has it, but maybe he hasn't had the opportunity to use it?

There are a few people who have had the rare opportunity to try 2 different different tunes on the same car. I had APR Stage1 for a year before I went APR Stage2, then went to UM Stage2. That is the point of the thread to discuss my experience with both tunes and hopefully answer any questions along the way. 

Me, like most in the US defaulted to APR. They had access to the platform in europe years before anyone here did. They were first to market, and as usual in the past I had a lot of faith in them.
To me, it was shocking when every other tuner wasn't having the same issues, when they tried to explain that the "misfires" aren't even misfires, how they are cured. I could talk to any of them, and did, and they all had an idea of what it was, and how it was fixed etc. APR continued to advise that the run more boost than others, so they don't have the same problems, but logging says otherwise. I'm running more boost, everywhere and the car is faster without any issues.

Now, APR is reviewing and re-writing the program. I'm happy that people that could stick it out will have a tune without compromises finally. Me, and Canuck both were told we had problems that couldn't be resolved, so we jumped ship to find out it isn't the case. Now APR is making a tune with more power, and no problems. After a year of people complaining, switching plugs, trying gas, and telling everyone it's not the tune, it's now being fixed.

What has changed for me personally:

Has this ruined APR for life for me, not really.
Will I automatically run to my APR dealer with every new car purchase in the future? Probably not.

First to market is great for APR's bottom line, and R&D funding, but it wasn't great for all the people who lived with these problems for a year, and were told other tunes don't make as much power or aren't as great.


BAH, Enough already.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

1TT1 said:


> Any plans to add launch control and no lift shifts like UM? Going for stage 1 or 2 soon but still trying to decide which tune to get.


We've discussed adding it. If we do, it will probably be an option at the next release. We know these are features not all customers want, so we’re looking into an elegant way to either add it into our Direct Port Programming system, or finding a way for users to turn it on and off at will. 



Marty said:


> APR still hasn't enabled the "program switching" for the TT-RS which has been "in progress" since it was first released...


We do it a little differently than some others. We’re not using external hardware and we’re not adjusting adaptation channels or using multipliers on existing maps. We’re actually swapping out the maps for brand new ones, and we’re doing so using only the ECU and controls available in the vehicle. Engineering has TTRS on their list of items to do, and when it comes time to work on it I’m sure they’ll get it knocked out and available. 



Williamttrs said:


> 2. APR slow response to the tune issues


William,

I do apologize for any slow response. We did make a change months back which lowered mid range boost and seemed to clear up the issue some had described. I’m not sure everyone was made aware of this update, which may be why you did not receive it. We essentially have two files on line right now. 1 for people without the issue and 1 for people with the issue. 




Williamttrs said:


> 3. APR response today regarding the specific question of extending the money back guarantee for an additional 30 days after the "fix" comes out. This seems highly reasonable and given the fact that I had every intention of purchasing a "non-defective" product, quite generous on my part. However, the APR rep told my tuner that even though he was aware of the issue, he could not authorize an extension and would run the request up the chain of command.


How long have you already had software? Are you currently in the 30 day window? If you are, this is no problem at all. I will extend the window another 30 days after the update is released. Please email me your information so I can keep it on file: [email protected]



Williamttrs said:


> However, I chose APR because I was under the impression that APR was the GOLD STANDARD when it came to aftermarket performance for Audi. Thus far, I have been disappointed.


I totally understand your position. Let me explain mine. 

We released TTRS software in 2010 and enjoyed years of happy customers across the globe. Recently I was made aware of a customer who experienced an issue and we went through a couple steps to diagnose the problem. I was unfortunately told different things between the customer and the dealer, making diagnosis over the internet extremely difficult. He ultimately returned the software, so we were unable to diagnose his vehicle further. I do not fault him for doing this, but I was simply unable to get any useful data. 

We continued to sell the same software and had more happy customers across the US and the rest of the world. Hearing our software is bad is difficult when at the same time we’re hearing this from customers:

Posted on April 6th, 
_ I'm happy to say you guys have the best TTRS SW currently available. _

However more recently I had a few more customers reporting the same issue. You must understand 99% of the time I hear of an issue concentrated to a small group of customers with a large group of happy customers, it’s usually something hardware related. Usually it’s spark plugs or coil packs, maybe a boost leak but typically something simple. People are quick to blame software because it’s something you can’t physically diagnose on your own but we must do our due diligence to collect data pinpointing the problem. Unfortunately we were not seeing much of this data, which made diagnosis difficult. Our in house car was not experiencing the same problems nor was the other test vehicles we had. Our goal was to get one of these cars in house so we could do the diagnosis first hand. 

We currently have a car in house and were able to make quite a few changes to the calibration. The engineers took a ground up approach and used many of the new things they’ve learned through our stage 3 calibration work to make the turbo spool faster, boost higher, and achieve more ignition advance without dangerously altering safety features. I think we’ve nailed whatever any customers were previously experiencing, and we’ll be able to issue an update that will be very satisfying. 



Williamttrs said:


> If right here and right now, Arin, you are willing to state to me and everyone else that the guarantee will be honored a full 30 days after the updated map comes out and that I will be entitled to switchable map feature when this comes out, then I will wait a little while longer. What do you say Arin? The ball is in your court!


Yes, anyone currently in the 30 day period I will extend another 30 days after the update. Please, if you fall in this category, email me at [email protected] with the subject TTRS Update – 30 day guarantee extension.

Thank you

-Arin


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

I'll do my best to make a lc/nls video this weekend. Where i live it's not easy to find an area that i can drive like a lunatic not unlike most of you out there i would guess. :laugh:

I personally like the fact that UM has steered clear for the most part of the online bragging etc that the other tuners take part it. Jeff has been tuning these kind of cars for longer than you would imagine. They have the evidence to back up their claims, they just don't run around bragging about it. :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Marty said:


> APR still hasn't enabled the "program switching" for the TT-RS which has been "in progress" since it was first released...


It's not a matter of "enabling". It's a matter of writing the entire thing. Most tuners buy a flashing tool from one of a couple companies. Then, they buy "Map packs" that give them the variables. All of their "features" come canned from the map pack companies. While that is a way to run a performance shop with minimal overhead, it's by no means the best option.

Apr doesn't do that. We roll everything in house. That's why our switching isn't just some tweaks to boost or timing. We can have completely 100% different tunes. We just built an E85 FSI map. When it's production ready, it will end up as a selectable option. Imagine that, you can use program switching to switch between Petrol and E85. I'd like to see anybody do that with Vagcom.

Anyway, I apologize for getting a little worked up there, getting back to the original question:

I'm the guy writing it and it's coming along nicely. I have a "Bench" TT-RS (basically the electronics from a car, but without that pesky car peripheral that takes up too much desk space) and the switching works there. I'm not going to release it though until I'm certain there are no bugs and it's 100% perfect. 

On the Golf-R, switching went from my successful bench test to production in about 2 months. That required ~20 beta cars and thousands of test switches. TT-RS is more difficult in that regard because there aren't nearly as many of them. Additionally, a lot of TT-RS's are not daily drivers. So, for each beta car, I won't get nearly as many test switches or as much feedback. I expect the beta to take longer because of these things.

I won't release anything that isn't tested to the best of my abilities and APR's resources. That being said, rest assured that it IS being worked on and will be released as soon as it's ready.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Also, I hope everyone realizes how powerful a feature switching really is. APR has added a lot of engineers in the last year and they're working on new features and new calibrations. We just did the FSI E85 and there are other neat calibrations in the works.

Switching gives you access to all of the new, neat things that we produce without having to sacrifice anything. When you want it, turn it on. When you don't, turn it off. 

Usually, I don't talk about pricing, but also remember that once you've got an APR loaded ECU, we don't charge anything for upgrades. You can always come back and get the new goodies, upgraded programs for new hardware or simply switch to a different set and (other than perhaps your dealer charging a small labor fee) it's FREE.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> Also, I hope everyone realizes how powerful a feature switching really is. APR has added a lot of engineers in the last year and they're working on new features and new calibrations. We just did the FSI E85 and there are other neat calibrations in the works.
> 
> Switching gives you access to all of the new, neat things that we produce without having to sacrifice anything. When you want it, turn it on. When you don't, turn it off.
> 
> Usually, I don't talk about pricing, but also remember that once you've got an APR loaded ECU, we don't charge anything for upgrades. You can always come back and get the new goodies, upgraded programs for new hardware or simply switch to a different set and (other than perhaps your dealer charging a small labor fee) it's FREE.


Is the e85 calibration going to filter down to us with B7 A4's or is this a transverse application only?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

joneze93tsi said:


> Is the e85 calibration going to filter down to us with B7 A4's or is this a transverse application only?


The question of time becomes part of the supporting older platforms question, but technically it could.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> Also, I hope everyone realizes how powerful a feature switching really is. APR has added a lot of engineers in the last year and they're working on new features and new calibrations. We just did the FSI E85 and there are other neat calibrations in the works.
> 
> Switching gives you access to all of the new, neat things that we produce without having to sacrifice anything. When you want it, turn it on. When you don't, turn it off.
> 
> Usually, I don't talk about pricing, but also remember that once you've got an APR loaded ECU, we don't charge anything for upgrades. You can always come back and get the new goodies, upgraded programs for new hardware or simply switch to a different set and (other than perhaps your dealer charging a small labor fee) it's FREE.


I must say that this kind of explanation is EXACTLY what I expect from a company like APR. Transparency, clarity, competence and follow through is all that I want.

I have received confirmation from Arin that the APR will extend the money back guarantee (for my situation).So I will wait. It seems like the prudent thing to do. Assuming my engine does not blow up from what appears to be a minor problem, I will test the update and report back. If the update does not solve the issue or creates others, UM is always an option.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Thank you William. We're looking forward to getting you the update. :thumbup:


----------



## AnotherA2VR6 (Jun 20, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> It's not a matter of "enabling". It's a matter of writing the entire thing. Most tuners buy a flashing tool from one of a couple companies. Then, they buy "Map packs" that give them the variables. All of their "features" come canned from the map pack companies. While that is a way to run a performance shop with minimal overhead, it's by no means the best option.


Just to clarify, UM does not purchase "Map packs", canned flash-tools, or third-party tunes to resell. Everything is done from the ground up within the UM group. This method ensures a high level of quality and competency in creating and modifying the control unit software.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

AnotherA2VR6 said:


> Just to clarify, UM does not purchase "Map packs", canned flash-tools, or third-party tunes to resell. Everything is done from the ground up within the UM group. This method ensures a high level of quality and competency in creating and modifying the control unit software.


You don't think APR was talking about UM do you? This is, after all, an APR to UM thread.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> We released TTRS software in 2010 and enjoyed years of happy customers across the globe.


There were two different tunes though. In 2010 the original APR calibration came out in Europe, before the car was available in the US. Several owners switched from Revo to APR at the time because Revo was overboosting and hitting soft limp. The APR tune at the time seemed to favor more timing advance over huge amounts of boost which cured the issue for several owners. It wasn't until the car was available in the US that APR went back through the calibrations and it seemed like at that point started to make more power than the initial calibration and started having issues. What I'm saying is that from 2010 to 2012 the fact that there were lots of happy installs is irrelevant because it was a completely different calibration.




[email protected] said:


> Recently I was made aware of a customer who experienced an issue and we went through a couple steps to diagnose the problem. I was unfortunately told different things between the customer and the dealer, making diagnosis over the internet extremely difficult. He ultimately returned the software, so we were unable to diagnose his vehicle further. I do not fault him for doing this, but I was simply unable to get any useful data.


Recently isn't quite accurate. The thread created here on fourtitude to aggregate all of the APR misfire issues was created in November of 2012, that's when the issues really started to become prevalent. That's 6 months ago already, not really recently. And there were posts prior to that too. Sure, Ceeper's issues early on could have been an outlier and some hardware issues but the thread here picked up steam pretty quickly.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

JohnLZ7W said:


> Recently isn't quite accurate. The thread created here on fourtitude to aggregate all of the APR misfire issues was created in November of 2012, that's when the issues really started to become prevalent. That's 6 months ago already, not really recently. And there were posts prior to that too. Sure, Ceeper's issues early on could have been an outlier and some hardware issues but the thread here picked up steam pretty quickly.


Understood, however the misfires were reported on all software. If you recall people across the pond were even jumping in saying they had misfires on every flavor of software under the sun. There was no clear cut answer but this is why we began looking into a car with the issue since we were unable to repeat it on our own vehicle.


----------



## Koa1 (Feb 21, 2012)

This whole APR misfire issue was mishandled, making it eerily similar to the BMW HPFP issues, which got me to completely swear off BMWs. Arin, humility in the beginning would have gone a long way (see APRKeith's tone on the UK forum as an example).


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Koa1 said:


> This whole APR misfire issue was mishandled, making it eerily similar to the BMW HPFP issues, which got me to completely swear off BMWs. Arin, humility in the beginning would have gone a long way (see APRKeith's tone on the UK forum as an example).


One thing to remember is that Aaron himself isn't coding these ECU's.
He's the online PR/Face man. If engineering tells him there is no problem, then there's no problem.

When you have a 30 page thread saying there is a problem, and people jumping ship, well now, there's obviously a problem.  And they are addressing it now for those who are still on APR.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

AnotherA2VR6 said:


> Just to clarify, UM does not purchase "Map packs", canned flash-tools, or third-party tunes to resell. Everything is done from the ground up within the UM group. This method ensures a high level of quality and competency in creating and modifying the control unit software.


I have a very, VERY hard time believing that. I know I'm going to get accused of all sorts of things for saying this, but, UM isn't big enough to do everything in house.

DSG, along with the full line of Audi and VW cars for all boxcodes? There is NO WAY they're doing that without 3rd party tools.

I know the amount of work required to build a write a flashing/extraction routine for a new ECU. I did it for the S6/S7/S8 Ecus. I don't care how good a programmer you are, you're not going to write something like that in an afternoon.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> I have a very, VERY hard time believing that. I know I'm going to get accused of all sorts of things for saying this, but, UM isn't big enough to do everything in house.
> 
> DSG, along with the full line of Audi and VW cars for all boxcodes? There is NO WAY they're doing that without 3rd party tools.
> 
> I know the amount of work required to build a write a flashing/extraction routine for a new ECU. I did it for the S6/S7/S8 Ecus. I don't care how good a programmer you are, you're not going to write something like that in an afternoon.




Wow,

Ignoring the rude and presumptuous nature of this...

I don't care if they got "map packs" from lenny the corner "map seller".
Despite their size, UM managed to deliver me a tune that worked on Day1, ran more boost, more features, and I have a direct line to the engineer who made it.


You really aren't doing your company any justice by coming on here and making posts like this.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> One thing to remember is that Aaron himself isn't coding these ECU's.
> He's the online PR/Face man. If engineering tells him there is no problem, then there's no problem.
> 
> When you have a 30 page thread saying there is a problem, and people jumping ship, well now, there's obviously a problem.  And they are addressing it now for those who are still on APR.


We're also addressing the gap between problem and solution. That's one of the reasons that I'm active on the forums. I've been very active on the Golf R forum and I will be here as well once my TT-RS software is released. I'm trying to reduce that gap and negate the need for 30 page threads.

If you've got a problem, bring it to Bronson first (his job IS tech support and he's super sharp), and I'll chime in if I can contribute something. Or, if it needs direct engineering attention, I'll get on it personally.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> We're also addressing the gap between problem and solution. That's one of the reasons that I'm active on the forums. I've been very active on the Golf R forum and I will be here as well once my TT-RS software is released. I'm trying to reduce that gap and negate the need for 30 page threads.
> 
> If you've got a problem, bring it to Bronson first (his job IS tech support and he's super sharp), and I'll chime in if I can contribute something. Or, if it needs direct engineering attention, I'll get on it personally.



Not sure if you've actually read the original post that started this?
It's a bit too late for me and several others who have switched ships. 
I lived with "misfires" for a year, tried $200 worth of spark plugs, gaps and everything else. When I went stage2 a whole new variety of issues appeared.

The APR "Engineer" who reviewed my logs said there was nothing else to do, but revert back to stage1, or low output files and try various spark gaps to try and cure it.

It just wasn't a properly engineered tune at all. I spent the money for another tune, and low and behold, all of the problems disappeared, while gaining additional power, drivability and additional features. Now that several people have jumped ship and things look dicey, you are here to completely re-work the tune. You've found more power ( like other tuners) no more issues (like other tuners).

I'm happy you are here though, maybe some of the customers who weren't willing to spend another $900 to fix the tune will get some relief.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Koa1 said:


> This whole APR misfire issue was mishandled, making it eerily similar to the BMW HPFP issues, which got me to completely swear off BMWs. Arin, humility in the beginning would have gone a long way (see APRKeith's tone on the UK forum as an example).


I don't think it was mishandled at all. We had years of happy people across the globe and low reports of issues. These same issues were reported by almost all available tuners, making diagnosis difficult. We still have many happy customers and dealers enjoying the software but have identified what could cause the described issue for some customers, and we are addressing it. Keep in mind we are still running more boost and creating more midrange torque than our competitors. Weaker software in this reguard does not experience the issue. 

Am I embarrassed some have an issue? Yes! Are we fixing it? Yes! Will we end up with more power in the midrange without the issue? Yes! Yes, yes, yes! Those interested in having their cake and eating it too will be glad we're making a big change and not simply giving you a slight increase over stock.


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> I'm happy you are here though, maybe some of the customers who weren't willing to spend another $900 to fix the tune will get some relief.


I'm one of those people and I'm waiting to get the new updated tune as soon as they release it. I did call up the tuner to see if they also were capable of doing the UM tune. He said they setup an account with UM today just incase the APR update doesn't come through.


----------



## Koa1 (Feb 21, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> I don't think it was mishandled at all. We had years of happy people across the globe and low reports of issues. These same issues were reported by almost all available tuners, making diagnosis difficult. We still have many happy customers and dealers enjoying the software but have identified what could cause the described issue for some customers, and we are addressing it. Keep in mind we are still running more boost and creating more midrange torque than our competitors. Weaker software in this reguard does not experience the issue.
> 
> Am I embarrassed some have an issue? Yes! Are we fixing it? Yes! Will we end up with more power in the midrange without the issue? Yes! Yes, yes, yes! Those interested in having their cake and eating it too will be glad we're making a big change and not simply giving you a slight increase over stock.


Without rehashing everything, I was referring specifically to the things you wrote and the way your posts came across. I think you might want to go back and re-read the way you responded now that you see there is a problem. 

I've mentioned before how tone can be misinterpreted on forums but yours was very consistent. Just saying, if APR was my business I'd be pretty disappointed with how this was handled. The good news is that now the tone is much more cordial...Im gonna go pour one out for CeepeRS now.


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> I have a very, VERY hard time believing that. I know I'm going to get accused of all sorts of things for saying this, but, UM isn't big enough to do everything in house.
> 
> DSG, along with the full line of Audi and VW cars for all boxcodes? There is NO WAY they're doing that without 3rd party tools.
> 
> I know the amount of work required to build a write a flashing/extraction routine for a new ECU. I did it for the S6/S7/S8 Ecus. I don't care how good a programmer you are, you're not going to write something like that in an afternoon.



WOW. 

'you will be accused of all sorts...'

Rhetorical question: Then why the heck did you say it, when you have no facts or direct knowledge??

Rhetorical question: Do you think we are 'too small' because you need 'a lot of help' to get the job done?

The guys at UM are all degreed engineers who have been tuning VW/Audi 
cars since before APR was incorporated... (1997 - ish)

Have you ever seen a stock R32 fuel system? Dual tank, single pump.
I have a patent on some of it. Rhetorical question: Do you have any patents?

Some facts:

UM DSG: 100% in house. Our flash algo, Our calibrations.
As far as I know we are the ONLY company getting 800nm out of these boxes, on stock clutches.
(100% stock hardware)

Writing flash algos is ~difficult, for sure.
Our dealer Flash Tool 100% in-house.
Our development flash tools: 100% in-house.
Our own ecu data logging tools: 100% in-house. (how else can you properly dig into things to solve real problems)

We are not 1st to market BECAUSE we make all our own tools and our own
calibrations.

Sean you are STILL chasing your tale on this TTRS 'misfire' issue. 
Its comical: ALL the data you need has been posted by Arin himself, yet no one at APR has put the pieces together. :screwy:

Beat us in the 'race', fine, but really, do you and Arin need to spread lies about UM just keep the cash flow up/keep us down?

Gents: Im not posting any further here. I had to post some rebutle... because folks believe this crud if its posted on the vortex.


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

[email protected] said:


> We've discussed adding it. If we do, it will probably be an option at the next release. We know these are features not all customers want, so we’re looking into an elegant way to either add it into our Direct Port Programming system, or finding a way for users to turn it on and off at will.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You say you think you've nailed the issue folks were seeing with the perceived misfires. Were you able to replicate the issue? What was the root cause? Would love to see some evidence of correction through actual data.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

Koa1 said:


> This whole APR misfire issue was mishandled, making it eerily similar to the BMW HPFP issues, which got me to completely swear off BMWs. Arin, humility in the beginning would have gone a long way (see APRKeith's tone on the UK forum as an example).


I agree, but the APR issue is 10X less significant. In principal it is the same.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> I have a very, VERY hard time believing that. I know I'm going to get accused of all sorts of things for saying this, but, UM isn't big enough to do everything in house.
> 
> DSG, along with the full line of Audi and VW cars for all boxcodes? There is NO WAY they're doing that without 3rd party tools.
> 
> I know the amount of work required to build a write a flashing/extraction routine for a new ECU. I did it for the S6/S7/S8 Ecus. I don't care how good a programmer you are, you're not going to write something like that in an afternoon.


Before this gets out of hand, Sean, seriously that was way out of line. If you had facts, that would be one thing. Your statement was totally unsupported, hypothetical, inflammatory and condescending. To make matters worse you are dogging the guy who apparently, with his little band of engineers, has out performed the mighty APR. We all make mistakes and this is one of yours. I am kindly calling you out on this and asking that you be a man and apologize. You guys need to really be thinking damage control, not slander.

I have no reason to disbelieve Jeff and I accept his word at face value.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

opcorn:


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

joneze93tsi said:


> Not sure if you've actually read the original post that started this?
> It's a bit too late for me and several others who have switched ships.
> I lived with "misfires" for a year, tried $200 worth of spark plugs, gaps and everything else. When I went stage2 a whole new variety of issues appeared.
> 
> ...


I don't know about you, but a BIG fat "we are sorry and here is how we are going to make it up to you" is in order. (No sarcasm). I think we all purchased these amazing cars to enjoy them. Being told that this and that is the problem and then diligently following all recommendations to no avail is the opposite of fun. I think your analysis is spot on. 

My approval rating of APR would go up several points if there was a consistant and honest message from them. I would be willing to bet that I am in a very tough customer service business. Everyone of my customers has a very personal opinion about how my company performs. It is my standard policy to take ownership of mistakes and do everything humanly possible to fix the real mistakes and ignore all the a holes that like to blow smoke. 

My advice to APR, offer to reimburse any owner who spent their money chasing the incorrect recommendations and reimburse them for any additional labor for "new / updated maps." This is what Apple would do and this is what I do with my customers. It would be a cheap gesture of good will that would create a PR benefit greater than any form of normal advertising.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> I don't think it was mishandled at all. We had years of happy people across the globe and low reports of issues. These same issues were reported by almost all available tuners, making diagnosis difficult. We still have many happy customers and dealers enjoying the software but have identified what could cause the described issue for some customers, and we are addressing it. Keep in mind we are still running more boost and creating more midrange torque than our competitors. Weaker software in this reguard does not experience the issue.
> 
> Am I embarrassed some have an issue? Yes! Are we fixing it? Yes! Will we end up with more power in the midrange without the issue? Yes! Yes, yes, yes! Those interested in having their cake and eating it too will be glad we're making a big change and not simply giving you a slight increase over stock.


Okay I will agree to disagree with you about the past, since I was not active 6 months ago, but I will be honest enough to say that IT IS BEING MISHANDLED NOW! Throw me a bone here. I am really trying to give you guys the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## AnotherA2VR6 (Jun 20, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> I have a very, VERY hard time believing that. I know I'm going to get accused of all sorts of things for saying this, but, UM isn't big enough to do everything in house.


Believe it, all done in-house. If the talent is there, you don't need to be that big.



[email protected] said:


> DSG, along with the full line of Audi and VW cars for all boxcodes? There is NO WAY they're doing that without 3rd party tools.


Wow, that's a big assumption, and a 100% incorrect one at that.



[email protected] said:


> I know the amount of work required to build a write a flashing/extraction routine for a new ECU. I did it for the S6/S7/S8 Ecus. I don't care how good a programmer you are, you're not going to write something like that in an afternoon.


Yeah, I know there's some work involved, but really, it's not like the port flash algorithm used by the various control units has changed that much over the years since M3.8.1. Even the newer UDS based algorithms are just an evolution of the KWP2000 based ones. Sure, writing the first one took a bit of time, but it gets much quicker with each following one. With experience, the standard becomes easier, leaving more time to focus on the non-trivial items.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Jefnes3 said:


> Rhetorical question: Then why the heck did you say it, when you have no facts or direct knowledge??


Because I know what it takes to do this stuff.


> Rhetorical question: Do you think we are 'too small' because you need 'a lot of help' to get the job done?


To borrow your phrase.. WOW... 

I think you are 'too small' because you really are too small to be able to do it all in house. 

Let me clarify "do it all":

1. In house flashing tools
2. In house extraction tools
3. In house map decoding/locating
4. In house code changes 
5. In house checksum tool development
6. In house digital signature tool development
7. In house developed calibration software
8. In house logging software (VCDS, in our opinion, is way too slow for initial calibration work)
9. Calibration (obviously.. I do believe that you guys do this completely on your own... Lots of people have great things to say about your calibrations)



I don't usually let myself get dragged into e-peen contests and I'm trying very hard to keep this one civil. 

I don't care how you do it. But, when someone tells me that they can do my job better with less people and in less time, I have a very difficult time swallowing that. I've also been doing this a long time.

If you want to settle this matter, screenshots would be easy. Post screen shots of your calibration tool and your logging tool. Slightly low res is fine, I don't care about the data. Just show us that the UI isn't one of the off-the-shelf canned packages.

Our Composer and Explorer have been posted before. For that matter, we used to sell Explorer. 


I said this back in the Golf R forum and I'll say it again here. My goal is always one thing and one thing only: Find the truth. I don't really care about ego's or marketing (I regularly piss Arin off...) I only care about finding the right answer.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

AnotherA2VR6 said:


> Believe it, all done in-house. If the talent is there, you don't need to be that big.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think I needed to be more specific in my initial postings. Yes, I'll agree that everything is pretty much an evolution of KWP2000. I wasn't talking about the layer 2 protocol. I'm mostly focusing on MED17 stuff with that statement. Particularly the security unlock challenge to read memory response and flash security passwords.

When a new ECU comes out, the initial extraction is VERY difficult. Unless it uses a poly and challenge that has been seen before, it becomes a pretty devious chicken and egg problem..

Throwing DSG TCU's into the mix further multiplies the number of devices you need to do it for. 

How about BDM? Did you build a BDM tool for TT-RS flashing? No.. all TT-RS ECU's have to sent to you for flashing. Our dealers all have APR's BDM tool and can flash an RS while the customer waits.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> Okay I will agree to disagree with you about the past, since I was not active 6 months ago, but I will be honest enough to say that IT IS BEING MISHANDLED NOW! Throw me a bone here. I am really trying to give you guys the benefit of the doubt.


In the past, it wasn't handled as well as it could have been. How do you think it's being mishandled now? You've got my complete attention. Whatever we can do to make this better, please tell me and I'll personally get right on it.


Edit: I missed your post where you said what you want for this. Your request is outside my jurisdiction. Arin extended the 30 day return policy until after that update, that's a pretty good step in my mind. As for anything else, we'll have to see once the update is out and it's not my decision.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Not sure if you've actually read the original post that started this?
> It's a bit too late for me and several others who have switched ships.
> I lived with "misfires" for a year, tried $200 worth of spark plugs, gaps and everything else. When I went stage2 a whole new variety of issues appeared.
> 
> ...


I think you're being a little overly dramatic here. Did some people have issues, yes. Did we take longer than we should have to deal with? Perhaps. Are we dealing with it now? YES.


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> Because I know what it takes to do this stuff.
> 
> 
> To borrow your phrase.. WOW...
> ...



To clarify:

1. In house flashing tools: YES
2. In house extraction tools: YES
3. In house map decoding/locating: YES
4. In house code changes : YES
5. In house checksum tool development: YES
6. In house digital signature tool development : YES
7. In house developed calibration software : YES 
8. In house logging software (VCDS, in our opinion, is way too slow for initial calibration work) : YES
9. Calibration (obviously.. I do believe that you guys do this completely on your own... Lots of people have great things to say about your calibrations) : YES


We do all of these. We also use some ~commonly available tools when justified.
(would you buy tools from Snap-on or make your own wrench set)

You are correct: we cannot do what we do with common tools alone.
You are correct: these things cannot be done in an afternoon.



Logger:










Editor:












-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Marty said:


> You say you think you've nailed the issue folks were seeing with the perceived misfires. Were you able to replicate the issue? What was the root cause? Would love to see some evidence of correction through actual data.


Part of the problem in the TT-RS case was that we own a TT-RS. Usually, that would be a good thing, because we'd see the problems before anyone else and have them solved long before it got into customers hands.

In this case, it worked against us because our car didn't have any of these issues. Stage 1 and 2 worked beautiful on our car. A few months after 1 and 2 were done, we took the car apart to start building the stage 3 kit. From then on, it spent most of it's life either being assembled, disassembled or testing some piece of the stage 3 kit.

We tested every way we could think of on our car and couldn't duplicate the problem. Finally, we decided that enough was enough and we needed to figure out what was really going on. We found a customer with the problem that lived fairly close and traded him our S8 temporarily.

I can say with certainty that we HAVE duplicated the problem (I was in the car) and we've resolved it (at least on the test car we're using). Now the task is to test it on a bunch of cars to make sure nobody else has problems before we release it as an update.

For the TT-RS revisit, myself and one of the calibrators worked together on it. The issue is related to temperature, mass flow and manifold pressure. We did all of the work initially during the summer here in Alabama. That was a root cause of this. Unfortunately (funny to be saying this), the mild climate and warm winters we have here can sometimes give us a false sense of security. 

There are multiple ways to solve the issue, but I'm very happy with what we've done. I'm not going to go into further details until it's got a little more testing on it, but it's pretty impressive here. Furthermore, now that we know what caused our calibration to get out of whack under different conditions, I built a compensation mechanism that will adjust for it automatically.

So, the update will work the same in Chicago during the winter as it does here in Alabama during the summer.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Jefnes3 said:


> We do all of these. We also use some ~commonly available tools when justified.
> (would you buy tools from Snap-on or make your own wrench set)
> 
> You are correct: we cannot do what we do with common tools alone.
> ...


Cool. Looks good. I stand corrected and eat my previous statements.


----------



## AnotherA2VR6 (Jun 20, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> I think I needed to be more specific in my initial postings. Yes, I'll agree that everything is pretty much an evolution of KWP2000. I wasn't talking about the layer 2 protocol. I'm mostly focusing on MED17 stuff with that statement. Particularly the security unlock challenge to read memory response and flash security passwords.


OK. In the end it comes down to disassembling the file and figuring out how it works, then go from there. It can be quite tough, so I can appreciate the work you've put into it.



[email protected] said:


> When a new ECU comes out, the initial extraction is VERY difficult. Unless it uses a poly and challenge that has been seen before, it becomes a pretty devious chicken and egg problem..
> 
> Throwing DSG TCU's into the mix further multiplies the number of devices you need to do it for.


Well, I guess we know what we're doing here at UM!



[email protected] said:


> How about BDM? Did you build a BDM tool for TT-RS flashing? No.. all TT-RS ECU's have to sent to you for flashing. Our dealers all have APR's BDM tool and can flash an RS while the customer waits.


Are you sure you're not in marketing? I do commend you on having a dealer based BDM tool. You must be proud of the work you've done to create it. Again, good job!


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> I think you're being a little overly dramatic here.


Ahh, there's that customer service I've come to expect from you.
I think you are doing more harm than good to your company's image here.
Aaron was always at least respectful, and relayed what he could from the engineering team, while being somewhat sympathetic towards those who have issues.

So far, you've managed to further alienate and push salt into the wounds of long time customers like myself.

Oh, and in a vain attempt to discredit another tuner, flat out called them a liar, only to be proven wrong.

I think Aaron was a far better face on the forum, all you are doing is squashing what little respect I had left for APR, with your horrible condescending attitude towards both customers and other tuners. What motivation to we have to deal with APR if this is how issues will be handled? I was one of the many who was eager to jump on the Stage3 kit when released, but honestly not anymore. Would I have to live with problems for a year before another tuner fixes them? Would we then be told, it's not your problem and have to go elsewhere to be corrected, then told it wasn't a big deal?

I was one of the many who would immediately recommend APR to all friends and family as, as almost by habit, I would immediately flash any new car I got. I have several good friends who have all witnessed/driven/ and now seen the end results. They are now going elsewhere for their tunes. My buddy just bought a Golf R right after I got the UM tune on my TTRS. Having driven the car before and after, he decided right then that he would go to UM for his tune. 

It was a big deal, it is a big deal, and the way you responding is only driving previous customers further away, and ensuring new ones know what kind of response they'll get if they have issues.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> In the past, it wasn't handled as well as it could have been. How do you think it's being mishandled now? You've got my complete attention. Whatever we can do to make this better, please tell me and I'll personally get right on it.
> 
> 
> Edit: I missed your post where you said what you want for this. Your request is outside my jurisdiction. Arin extended the 30 day return policy until after that update, that's a pretty good step in my mind. As for anything else, we'll have to see once the update is out and it's not my decision.


Here is how it is being mishandled.

The admitted problems APR is having with its tune has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with UM R&D. Slamming them is counterproductive. It makes APR look like thin skinned, narrow minded, defensive, and unable to handle legitimate criticism. Furthermore, it injects an element of emotion into the situation that is not necessary.

Until yesterday, I considered this just a technical problem and I based my entire decision based on a cost benefit analysis. Now, I am thinking more about WHO I want to be associated with. Do I want to keep giving APR the benefit of the doubt and recognize that Sean is human just like all of us and you could have worded things better or do I go over to UM because I have a deep personal connection to smaller business (quantity, not quality). I should not even be considering this, but it is the only thing I am thinking about now. That is how it is being mishandled now? 

Furthermore, it really bothers me when someone tells me that I cannot possibly understand something because of some special knowledge, tool, privilege, or ability of someone else. 99.9% of the time this is not true. A dedicated human can usually overcome these advantages, if they are willing to pour their soul into it. 

As for my specific comment about what should be done for owners who have had problems:

1. You HAVE done what I asked for. Thank you!
2. Other people have had problems for a longer period of time and THEY deserve some additional consideration. Let me be clear. Pay for their spark plugs. Pay for their labor charges for the EXTRA work that was performed to try to fix the tune and did not work. This seems obvious to me.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Why anyone would go with APR after this fiasco is beyond me. Jeff has showed you don't have to be a big company to make a quality product. Actually the big company with all their engineers got it wrong for a lot of us out here. Thanks Jeff for doing it right and staying classy. :thumbup::beer:


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

Williamttrs said:


> 2. Other people have had problems for a longer period of time and THEY deserve some additional consideration. Let me be clear. Pay for their spark plugs. Pay for their labor charges for the EXTRA work that was performed to try to fix the tune and did not work. This seems obvious to me.


Personally I think APR should offer everyone's money back for those that want to return the tune based on the issues. At this point I think APR is lucky that a class action lawsuit has not been started yet for this product.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> Why anyone would go with APR after this fiasco is beyond me. Jeff has showed you don't have to be a big company to make a quality product. Actually the big company with all their engineers got it wrong for a lot of us out here. Thanks Jeff for doing it right and staying classy. :thumbup::beer:


1. Because quick emotional decisions are usually not the best decisions.

2. Yes this is a boondoggle, but I have been on the wrong side of a boondoggle before and I know that making mistakes do not define WHO you are. Sean, Arin, and APR in general has the potential to learn from this and do better. 

3. It is inappropriate to discount years of good work by APR because of a fairly narrow issue that has been massively intensified, due to emotion.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> 1. Because quick emotional decisions are usually not the best decisions.
> 
> 2. Yes this is a boondoggle, but I have been on the wrong side of a boondoggle before and I know that making mistakes do not define WHO you are. Sean, Arin, and APR in general has the potential to learn from this and do better.
> 
> 3. It is inappropriate to discount years of good work by APR because of a fairly narrow issue that has been massively intensified, due to emotion.


I'm sure you realize that the money you will be paying to this company validates how they have treated many members on and off the board in regards to this problem. Perhaps you could care less, but my money goes to the company that treats it's customers well because that's who they are, not just because they are losing money or have a PR problem.

Now YOU are discounting what has happened to others on here by stating they are emotional. Was Joneze emotional when he spent months dealing with apr over an issue they couldn't/wouldn't fix? Was CeepeRS emotional when he spend months going over issues with his tune and eventually sold his car. Did you see me getting emotional about the problems I had with my tune from APR? I think not. If not getting what you paid for and then told it's no big deal or let's spend months testing your car is okay and doesn't get you a little upset, then the APR tune is for you!  I just think it's a lot of money to spend to be a beta tester.

I can tell you will be going with APR, i just hope you don't have any further issues that they think is irrelevant or not a big deal.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> I don't usually let myself get dragged into e-peen contests and I'm trying very hard to keep this one civil.
> 
> I don't care how you do it. But, when someone tells me that they can do my job better with less people and in less time, I have a very difficult time swallowing that. I've also been doing this a long time.


LOL! It's not UM that's telling you they can do a better job than you. It's your own (previous) customers who are saying that UM does a better job than you!


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

joneze93tsi said:


> Ahh, there's that customer service I've come to expect from you.
> I think you are doing more harm than good to your company's image here.
> Aaron was always at least respectful, and relayed what he could from the engineering team, while being somewhat sympathetic towards those who have issues.
> 
> ...


You can't please everyone. I gave up trying a long time ago. We also can't and won't get everyone's business. I hope you have fun with your car and whatever tune you put on it.

I tell the truth as best I know it and it's as simple as that. Am I wrong on occasion, yes. But it doesn't happen often and I own up when it does.

You are just spewing bile for the sake of spewing bile. I understand that you're annoyed, but, as I said before, you're being overly dramatic. I will make no further efforts to assuage you.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

AnotherA2VR6 said:


> OK. In the end it comes down to disassembling the file and figuring out how it works, then go from there. It can be quite tough, so I can appreciate the work you've put into it.


I'm talking about getting that file in the first place. That's the chicken and egg problem. Disassembly is easy, that's what I do here. Getting the original file TO disassemble is not.


> Are you sure you're not in marketing? I do commend you on having a dealer based BDM tool. You must be proud of the work you've done to create it. Again, good job!



I do need to apologize a little. I let some of the fanboy bull**** get to me.


----------



## bsmack (Oct 16, 2008)

Here is a dyno of my car with just the secondary cat delete and UM tune vs a competitor's tune and secondary cat delete. Same day, same conditions, same car.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

lol at the UM fanboys pushing UM tunes so hard like their life depends on it. :laugh:

Whoopie do UM came across the issue during development whilst APR, Revo/stasis/giac didnt.

When I had the revo tune I had these issues, with the APR I didnt. HOWEVER, two of my friends with the same revo tune didnt have the problems I had with my revo tune. For some reason I dont know why some cars are affected, and others arent.

Anyhow in the end everyone gets there eventually, one way or another, which is usually the important bit. For all you guys know, certain users could be removing or turnin off tuning protection strategies to overcome certain issues they acounter. The good thing with APR is that you know they will do it the right way, the proper way. Just look at the customer TTRS engine another tuner melted....

Anyhow, ive been around the VAG tuning circles for a while now, and they ALL talk big, but push comes to shove it really does boil down to philosophy and resources, and having seen the way APR go about with their development, I have 100% with a 18k ttrs engine with them.

Who else is making big numbers with their stage 3 kit like APR, whilst retaining OEM driveability, OEM build quality, OEM reliability, at a price point that is still affordable, unlike the 30-40k german stage 3 kits? NO ONE.

Im sorry to say the sad truth is that when it comes to real tuning and modifying your VAG car, there are truly only 2 companies arguably 3 at a push, out there who can do it properly.

Ones american, the others german.


Anyway, lets stop the back and forth and just enjoy your cars, stage 2 power is nice, but stage 3 is on another planet. Once you taste it, you will want it, trust me. :wave:


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Poverty said:


> lol at the UM fanboys pushing UM tunes so hard like their life depends on it. :laugh:


Yes, i am a fanboy of good results and quality customer service.

I am happy you are pleased with your tune, unfortunately not all of us have had the same experience nor do we get to be an insider and part of Stage3 development at APR.

opcorn:


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Poverty said:


> lol at the UM fanboys pushing UM tunes so hard like their life depends on it. :laugh:


Fanboy?

This thread began as a review. I was an APR "Fanboy" as you might call it for years. There was no other option as far as I was concerned. I even drove from Ohio to Alabama to have them install the Software & Pulley system on my B8 personally, as I trusted them implicitly.

I wasn't compensated or enticed to switch to UM in any way.

After a year of problems, and trying various plugs, various gas, various gaps to try and solve the problem, I was even willing to live with it and drive around it... But then I went Stage2 and the problems got far worse, to the point were I didn't feel safe driving the car. I worked with APR on logging the car and was told, flat out it's not going to work and I need to revert back to stage1, or try low output files and different gaps.

After talking to another person who switched after running into the same problems, I paid the $900 again to another tuner (UM). They delivered a tune that worked out of the box, made more power, and had more features for me. I got a follow-up from the engineer who wrote the tune asking how I liked it, or If I needed anything changed to meet certain needs.

At the end of the day, I'm out $900 for the APR Tune. $250 in plugs that weren't needed for a tune that popped, misfired, and fuel cut. APR did not have a solution for me. I paid $900 again to have it fixed by another shop. A month later, APR now has a new team of engineers who claim to have resolved the issues and will soon make customers happy. That's great, and I'm quite happy for for those who stuck through it, they got resolved without spending anymore money.

I'm not "spilling bile" I'm explaining my circumstance and experience with APR, and how it was handled. As Sean put it, they don't really care about winning over every customer, that's obvious.
But I'm not waiving the UM flag due to any compensation or endorsement deal, I'm happy because I got what I paid for, without arguing, fighting, or problems.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

I agree completely with joneze93sti. Some of us here seem to be pretty level headed and without major agendas. Your comments and experience have the ring of truth.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

canuckttrs said:


> I'm sure you realize....
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> canuckttrs said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure you realize....
> ...


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> canuckttrs said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure you realize....
> ...


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> Yes, i am a fanboy of good results and quality customer service


I will say that APR has done more than enough recently in the customer service department to put my mind at ease with this tune. I've seen arrogant and near-childish posts from both UM and APR in terms of the actual engineering of the tunes so I'll just call that a wash. People get defensive over their products, it's understandable. APR has communicated that they want to make things right for those of us with issues and I'll give them the opportunity to do so. It will just take some time. Based on what Sean has been saying we may end up with an even better tune than the original stage 2 they did.


----------



## J662 (Dec 8, 2011)

LynxFX said:


> I will say that APR has done more than enough recently in the customer service department to put my mind at ease with this tune. I've seen arrogant and near-childish posts from both UM and APR in terms of the actual engineering of the tunes so I'll just call that a wash. People get defensive over their products, it's understandable. APR has communicated that they want to make things right for those of us with issues and I'll give them the opportunity to do so. It will just take some time. Based on what Sean has been saying we may end up with an even better tune than the original stage 2 they did.


At the end of the day though one tune works and the other doesn't. I'd rather spend my time enjoying the car than jerking around with issues. Just an observation and an opinion.


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

J662 said:


> At the end of the day though one tune works and the other doesn't. I'd rather spend my time enjoying the car than jerking around with issues. Just an observation and an opinion.


If I was just looking at getting a tune I would agree with you but some of us already have money invested. I have the LO file and it works, just not what it should be and they are actively working on that. So it makes sense to play the wait and see approach.


----------



## J662 (Dec 8, 2011)

LynxFX said:


> If I was just looking at getting a tune I would agree with you but some of us already have money invested. I have the LO file and it works, just not what it should be and they are actively working on that. So it makes sense to play the wait and see approach.


Understood. Hope it works out for you guys.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

LynxFX said:


> we may end up with an even better tune than the original stage 2 they did.



It's gonna rock.


----------



## primetime21 (Feb 14, 2013)

I'll be picking my car up next week and wii tune shortly after and probably do a few other mods as well... Lol.. Been an apr customer since early 2000's... Plan too hookup with a certain member who didn't have the best of luck with apr and is now on um... Arin and I talk on a regular basis in regards to another car I own and I am still leaning toward apr but honestly Sean isn't helping with that decision... I'm just another customer and as Sean says you can't please everyone so it probably doesn't matter what I think since I'll be a noob to the TTRS... That will change fairly quickly one way or the other... :wave:


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> It's gonna rock.


I hope so! If anything good will come of all this, Sean/APR will be motivated to make something really special and benefit everyone. I mean everyone. UM tuned cars as well. If APR gets bragging rights, then good friendly competition will spur the excellent fellows at UM to find a little more too. Now that kind of competition is fun to me!


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

primetime21 said:


> I'll be picking my car up next week and wii tune shortly after and probably do a few other mods as well... Lol.. Been an apr customer since early 2000's... Plan too hookup with a certain member who didn't have the best of luck with apr and is now on um... Arin and I talk on a regular basis in regards to another car I own and I am still leaning toward apr but honestly Sean isn't helping with that decision... I'm just another customer and as Sean says you can't please everyone so it probably doesn't matter what I think since I'll be a noob to the TTRS... That will change fairly quickly one way or the other... :wave:


Welcome to the club. It is a hoot!


----------



## primetime21 (Feb 14, 2013)

Williamttrs said:


> Welcome to the club. It is a hoot!


Thanks... Actually, really excited and big plans for the car...


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

primetime21 said:


> Thanks... Actually, really excited and big plans for the car...


care to elaborate on those big plans?


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

UM = Win 

APR - Next time around, reread your posts before hitting the submit button after you have had time to think/calm down. Completely off topic attacks on UM about whether they develop their own tools has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. If UM can develop their tunes using an analog volt meter and Notepad for coding, then so be it. It turns out that UM has their stuff together, which only helped to make APR's original attack look more foolish. 

I appreciate the vendors participation on these forums. I come here for useful information and maybe a few laughs, but the p*ssing contest has gotten old.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

How many guys are running APR or UM maps ?
Seems to be a lot of banter and no facts.
Any videos,acceleration times, top speed information available ?
As a little note.
Tuners in Europe have had misfire,safety modes,speed limiter issues since 2009.
Not all tuners can solve all the problems,and it doesn't help that many can't get feedback from all cars in all situations (i.e Autobahns/race tracks on their doorstep)
Tuners in the UK for example, are not going to have a lot of feed back from cars hitting a speed limiter at 165 mph,or intake temperatures,boost levels under wot runs to 180 mph +

Audi have also used many different software upgrades since the car came out,especially when the stronic and RS3 came out in 2011.Mine has just had a new factory map put on last week,which the tuner who developed my latest map has never seen before.
So another map that he hast to look into and could have hidden surprises.
Don't forget,it's not great news for Audi when everyone tunes their TT RS to give the R8 V10 problems out on the road,lol

Tuning is a learning process,so problems are bound to arise.It's part of the game, and from what I can see, here both tuners are doing what they can to keep customers happy.


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

jaybyme said:


> How many guys are running APR or UM maps ?


Quite a few people in this thread, myself included. I won't post any videos unless I make it out to a track. A couple members have posted dynos. I plan on running a dyno once I get the updated APR stage 2. If I can work it out I'll get one with the LO profile first to compare. No promises on that though.

It would be fun to see a friendly side by side pull with a couple cars with different tunes. opcorn:


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

I rough time mine 50/60 mph to 100/124/155 mph with the lap timer,just to give me a rough idea down to a couple of tenths with different maps.
I don't bother with the 0-60 too much as I know it will be in the low 3's and there are too many cars having propshaft problems to risk it.
Knowing me,I'll be one of the unlucky ones.even though one car has done over 150 launches in his Stronic.


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

i have the original apr stg1 93, its amazing, pulls so hard, raced a panamera turbo i was ahead by maybe a car length max from 60-120mph, repeated this process 10 times lol had shell racing 100ron fuel at the time, i misfired once when i went on a road trip thanks to this one gas station had crappy fuel it seems, 2 tanks later it went away been fine since

other notes, i never had limp mode people are mentioning, but i do have the speed limiter problem at 155mph, so hopefully this new soft sean is working on he remembers to carry over that security bit


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

Williamttrs said:


> Before this gets out of hand, Sean, seriously that was way out of line.




You're right. I was emotional due to a personal issue and let that translate into being an ******* on here. I realized the severity of it when my wife asked me if I was about to have my period.

Sorry to everyone for all the bull****. I'm not usually like that, and I feel like a turd for it. I didn't represent myself or APR in the manner that I prefer to.

I'm going to take some midol and a weekend off from everything. Hopefully on Monday, my disposition is significantly better.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

tdi-bart said:


> i have the original apr stg1 93, its amazing, pulls so hard, raced a panamera turbo i was ahead by maybe a car length max from 60-120mph, repeated this process 10 times lol had shell racing 100ron fuel at the time, i misfired once when i went on a road trip thanks to this one gas station had crappy fuel it seems, 2 tanks later it went away been fine since
> 
> other notes, i never had limp mode people are mentioning, but i do have the speed limiter problem at 155mph, so hopefully this new soft sean is working on he remembers to carry over that security bit


I maybe wrong,but I don't think even APR knew of the speed limiter issue until it happened on mine last year.
It's a strange one,as it can work fine for so many miles with plenty of high speed runs,then comes in later.
Many tuners still have problems completely deactivating it, as even when some had thought they had cracked it,it came back.
I haven't tested the newer APR map,so I can't comment,but I know after I mentioned it,APR UK done lots of testing to solve the problem.
My ECU with stage 2 APR map is locked out now,as I'm running a new ECU with Audi's latest software. and map from Siemoneit Racing supposedly limited to an optional 310 km/h limit.
The standard car with a limit set at 280 km/h would nearly hit 300 km/h on the clock,so it should be enough unless the car gets a huge power hike.
Standard cars in Europe limited to 250 km/h normally would hit the limiter at 277 km/h on the clock.
After 1000 km of testing all is well,but I won't be convinced until I've done 2000 km


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

sure its ~270 on your gauges, but in vagcom its exactly 255, the gauges read high on all cars for safety reasons


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 28, 2004)

jaybyme said:


> I don't bother with the 0-60 too much as I know it will be in the low 3's and *there are too many cars having propshaft problems to risk it.*


 Sorry for the OT... Do you have a link to said failures? Pictures? Details? Thanks


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

tdi-bart said:


> sure its ~270 on your gauges, but in vagcom its exactly 255, the gauges read high on all cars for safety reasons


 Yes,but the standard car is not limited to an exact 155 mph or 174 mph. 
Mine, with the factory 155 mph limiter would hit 167 mph gps,and others with the 174 mph limiter have hit 180+ mph gps. 
I find the easiest way, is to check out GPS speeds/rpm and then go by the rev counter. 
IF you update them allowing for different tyres and wear,the speeds will be correct. 
I know if I hit 6000 rpm in 6th I'll be hitting a true 300 km/h 
To hit the magical 200 mph, I would need just under 7000 rpm in 6th. 
If I want to drive with economy in mind, a true 180 mph is achieved cruising at just 5225 rpm in the stronic  

I'll see if anyone posted pictures of propshaft failures. 
The most recent one I saw was from a guy on here in Germany,but there have been a few more,especially with the RS3. 
http://www.tts-freunde.de/board/boa...en-umbauten/9781-hungs-tt-rs-plus/index8.html 
he has posted on the UK forums,but I can't find it


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> You're right. I was emotional due to a personal issue and let that translate into being an ******* on here. I realized the severity of it when my wife asked me if I was about to have my period.
> 
> Sorry to everyone for all the bull****. I'm not usually like that, and I feel like a turd for it. I didn't represent myself or APR in the manner that I prefer to.
> 
> I'm going to take some midol and a weekend off from everything. Hopefully on Monday, my disposition is significantly better.


 A little self-deprication goes a long way to heal hurt feelings. I now decree you FORGIVEN for past transgressions.. Of course I can only say that for myself. 

I love a spirited competition amongst rivals though. I just hope we can keep the banter about the level that we would be comfortable with if a bunch of us were sitting at a bar having a few drinks (not a lot of drinks).


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

jaybyme said:


> I maybe wrong,but I don't think even APR knew of the speed limiter issue until it happened on mine last year.


 You are right. We didn't know about it. A couple of you guys started hitting the limiter early so the EE's dug into it and figured out why it was popping back up. Thanks for pointing that out to us.  :thumbup:


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

RTErnie said:


> Sorry for the OT... Do you have a link to said failures? Pictures? Details? Thanks


 
There were 2 in the US that I was aware of, but both of them happened the first time they tried launching the car hard. I'm guessing there was a bad batch of CV joints as that is where they both failed. RS3's tend to kill them first due to the added weight. 

I've done god knows how many(50+?) clutch drop, tire spinning launches on my car and it's never made a peep, only lots of tire smoke. Yesterday, our SCCA group put on a "mini autocross" event for the IFO event that was in town. After a couple people got a ride, a line formed outside the TTRS for more rides. "I can't breath when you take off" :laugh: 

I did a good 15 back to back tire spinning launches like this: 
(whipping the throttle between 3.5/5k and drop it on the upswing above 4) 






 
The clutch is strong, but doesn't like heat from spinning. Snap it out quickly and let the tires spin, not the clutch. You might eventually drop a prop shaft or CV joint, but I'd rather do that than a clutch job. PS: This is on 275 wide NT05's.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 28, 2004)

joneze93tsi said:


> There were 2 in the US that I was aware of, but both of them happened the first time they tried launching the car hard. I'm guessing there was a bad batch of CV joints as that is where they both failed. RS3's tend to kill them first due to the added weight.
> 
> I've done god knows how many(50+?) clutch drop, tire spinning launches on my car and it's never made a peep, only lots of tire smoke. Yesterday, our SCCA group put on a "mini autocross" event for the IFO event that was in town. After a couple people got a ride, a line formed outside the TTRS for more rides. "I can't breath when you take off" :laugh:
> 
> ...


 What width wheel are you running to fit a 275? 10"? If so what's your offset. Thanks for answering my question.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

RTErnie said:


> What width wheel are you running to fit a 275? 10"? If so what's your offset. Thanks for answering my question.


 
On stock 19x9. 


http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6006563-275-30-19-on-Stock-TTRS-Wheels-Success


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

canuckttrs: Did you managed to make a video of the No Lift Shift functionality? 

I am (and I guess more of us are) interested in seeing that is actually working and gives no error or whatever. 

It would be enough to film the dashboard (rpm and speedo) and make a few gear changes: 
Some fast changes + some very very slow (like pressing the clutch for 2-3 seconds to see if the RPM holds without any issue). 

Thank you. 

On another note: This should have been made by UM themselves as it's the only TT RS software with this option (based on their claims). I am quite interested to have this on my car so maybe we can sort it out somehow.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

cipsony said:


> canuckttrs: Did you managed to make a video of the No Lift Shift functionality?
> 
> I am (and I guess more of us are) interested in seeing that is actually working and gives no error or whatever.
> 
> ...


 +1 This would add another tick mark in the UM column for my impending decision.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

I actually wrote Jeff and suggested that they take some video of these two options since they would be such a big selling point. Never heard anything back


----------



## TraderGuy (Feb 3, 2013)

croman44 said:


> I actually wrote Jeff and suggested that they take some video of these two options since they would be such a big selling point. Never heard anything back


 They would need a local TT RS with their tune and a willing owner. Probably not too many around. Hey I'm local, have a TT RS....


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

When I get LC/NLS flashed, I promise to hook up the Go-Pro for your enjoyment. 

After some testing at the last Autox event, I cant imagine leaving much harder, car already spins 1st pretty easy.


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

TraderGuy said:


> They would need a local TT RS with their tune and a willing owner. Probably not too many around. Hey I'm local, have a TT RS....


 Bring it by the shop. Another TTRS is coming in for some dyno time ~next week. 
Call Fred: 203 889 0008. 


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Jefnes3 said:


> Bring it by the shop. Another TTRS is coming in for some dyno time ~next week.
> Call Fred: 203 889 0008.
> 
> 
> -Jeffrey Atwood


 Jefnes3 --> are you representing UM ? (I'm new here so I know just a few members)


----------



## climbingcue (Feb 2, 2001)

cipsony said:


> Jefnes3 --> are you representing UM ? (I'm new here so I know just a few members)


 He is the one that is writing the software for United Motorsports.... I have his launch control and no lift shift on my Stage 2 Golf R. The tune is very smooth and the LC and NLS are awesome and easy to use. Anyone that would not run a UM tune is really missing out on the best of what their car has offer. 

Bill


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

In this case I have a few questions for Jefnes3: 
1) Is the function implemented and working ok on TT RS? as it seems that no one actually said: "YES I have it on my car and it's working." 
2) How do you manage to maintain the rpm constant when the clutch is pressed ? Just a rpm limitation by signal OR coils signals interrupted OR coils signals interrupted & fuel reduced OR ... ? 
3) Is the rpm during wot changes reduced according to the pre-changing rpm ? or is just a fixed value? 
4) CAN YOU FIND A SOLUTION to flash this option on my car without altering the REvo software? OR if you flash it and then I go to Revo for putting my software back will they alter your NLF function? --> Of course I am willing to pay all the extra time that is involved in the process. 

Thank you in advance. 

PS: If it really works just wait for some to use this function and understand it's advantages --> It would be like the equivalent of 20~30 hp out of nowhere.


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

climbingcue said:


> He is the one that is writing the software for United Motorsports....
> 
> Bill


 

Close, but not quite. 

I own/run UM USA. Matt Wright owns/runs UM UK. He wrote the nifty Golf R and TTRS features we offer: Launch control, No lift shift, Adjustable octane, Adjustable boost. 

Jacob builds our in-house flash, development, data logging tools and does disassembly work. 
I do calibration work here for the USA market cars. Matt does calibration work in the UK. 
We've all been working together on some level since the Mk3 VW cars were still 'new'. 
(Before the Vortex and most other tuners got started) 


re:cipsony 
1. Launch, no lift shift, adjustable boost, adjustable octane are standard in the UM TTRS software. 
Currently only Joneze has not been updated to current specs. All others have the full version. 
He has adjustable octane and boost features. 

2. No lift rpm is not maintained, it will drop. We cut engine power. This feature has a user adjustable timer to accommodate individual driving style. 

3. Honestly: 'how' we do things is not something I wish to discuss. This feature took some time 
to develop the proper logic so that it works how we wanted. 
(rehtorical question: would you ask Coke for the recipe?) 
This is not 'black magic', just custom code work. 

4. not possible to add ~some UM code to another tuner's work. 

p.s. These functions really work. (take a look over at the Golf R forums, folks running these 
features) 


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## climbingcue (Feb 2, 2001)

Jefnes3 said:


> Close, but not quite.
> 
> I own/run UM USA. Matt Wright owns/runs UM UK. He wrote the nifty Golf R and TTRS features we offer: Launch control, No lift shift, Adjustable octane, Adjustable boost.
> 
> -Jeffrey Atwood


 Sorry, I got it wrong Jeff... I am loving the software for my Golf R :thumbup: :thumbup: 

Bill


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

Why is no one in the UK running this software on the TTRS or 2.0TFSI? 

Never even heard of UM before


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

Poverty said:


> Why is no one in the UK running this software on the TTRS or 2.0TFSI?
> 
> Never even heard of UM before


 Goto The Phirm. Matt has been sorting blower RS4 4.2fsi cars lately.

2L fsi: Matt knows them well, swaps, big turbos, He's done it. 

-Jeff


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

Jefnes3 said:


> Goto The Phirm. Matt has been sorting blower RS4 4.2fsi cars lately.
> 
> 2L fsi: Matt knows them well, swaps, big turbos, He's done it.
> 
> -Jeff


 Oh so UM is the phirms own code? Ive heard of those guys before. 

They arent promoting the code though?


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

No. 


UM is not The Phirm, and The Phrim is not UM. 

The Phirm is where you can find examples of Matt's work. 

-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

So there are no UM agents in the UK?


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Jefnes3 said:


> Close, but not quite.
> 
> I own/run UM USA. Matt Wright owns/runs UM UK. He wrote the nifty Golf R and TTRS features we offer: Launch control, No lift shift, Adjustable octane, Adjustable boost.
> 
> ...


 Thank you for your answers. 
I'm asking all these questions because I really want this feature on my car. 

There is a possibility to make it by altering the signal coming from the "throttle position sender" but I would really prefer your solution through software. 

PS: Don't answer to the questions coming from Poverty. His role here is just to promote APR and attack anything else.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

cipsony said:


> Thank you for your answers.
> I'm asking all these questions because I really want this feature on my car.
> 
> There is a possibility to make it by altering the signal coming from the "throttle position sender" but I would really prefer your solution through software.
> ...


 grow up ciprian


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

Poverty said:


> So there are no UM agents in the UK?


 There are UM dealers in the UK. 

Please contact us by email if you have further questions. 


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Poverty said:


> So there are no UM agents in the UK?


 http://unitedmotorsport.co.uk/ 

google is very helpful for these kinds of things.


----------



## climbingcue (Feb 2, 2001)

canuckttrs said:


> http://unitedmotorsport.co.uk/
> 
> google is very helpful for these kinds of things.


 :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 28, 2004)

Jefnes3 said:


> WOW.
> 
> 'you will be accused of all sorts...'
> 
> ...


Quoting for future reference.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 27, 2012)




----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

canuckttrs said:


> http://unitedmotorsport.co.uk/
> 
> google is very helpful for these kinds of things.


yes, a website last updated in 2011. very good.


----------



## Dan.S (Jan 3, 2012)

Does UM have a stage 2 tune for ****ty AZ 91 oct fuel? If so what is required additionally, and what is the dyno like?


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

[email protected] said:


>



bwahahaha :laugh::laugh::laugh:

GoAPR


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

Poverty said:


> bwahahaha :laugh::laugh::laugh:
> 
> GoAPR


:screwy:


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

All in due time


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

Dan.S said:


> Does UM have a stage 2 tune for ****ty AZ 91 oct fuel? If so what is required additionally, and what is the dyno like?


With the UM SW, octane can be adjusted by the end user with a VAGCOM setup for 91, 93, etc. at any time. UM will set the initial flash up like you request though, if you don't have a VAGCOM cable/SW. UM requires a high flow downpipe for Stage 2, which wouldn't vary based on 91 vs 93. Haven't seen any 91 octane dyno graphs from UM, but maybe they have some that they could post.


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

Poverty said:


> All in due time


yall are like a bunch of schoolgirls...

PS - good song by Killswitch Engage.


----------



## Tranzit (Mar 3, 2013)

APR vs UM? Loser starts with A.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

Tranzit said:


> APR vs UM? Loser starts with A.


Not constructive. Not helpful. Thanks for sharing though.


----------



## 13ttaz (Apr 30, 2013)

This thread reveals a lot about APR, its capabilities and its professionalism. It's disappointing.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

le sigh.

Poor thread.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

So, can we see in this millennium a movie (a simple basic movie that can be filmed with any phone) with the NLF function?
Something that would actually prove this function is implemented on the TT RS?


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

cipsony said:


> So, can we see in this millennium a movie (a simple basic movie that can be filmed with any phone) with the NLF function?
> Something that would actually prove this function is implemented on the TT RS?


"NLF"? Are you wanting to see the "Launch Control" or "No Lift Shift" feature filmed?

I need to fire up Vag-Com tomorrow, so I can enable the feature on my Stage 2 TT-RS and make a short video. I want have time/SW to make the video pretty, but you just want "proof" I take it?


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

hightechrdn said:


> "NLF"? Are you wanting to see the "Launch Control" or "No Lift Shift" feature filmed?
> 
> I need to fire up Vag-Com tomorrow, so I can enable the feature on my Stage 2 TT-RS and make a short video. I want have time/SW to make the video pretty, but you just want "proof" I take it?


Yes please.

I would be interested to see if the No Lift shift works, how well and if it can be used daily (when revving to 7000 rpm) --> I'm interested to see a fast shift and a very slow one to see how the rpm is behaving and no cell or anything is appearing.

IMHO, this function represents the major difference between UM and other tuners so this should have been advertised more intense (people don't realize how much you can actual win in terms of performance with such a function + it removes lot's of stress from the gearbox, clutch, driveshaft ...)


----------



## anthemx (Dec 30, 2013)

*Update*

Hi All,

I am new to this forum so apologies if i am arriving late to the topic,  and am interested in mapping my RS, however still trying to get to the bottom of this misfire issues, how did the new APR tune work out for everyone ?, did this completely sure the misfires and was there the improvement in midrange which was being worked on ?.

Also where are APR with the switchable maps, the website says it is being worked on ?, i have read that [email protected] seems to certainly know his stuff, maybe he could clear up for me that some tuners here in the UK are saying their maps are not detectable my Audi (TD1). I do not think this can be true as all maps if left on will throw a TD1 flag ?.

Many thanks all

Happy new year !


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

anthemx said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I am new to this forum so apologies if i am arriving late to the topic,  and am interested in mapping my RS, however still trying to get to the bottom of this misfire issues, how did the new APR tune work out for everyone ?, did this completely sure the misfires and was there the improvement in midrange which was being worked on ?.
> 
> ...


Yes, the misfire stuff has been resolved for quite some time.

TD1 is a different animal. The real bottom line that nobody will tell you is that nobody is 100% certain exactly what they're looking at. Furthermore, they change it somewhat regularly.

The biggest problem with it is that it doesn't appear immediately. After a car is plugged in, TD1 can appear 1 day or even up to about a week later. Sometimes it's because they dealer had suspicious and notified Audi. Other times, it's detected programatically. 

From our knowledge here in the US (and we're aware that the UK TD1 is slightly different than here), if you switch back to stock mode with our program switching on a TT-RS, you won't TD1. (For competitive reasons, I can't/won't go into why that is true, but it is). That's not true on other cars, but it is for the TT-RS.

I can't guarantee that they won't change TD1 or that it even works the same in the UK. Our experience there has been good, we've not had TD1 issues thus far. But, past performance is no guarantee of future results.

The best thing to do if you're paranoid about TD1 is to go to your APR dealer and have the car flashed back to OEM stock before any warranty work is performed. That definitely won't flag TD1.

After the work is done, return to the APR dealer to have your performance software re-installed. Some dealers charge a small amount of labor for putting performance back on, but it shouldn't ever be much and APR doesn't charge anything.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

I've put thousands of miles on the updated tune and there has been no misfires, pops,cel, or any other issues.
I should note, these have been hard, very much enjoyed miles as well.:laugh:


----------



## anthemx (Dec 30, 2013)

Perfect thanks !


----------



## anthemx (Dec 30, 2013)

Thanks Sean, appreciate your input. 

Does the program switching work on all TTRS model years ?, mine is one year old now, is this with the mobile app and Bluetooth dongle ?, also I am presuming the work is carried out with the ECU removed rather than OBD ?.

An my final question is will I needs to pick a map based in the fuel octane I will use, it appears that stock will take both 99 and 95 available here in the uk. Will the new tune take both but just produce less power on 95 ?, I generally run 99 but not always available. 

Thanks again


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

anthemx said:


> Thanks Sean, appreciate your input.
> 
> Does the program switching work on all TTRS model years ?, mine is one year old now, is this with the mobile app and Bluetooth dongle ?, also I am presuming the work is carried out with the ECU removed rather than OBD ?.
> 
> ...


Program switching for Euro TT-RS is still in Beta. We've got test cars, it just needs a few things finalized before we can release it.

We have specific programs for specific fuels. That's one of the primary uses of program switching. You can select a tuned program specific to the fuel you're using. (95 ron, 98 ron, 103 ron, etc...) and get the best performance the car can deliver with that fuel.

Almost all TT-RS models require ECU removal.


----------



## TRZ06 (Jan 20, 2013)

Sean,

How is the progress going on the noise issue? 

Also, I have noticed as of late with cooler temps. that the boost falls off with the same amount of throttle input at about 5K and comes back in at about 6.5K with throttle input kept at the same level. This didn't happen in the beginning.

I have been correcting it with adding more throttle input to bring the boost back up, but I shouldn't need to do that right?

Do you know if I have data logging on my tune and is it something that could be sent to you?


----------



## ina04gli1.8t (Sep 24, 2010)

cipsony said:


> Unfortunately many people are attached to their software (me included) but I am willing to pay a fair amount to any company that can bring the "no lift shift" on my car, without changing my current software.
> 
> If that would be possible I guess the first company bringing this on the market would make some serious money.


In a two words WOT Box


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

I wish it were that simple.
Wot box doesn't work with the TT RS


----------



## Ronald_Reagan (Feb 16, 2012)

Jefnes3 said:


> I own/run UM USA. Matt Wright owns/runs UM UK. He wrote the nifty Golf R and TTRS features we offer: Launch control, No lift shift, Adjustable octane, Adjustable boost.
> 
> Jacob builds our in-house flash, development, data logging tools and does disassembly work.
> I do calibration work here for the USA market cars. Matt does calibration work in the UK.
> ...


Interesting. Didn't Jacob work for EPL and C2 at one time?


----------



## Drof (Jun 27, 2013)

so through the 8 pages of info / arguments

anyone have any info/vids regarding how the TTRS reacts with UM LC and NLS? Quarter Mile Times, 0-60 times etc.?


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

I've had my RS back for a little over a week now with the United Motorsport Stage II tune... I had the APR Stage II but I had the noise that a lot of people have complained about. According to the shop I deal with APR acknowledges the noise but claims it will not cause any damage. I had them return my car to Audi default stock and the noise disappeared so it had to be the tune... So here are my thoughts:

The UM tune is much more linear and lacks the herky jerky response of the APR... AND NO NOISE 
The UM tune produces more power and torque...
The UM tune addresses the "S" mode over-sensitivity issues - Now I drive in the "S" mode all the time...
I can adjust the boost & octane using VCDS as well as no-lift shift timing and launch RPM...

All in All I'm much happier with the UM tune. I feel APR has a lot of work to do on their TTRS tune but then again is it worth it for them to put in the effort considering how few units were produced.

Having had the APR tune and now the UM tune I can tell you there's a world of difference between them... UM was extremely responsive to my questions and got my ECM out the same day it arrived... I'm extremely impressed with their service... I HIGHLY RECOMMEND UNITED MOTORSPORT...


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

thanks for the follow-up.

Do you have dynosheets that show the UM making more hp and more torque than stage 2 apr tune?


----------



## Drecca (Oct 26, 2003)

what octane was this on? 

Making 404whp for stage 1 with no hardware changes is pretty awesome. I'm all for switching from APR to UM to get an extra 50whp if it's on 91-93. Is it reliable so far? Curious as to how they make 50 more whp just with software


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

Fined said:


> thanks for the follow-up.
> 
> Do you have dynosheets that show the UM making more hp and more torque than stage 2 apr tune?


I will get that done at some point. UM numbers for Stage II are 445 WHP and 495 WTQ... I can tell you for sure that the UM tune feels stronger than the APR tune... For me it's not about the numbers... The metallic noise is gone, the power curve is much more linear and now the 'S' mode is usable... Plus, I really like using VAGCOM to set parameters.


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

bull30 said:


> I will get that done at some point. UM numbers for Stage II are 445 WHP and 495 WTQ... I can tell you for sure that the UM tune feels stronger than the APR tune... For me it's not about the numbers... The metallic noise is gone, the power curve is much more linear and now the 'S' mode is usable... Plus, I really like using VAGCOM to set parameters.


what kind of metallic noise were you getting?


----------



## illbillTS (Apr 11, 2006)

bull30 said:


> I will get that done at some point. UM numbers for Stage II are 445 WHP and 495 WTQ... I can tell you for sure that the UM tune feels stronger than the APR tune... For me it's not about the numbers... The metallic noise is gone, the power curve is much more linear and now the 'S' mode is usable... Plus, I really like using VAGCOM to set parameters.


Does UM offer a tune that doesn't mess with the Sport mode throttle?


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

canuckttrs said:


> what kind of metallic noise were you getting?


It was a faint metallic noise that disappeared as soon as you put the engine under load. Like a very fast rattle. It's very hard to describe. Sometimes so faint it's not noticeable unless you are really listening for it. Turn the radio on and you can't hear it.

Not sure on the question about the sport mode.


----------



## robotvoice (Apr 7, 2014)

How does the APR map handle the sport button?? And does anyone have target boost levels for APRs stage 1 and 2 maps?


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

robotvoice said:


> How does the APR map handle the sport button?? And does anyone have target boost levels for APRs stage 1 and 2 maps?


APR tune does not address the super sensitive throttle input on SPORT mode.


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

now I'll have dilemma until there are user dyno sheets for UM stage 2. It really does not make sense to take the word of a tuning company about how much power their tune makes. That's like believing an ice salesman when he says his ice is the coldest.


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

Fined said:


> now I'll have dilemma until there are user dyno sheets for UM stage 2. It really does not make sense to take the word of a tuning company about how much power their tune makes. That's like believing an ice salesman when he says his ice is the coldest.


Like I said earlier... I went with the UM tune because of the noise that I got with the APR tune... Believing someone that a metallic noise coming from my engine is not serious and will not cause issues is like believing an ice salesman when he says his ice is the coldest.

Bottom line for me is that BOTH make more power and since I've now had both tunes IMO the UM tune is better... Then again, opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one...


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

bull30 said:


> believing an ice salesman when he says his ice is the coldest.


actually, one guys ice can be colder than the other guys, just depends on what temperature he stores it at.

a more accurate analogy for this situation would be to believe an ice salesman who says: "that funky flavour you are noticing in my crystal clean ice is normal."


----------



## LynxFX (May 17, 2012)

Fined said:


> now I'll have dilemma until there are user dyno sheets for UM stage 2. It really does not make sense to take the word of a tuning company about how much power their tune makes. That's like believing an ice salesman when he says his ice is the coldest.


I offered up my car last year to do an independent back to back dyno between the two tunes. After some bickering back and forth neither company committed despite both saying they wanted to do it. I have no interest in offering again. That said I've been running APR stage 2 for a year now and I never had the noise issue. I also disbelieve UM's power numbers of 445 WHP and 495 WTQ. That doesn't even sound right with race fuel.


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

Well gents pardon my poor analogy skills. 



LynxFX said:


> I also disbelieve UM's power numbers of 445 WHP and 495 WTQ. That doesn't even sound right with race fuel.



But yes thats kind of what I'm getting at here. I really don't buy the UM numbers at all.


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

Fined said:


> I really don't buy the UM numbers at all.


Nor should you...


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

It's sounds to me like you have only had the APR tune whereas I have had both. So one of us is talking with experience and the other is just offering an uninformed opinion. I have nothing against APR at all. After a fair comparison I like the UM better.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

Well, you own both tunes... Do dynos on both and get back to us


----------



## Not4show (Jun 11, 2004)

bull30 said:


> It's sounds to me like you have only had the APR tune whereas I have had both. So one of us is talking with experience and the other is just offering an uninformed opinion. I have nothing against APR at all. After a fair comparison I like the UM better.



Did you see/hear/feel any difference with the VWR intake?

I don't see it in your sig, but do you have a FMIC?

Thanks,


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

Not4show said:


> Did you see/hear/feel any difference with the VWR intake?
> 
> I don't see it in your sig, but do you have a FMIC?
> 
> Thanks,


I feel the turbo spools a bit quicker and a little more sound... I don't think it adds much at all but it looks much better than the stock intake...


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

croman44 said:


> Well, you own both tunes... Do dynos on both and get back to us


^^this.


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

Not sure if the person who this dynosheet belongs to posts on this forum. If so my apologies for stepping on toes. Again, not my dynosheet. Just saw it posted online today. 




"I did 3 runs on an all wheel Dynoject on 93 octane with my 2012 US Spec TT-RS United Motorsports stage 2. Very consistent pulls. I still have stock air box and catback. I'm only running 034 downpipe and catless mids. I had a couple minutes of cool down between runs. I was getting cluster misfires in cylinders 2 & 3 at 6500rpm which is odd since I don't experience these misfires when doing pulls on the street. Nevertheless, I'm very happy with the results.

379 awhp 422 awtq (384ps 572nm)"


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

That is about 450hp at the crank, assuming 20% drive train loss (higher % because of the awd system). That is right in line for a Stage 2 tune, from what I have read from numbers published by other vendors. 

If only the factory turbo had enough flow to flatten out that torque drop at high RPM's. That would easily push power up to 500 crank HP and the magical 200HP/liter efficiency point. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk


----------



## canuckttrs (Feb 5, 2012)

UM Stage1 advertised numbers are much higher than presented here... 404WHP and 442WTQ

maybe fwd only dyno for their numbers.


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

The U.M. website lists a stage II for 435whp. pretty far cry from 380.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

My APR Stage 3 only puts out 410 whp on a local dyno. Can't compare absolute dyno numbers...


----------



## Michalle_Mouton (2 mo ago)

We have a 2013 Audi ttrs. we bought it used with 32,000 miles with a stage 2 APR we track the car no daily at all, 3 years now and not even once we had problems, it runs smooth up to red line. Turbo upgrade, downpipe exhaust with the oem rear muffler. 8-16 track days per year.
other ttrs claims he had 450hpw, but can't keep up on the straight at WatkinsGlen. we do not have dyno numbers... but everyone at the track love to guess north of 450 lol because they can't amit that a female is kicking their ass so, they blame the car has more HP. we can care less about the HP numbers. She was kicking their asses with 2008 R32 with a UM-tune before.



__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=587203476470611


----------



## Tom T. (Dec 30, 1999)

Michalle_Mouton said:


> My wife’s driving the coupe like she stole it.


She has a very good line. I used to track my Porsche on Lime Rock. Lots of fun and good memories..


----------



## dalotissac (6 d ago)

I am experiencing the occasional misfires and with the stage 2 flash I immediately noticed hesitations at high rpm.





Nox Vidmate VLC​


----------



## JMBone (4 mo ago)

Michalle_Mouton said:


> We have a 2013 Audi ttrs. we bought it used with 32,000 miles with a stage 2 APR we track the car no daily at all, 3 years now and not even once we had problems, it runs smooth up to red line. Turbo upgrade, downpipe exhaust with the oem rear muffler. 8-16 track days per year.
> other ttrs claims he had 450hpw, but can't keep up on the straight at WatkinsGlen. we do not have dyno numbers... but everyone at the track love to guess north of 450 lol because they can't amit that a female is kicking their ass so, they blame the car has more HP. we can care less about the HP numbers. She was kicking their asses with 2008 R32 with a UM-tune before.
> 
> 
> ...


Which turbo are you using? From my understanding of a box/off the shelf tune, it's not always advisable to run a larger turbo without retuning for it, even if it's just a hybrid turbo.

But a hybrid turbo would certainly pull on a regular stage 2 car. Stage 2 starts dropping power fast after 5k RPM on the stock turbo, where as hybrids or better don't of course. Let the haters hate.


----------

