yes good reply Rebel1...:rolleyes:

I am sure you wouldnt like me carrying on about a business of yours in a public place if i had an issue - you would rather have me try and resolve it behind clossed doors and give you a chance to make it righ or have me understand the reasoning behind what i felt was incorrect - which dan pointed out he did on numerours occasions.

regardless of whether it was right or wrong do you feel it hasbeen handled by boxhead appropriately in a public forum?

but i guess its easier to come onto a forum where everyone can just jump in and put rubbish on someone and not have to face that person in real life.

------------------


and for the record - my stance as a supplier - if we supply something and you are not happy with it then come back to us and let us resolve it. not have the client make one phone call to us and then bag us out over 2 forums.

so for the reading public, the guys on this forum that we have done work for will know what our trading standards are, and there are many of those that have moved on from old ride to a newer one have got us back to carry out the work on it. So once again warn people about things to look out for but dont bring business names into it.

What can be overlooked is the timeframe of a cobra build. On average it's probably 3 yrs going onto five. Most don't get built in 12 months; perhaps unless you've done it before.

That's probably part of the problem here. The tune was ordered 3.5 yrs ago but most things have a 12 month warrantee. So long after you start driving the cobra the warrantee has expired. Some suppliers understand this, some won't.

Also, despite there only a small difference between the tunes, which at WOT is going to be hard to feel those extra kws, that's not perhaps the biggest problem. As an ICV the vehicle needs to pass an emissions test. If it's running rich at idle and part throttle it won't pass.

Again Doubledip, you were not the supplier in question. I guess we will just have to wait to see how you handle disputes should there ever be one.

Cheers

I totally agree Al except I don't agree the build time has any bearing.

I feel that common sense on behalf of this supplier was lacking.

Firstly he was dealing with some-one 2000Klm away in woop woop, with little chance of dropping in for a retune at the suppliers shop.

Secondly, the car in question was not a "off the showroom" GMH model

It was a cobra which for all the reasons mentioned previously strongly suggests the car will end up on a dyno for a retune.

These three points alone suggest that the supplier should have had a reasonable expectation that an unlocked PCM was required.

Very poor service in my opinion.

Gawd, who voted me to be the consumer advocate here? :LOL:

I work in software.

To me, the matter of ownership of the tune and whether or not the tune can be locked looks a lot like a licensing issue.

The last licensing contract I did was over 30 (A4) pages - so I have an appreciation that there are many different aspects to the 'ownership' and ability to modify software (a tune).

This last contract, as with most of the previous ones I've done very specifically sets out that the ownership of the IP (in all sorts of forms) resides with the Vendor.

The reason this is so specifically laid out is that it is contrary to the default rule that would be applied by the courts, in the absence of such an agreement ( or so I'm told by some very highly paid IP lawyers) i.e that the ownership of the IP (tune) would reside with the person who paid for it, the Customer. (again noting that this is a vast generalisation)

Like Plums & Doubledip I generally want to protect my(or the company's) IP and to do so requires attention and careful management. The volume of forum traffic dedicated to this indicates that this aspect was not well managed at all.

Whether it was a good tune in terms of performance for a mail order tune or reasonably priced is way besides the point - performance, effort and feelings of ownership often cloud peoples understanding of rights and actual ownership.

I have read most of the posts about this on LS1.com.au (and here) and think that if I were in Boxhead's shoes I'd feel that I had some fairly legitimate compliants, particularly after reading the responses from Chipmaster.

I didn't see anywhere that Chipmaster was refusing to refund you Boxhead (did I miss that?) My assumption would be that if he's wiping the tune he's also refunding at the same time - no harm/no foul/each side is out the cost of some shipping and maybe learned a lesson.

No?

LoBelly

Morality will win out
 

In our business the Intellectual property issue is a concern, allowing mediocre companies to grow on the backs of those who spend the time and money to developed new ideas and designs.

Like with the Tunes they are then out in the market place for all to see and unfortunately copy.

My 2cents.
We realized that this would happen and to fight legally is expensive and most times you need to just accept that that is how it is. Our business has grown because other than having good products our service level is as high as it possibly can.

Yes you could buy it cheaper elsewhere but our customers will only deal with us, no question.



In every transaction everything should be disclosed, if you don't it will only end in a conflict.

Well maybe it is 3 cents worth.

We also from time to time have issues with our products that cause our customers grief, but we throw everything we can to sort it out, one call from our customer and we step into action. The feed back from one of our customers after a quality issue, "The units were great but how they fixed the glue problem was impressive!"

Phil

this here is not a dig but just a comment for others to read for the engineering side of things. In general if you have a ICV and as we know has to be engineered and now go through emissions testing then you need to fit a late model engine and all the accessories it ran in the production vehicle. This would mean a MAF so for starters the mafless tune would be no good boxhead recieved... so then regardless the tune running rich wont pass..

It would be better for those that are going through this stage at the time to get in contact with the end tuner and say once i have passed engineering , emissions blah blah blah and i am driving it i will be in for a Dyno tune. Then ask them to supply the standard tune in the ecu that the factory car had (all be it for VATS and fan temps and speedo ), but still retain the MAf O2,s etc... This way the engineer will be happy and so will the RTA/emissions testers.

Also i would feel it is best that these sorts of things are left right till the time they are needed... as earlier pointed out warranty runs out on a lot of things when building a ICV (a computer wont stop you building the car), so why help it by buying a computer and tune when you know it wont be used till 2.5 years down the track at the earliest.. the tuner could have even gone out of business before you first get to turn the key.

As I said this is just a warning for all not a dig at what Nasty has said.

None taken. As builders it is natural to get caught up in the emotion of building a Cobra. Personally I had a lot of major components way before I needed them, mainly because I didn't won't suppliers stuffing me around, which did happen but I planned for that. A case of get the sale and deal with producing said product later. We're all busy people, builders and suppliers at the end of the day.

I've had one component fail to date after having the car registered for 10 months and the supplier at first gave the the line, "I sold you that 2 yrs ago" to which I said, "It's been registered for only 6 months". He understood and fixed the problem.

yes and i know that we have had that in the past and warranted it as well.. it all comes down to the attitude of one person to the other as to what will come out of it... now i am sure you approached the supplier and told him it was faulty and when he said it was sold over 2 years ago i bet you didnt call him every name under the sun.. you in a professional and courteous manner told him the situation and it was resolved... but you cant expect a supplier to come to the party after having their business drapped across 2 forums and 4 threads basically saying i didnt get what i want when i asked for it 3.5 years ago with all the carry on this has had.

I am glad yours was sorted and if people (both client and supplier) can think rationally and put themselves in the other persons shoes (like you obviously did) before they shoot their thoughts off then there would be alot more happy customers and suppliers than there are, with the same happy outcome you got to.

Just a few thoughts....
 

Just a few thoughts.....

On this cobra forum and in the cobra community in general, the concept of sharing ideas and offering help to benefits a fellow cobra owner and not yourself is at the heart of what we are about (its the vibe...its mabo...its...the vibe). This forum, particularly the Australian side is not driven by sponsors, and not there to benefit sponsors - its for us. I am very sceptical about the whole tuner thing - locking tune, the hiding of tunes or of cam specs. IMO, anyone who comes into the "cobra community" with these BS "I know something you dont know" attitudes is not going to endear themselves to the community as a whole.

When i visit the LS1 forum I am constantly amazed at how excited theses guys get about a friggin commodore. eg. The post pictures of your ride forum....Heres my...wait for it...new VE SS COMMODORE. Whoop di f**kin do.... And all the other commodore nerd jump in pissing in his pocket saying what a "sweet ride" it is or whatever. What a load of self indulgent crap. If I want to see a picture of a VE SS commodore I can go and get a brocure from the local dealer - these arent special cars.

Cobras, IMHO, are special. These cars have our heart, our time, our hard earned and a good deal of our lives tied up in them. Many cobra owners may be pretty well off - and to them $800 is a drop in the ocean. To me and to the majority of builders, we build because that is the only way they can afford to own a car like this - or at least convince the better half of that (lets face it - is we all had the means to buy a complete kirkham or csx car, we would).

I know David, and I trust him. David is part of the cobra community, and has built a reputation within here of being a straight talking no BS sort of guy. If David said he told the tuner his situation, and that he will be needing to have his tune "touched up" on a dyno locally to him, I believe him.

Buinesses should be about cutomer service. The customer may not be always right, but they should be treated as they are. Justin - your attitude to fixing problems and ensuring the cutomer is satisfied is commendable, and is the attitude all business owners should have. (In my dealings with you, you would realise I live by the same philosophy). I dont think chipmaster, in this instance at least, has.

There was certain operator in the LS1 community that if a few more people had spoken up about earlier on, a lot less people wouldnt have been burnt to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars (search LS1.com or google for "Derek Hocking" - An extreme case to illustrate my point). I see nothing wrong with advising potential customers of your dealings with a supplier, whether they be good or bad.

Cheers
:)

PS. Les - you have my vote for CC Australia poster of the year.

So I have question for the tuners, a little off the topic. When my "mail order tune ECU" is turned on for the first time will it send fault codes because it cant find or "talk" to the corvette BCM,EBS modules? I have been told that some ECUs will give fault codes and go into "limp mode" when first fired up and need to be "told" again that it isnt in a Corvette.

Alffie, that "shouldn't" happen if the tuner has disabled the requirement for the ECU to aquire a code from the BCM. BUT it is possible that it may need a re-link on the first start-up..... If the engine fires then stops (as opposed to just cranking) you will need to get it re-linked. You'll just have to wait and see...

If its locked can a local tuner do this "re-link"?

No, you need it unlocked to do a re-link.

hey plums if the ecu is locked and vats is enabled why can u do a relink to bcm

doesnt the bcm take the code from the ecu

a locked tune is only to do with not being able to read the actual tune using hp tuners or efi live

anyway the happy people out of all this is efi live and hp tuners

they are selling their product to more and more backyarders who think thye can tune a car

Glues ain't glues
 

That Phil Mizzi knows his glue:D

You can force a VATS re-link with a tuner-locked PCM. When the PCM is put back into the car, the first time the bcm sends the code to the PCM, the PCM will store that sequence and continue to use it from then on. It uses the first BCM code that it sees, so it only happens once.


Philm hit the nail on the head with this: "In our business the Intellectual property issue is a concern, allowing mediocre companies to grow on the backs of those who spend the time and money to developed new ideas and designs.
Like with the Tunes they are then out in the market place for all to see and unfortunately copy."
People may think this "hiding tuning secrets" thing is BS but Phil's statement here is 100% spot on. ANY person with the tuning software, can simply download your tune, compare the differences to a stock program (the latest software up date has an excellent compare function) and use these differences to tunes his own OR CUSTOMERS cars.

I'll tell everyone here the reason I am so passionate about this subject. Back in 2004 in Adelaide, the LS1 tuning game was at it's peak. The software was still relatively expensive and there were only a few places (in Adelaide) that could tune an LS1. From the very start, I had been putting a small "security function" into every tune that I did (this was simply changing one of the unused table values to something that was not realistic). I could easily tell my tune apart from another (aside from other variables) by going straight to this table. One day in late 2004, I got a phone call from a guy saying that his car was running badly but that he'd had it tuned by someone else and asked if I'd take a look. I told him to go back to the person that did it but he said he had had a "falling out" with that workshop and was desperate. I told him to bring it around and I'd take a look at it. The car was running badly so I got into the tune to take a look. As soon as I opened the editor I thought it looked familiar, it was MY PROGRAM... After doing a quick scan with the engine running, I realised that the O2 sensors were buggered, (one was lazy and the other stuffed). It was nothing to do with the tune at all, which was mine anyway and after the O2 sensors were replaced it was running well again. The worst thing about this story, is that this car was tuned by a big name workshop, charging big name dollars!!!!
After that day I always lock my "good tunes"....

Who knows, I could be keeping "secrets" that are known to every tuner, but I'll continue to live in my own little world and think that I'm the only person that knows my "secrets".....

Sorry for the big rant....

couldnt agree more




totally acceptable

For those who are interested I have been in contact with the ACCC and the breach of rule comes under the title off "Not fit for purpose"
please refer to http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item....ds%20guide.pdf

And a warning to all tuners, unless you specify (and written documentation with a customer signature is best) that the tune is either locked or not accessable by any other running system, then you are in breach of this law.