commander 950 VS. Eprom programming
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: pacific NW
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Z28 1LE A.K.A The blue rocket
Engine: Blown 383
Transmission: Full manual 700R4
commander 950 VS. Eprom programming
I was wondering why most people burn their own chips instead of running a commander950 like system? Is it the $900 price tag? Its seems that even though its expensive as hell, thats its so freeking easy to tune. Driving down the road, realtime, at the track.......
#2
Supreme Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Changing Tires
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: too many ...
Its mostly the price. If you stick with the GM equipment and tune yourself, you can actually enjoy alot of the benifits of a system like the Commander 950, but at 1/2 the price or even less. Set up a romulator and you can tune the GM ECM in real time while driving down the road. You can even get a wideband 02 sensor setup for cheap (like $200) and tune your A/F ratio's. The difference between the two is one is packaged nicely and easy to understand, the other needs to be pieced together and takes some time and effort to understand. If you are a DIY kind of guy then choice two is the best. For me the cost difference was the deciding factor. The money I save will pay for my new intake.
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In reality
Posts: 7,554
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: An Ol Buick
Engine: Vsick
Transmission: Janis Tranny Yank Converter
Re: commander 950 VS. Eprom programming
Originally posted by MYBLUZ
I was wondering why most people burn their own chips instead of running a commander950 like system? Is it the $900 price tag? Its seems that even though its expensive as hell, thats its so freeking easy to tune. Driving down the road, realtime, at the track.......
I was wondering why most people burn their own chips instead of running a commander950 like system? Is it the $900 price tag? Its seems that even though its expensive as hell, thats its so freeking easy to tune. Driving down the road, realtime, at the track.......
Pop an injector driver in a Commander, and the car just sits waiting for a replacement. pop a GM ecm and go to the local junkyard and for $50 your on the road again.
While at one time the aftermarkets were easier to program, the drivibility was just slightly better then terrible. But now, to get the drivibility right, they've gotten more complex.
Real Time for the novice can be alot more of a disadvantage then an advantage.
Tuning is about noting trends, with prom burning you have to take the time to burn the chip, and hopefully write some notes about what you saw or learned. It's easy with real time to overshoot something, and get lost in the tune.
There are times when they have an advantage, but in general for anything that's really a street car, they don't have alot to offer.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 78 Regal
Engine: 82 FBod LG4 305, 730 ECM
Transmission: M20
Axle/Gears: 4.10
I think this is also another one of those marketing things. The advertisements have you thinking it's going to be exactly what they say. Just like those performance chips that folks swear by. I mean, to quote "easier to tune" doesn't really say anything. Most people here burn proms because that's what they have in their cars. Some burn proms because they know they don't "need" an aftermarket system. Some burn proms because it is cheaper. Some burn proms because the factory ecm is better than the aftermarket for their application. Some don't burn proms but tune "on the fly" and then burn a prom when all is said and done. I'm sure there are even more reasons then the ones I just stated but I won't go any further. There is a time and a place for an aftermarket ecm as I won't sit here and tell you they aren't needed ever. It's just that most folks here have seen the truth about certain advertising tricks and don't care to be fooled by them. Notice that in every car magazine article they have used an aftermarket ecm that is so "easy to tune", they have taken it to a "pro" tuning shop. If it's so easy, why didn't they do it themselves? Don't do like many of us (myself included) have done and buy the hype. Research and buy what you need.
#5
Supreme Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: MN
Posts: 1,355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 2009 Pontiac G8 GXP
Engine: LS3
Transmission: 6L80E
Axle/Gears: 3.27
When I checked out the Commander 950...I found that it only controlled the ECM...not the transmission or any VSS input. I want that control from the GM ECM and am not willing to pay for an aftermarket ECM.
With Moates software, a Pocket Programmer and my Romulator...why spend the $$$ with the aftermarket when you don't have the ease of replacement, and the Holley has less control than the GM unit?
HTH,
With Moates software, a Pocket Programmer and my Romulator...why spend the $$$ with the aftermarket when you don't have the ease of replacement, and the Holley has less control than the GM unit?
HTH,
#6
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: pacific NW
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Z28 1LE A.K.A The blue rocket
Engine: Blown 383
Transmission: Full manual 700R4
My 700R4 is fully manual, so tranny controls wouldnt be a prob, but I am not sure what vss input is. Does that have to do with the speedo controls? I have heard that you lose that with the commander950 system, which is a HUGE turn off. I have already purchesed a eprom programmer, but I'm having problems downloading the software off their web site. Needless to say this is discouraging. If I can even load the software, I dont even want to touch it. Thanks.
#7
VSS is vehicle speed sensor. Your Delco ECM gets a signal from it as part of the idle control system. Without it, you may find yourself stalling as you coast to a stop. It also affects other stuff like DFCO (deceleration fuel cutoff. I've got no idea what happens with this in your C950 whatsit.
John
John
Trending Topics
#8
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: pacific NW
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Z28 1LE A.K.A The blue rocket
Engine: Blown 383
Transmission: Full manual 700R4
The more I read about the 950 the more I dont like it. I would like a system that is adjustable on the fly, but am not willing to lose my speedo. I mean come on, how many stories start '' I was doing 135.....''
#9
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In reality
Posts: 7,554
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: An Ol Buick
Engine: Vsick
Transmission: Janis Tranny Yank Converter
Originally posted by MYBLUZ
The more I read about the 950 the more I dont like it. I would like a system that is adjustable on the fly, but am not willing to lose my speedo. I mean come on, how many stories start '' I was doing 135.....''
The more I read about the 950 the more I dont like it. I would like a system that is adjustable on the fly, but am not willing to lose my speedo. I mean come on, how many stories start '' I was doing 135.....''
LOL
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post