Crypto not all, if not the far majority of these are not thrown at your directly, so please dont think I am just directing all this at your feel. Sorry for the long post as well.

As for everyone else, my responses are in color and crypto's questions are in black

Cheer s


crypto;Throwing out technical terms, and continuing to define a CVT and what it does isn't actually addressing the issue. You applying attributes to this product that it doesn't actually have and talking about it as if it's a piggyback, or a stand alone.

what is the biggest word I used? I have attempted to define what I am saying inline with what amby was asking. i was accused of not being clear enough. Everything in my arguement is based on fact based on available white paper documents from mitsubishi, consulting with third party documents / professionals and some good old phone calling to the cvt makers.

The sprint booster literally does ONE thing....and that is to amplify the signal from the throttle pedal. That's it, it's not making the car more aggressive, it's not reprogramming the ECU, it's not doing anything other than increasing the signal so that the ECU thinks your pressing the pedal more than you actually are.
So the only real gain i can see, is for incredibly lazy people who don't want to press their gas pedal as hard to get power.

Now again I do not have the software program layed out in front of me, so everything has been constructed based on what is out there from Mitsubishi. I will agree with you 100% that this device does not interface with the ECU and the TCU. Fact. But I whole heartedly disagree with the way you do not put enough weight into how much user input affects these controllers.

In my previous discription I would say that the amplified Sprint booster curve allows for a more responsive middle end of the throttled, I hate to use number so losely, but I am doing this to convey my point. based on response and instant feedback of how my car drives now vs. before. it is very easy to control the ECU/TCU throttle response when relating it to the threshold process of the TCU or Transmission software. With out sprint booster when you apply the gas in a normal fashion, say your a season driver of a regular old fashioned Automatic normal Gear tranny, It feels as if there is a counter force at work. This would be the TCU applying is TOP PRIORTY or COMMANDMENT of FUEL ECONOMY Maximization. When you attempt to go above this commandment and demand more power, your controllers will attempt to give you more power aka TQ at low RPMs. you basically have to keep applying more power step by step until the Controllers figure out SORRY BOSS, I DIDNT UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANTED MORE POWER. HERE YOU GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (note I am not talking about 100 WOT I am talking about, hmmm I need to get to the right lane from the left lane and pass the cars next to me. So you can characterise this as an above normal aggressive driving act) right?

If you asked anyone, and I mean anyone who owners a CVT , ALL OVER THE USA or Canada, they will tell you, most of the time the CVT does not get it. I want power now. I own 3 cars, one of them being a CVT and the others an Automatic normal transmission. When I want to GO, I know exactly how much pedal I need to press in order to get the amount of power / acceleration I want.

With the CVT it is constantly MOVING THE GOAL POST!!! if i step 80% it doesnt mean 80% it means 80 minus some algorthym = Power less then what the user wants. My main point here and forgive me for using bold print, but I am trying to explain this to someone who DOES NOT OWN A CVT Transmission what it is like.
My case and point is, there is a software system which attempts to give you less then what you want based on a a program written and hardcoded into maximize fuel economy.

I ask you, is that in a nutshell make sense about the CVT system impliment on our lancer? Because this is more or less how I had it explained to me by tech who service the system, (haha or who cant service the system, when it breaks, its replaced entirely)

Please dont bat this one away, crypto , i have seen some of your other posts and you seem to have a set of logics to you, is it possible that I may be right at least about this point of the CVT system?


As far as the ECU/TCU learning goes, this product makes ZERO difference to how they learn.
All it's doing is telling them you're giving the car more gas than you actually are so it adjusts to a more aggressive driving style.
This EXACT goal can be accomplished by just pressing on the gas more and driving more aggressively.

My explanation above explains why yes you can 100% mash the pedal, but in order to get the car going, 90% of the throttle of a unmodified lancer is of a variable nature which has a moving goal post. you cant achieve a reliable or predictable acceleration.

With Sprint booster this changes, big time, given with what I said above. I can achieve more control of the cars accleration and ECU / TCU RPM profile. And its in a much more predictable fashion. And to be honest with you when I am cruising (say as an estimate of throttle), I can easily execute a controlled and predicable acceleration profile and not have my ECU/TCU fight with me. I can move from a maintain speed at 45% throttle press to about 60 or 75% and get exactly the right amount of power. when i want it.


Now unless I've completely missed something and the sprint booster is somehow reprogramming the ECU then I am 100% correct.
I'm not saying this product doesn't work, I'm just saying what it does can be accomplished for free by just pressing down on the pedal harder and letting your car learn a more aggressive driving style.
Save your $300 and go buy something worthwhile

also as i side note, i have driven a CVT for an extended period of time. I've also driven a regular MT, Auto and the SST

Reprogramming no, but in some ways yes, because if there is a predicable pattern to the users acceleration habits this, the ecu/tcu will learn this. Unfortunately its not learning anything new, just taking into consideration the user input request of the driver. you know the guy drives the car. If you go back thru my posts thru the years, (2 years now) you will see that with everyone mention of the CVT I have said that they got it wrong. its too conservative, it treats you like an old man in a retirement home. It gives you less then what you really want, and in some ways disregards urgent requests. hahah do you know how many times I had to abort a ummmmmm evasive, haha or invassive driving maneuver, because I know I am not going to make it. To many times. And using the damn paddle shifters take to long because even that programing is wrong, it drops you too low in the RPM range for it to be meaningful. I have mentioned this in my quick blurb of Mivec operations, and you know that Mivec is a two sided coin. Low end TQ and a modest and promising RPM highend which delivers decent HP. Where the CVT also falls down is Mitsubishi should have made it a 5speed gear system with 6th Overdrive. the CVT as it is now , has 6 gears + overdrive. there are two many shift points and acceleration can be improved with fewer gears. I assume they didnt want it to be that powerful or substantially faster then the 5 speed. BUT THATS A DIFFERENT STORY.

If the the Sprint booster or other similar systems were as stupid and linear in their programming then the car would suffer from JURKY starts and a RPM needle always reaching for the sky.

From my driving experience I have almost never had the RPM jump up to RPMs above 4000-4500 RPM, that would be an indication of 100 WOT. If you review all my threads, where i have his kind exchange with Ambystom, all I have ever talked about is normal operation driving. NOT WOT. ask anyone who has the sprint booster installed if the needle ever jumps off the rails similar to a Normal Automatic Tranny where you can see when the Tranny jumps from gear 4 into 2 which is what you get in situations of WOT.

Sprint booster, based on my own observations in my own car, stays within the Low RPM / High TQ RPM band. as explained by Mitsubishi on their website.

Simply put, the car acts, exactly how a CVT should have been programed to act.
Which is

TOP PRIORITY
1. Safety operations - check heat, check gear position, check transmission pressure, check line presures, check everything before doing the following, the program
1. Anti Vibration - Torque modulation (this is where and why you lose about 7 hp/tq
2. FUEL ECONOMY
2. MAXIMIZE MIVEC LOW end TQ Stage TWO!!!!

Vs.
TOP PRIORITY
1. Safety operations - check heat, check gear position, check transmission pressure, check line presures, check everything before doing the following, the program
1. Anti Vibration - Torque modulation (this is where and why you lose about 7 hp/tq
2.FUEL ECONOMY
2.USE MIVEC LOW end TQ Stage One!!!

Forgive me for labling it this way but if you look at the TQ curve you will see by Design that there are two peaks of TQ in our TQ band, the first one *mitsubishi talks about this alot* makes an impressive amount of TQ at the first peak. This is why when you accelerate your car with CVT in D mode that it always seems to stop increase RPM at about 2300 to 2499. Ask anyone driving our car where their RPMs top out that under moderately aggressive acceleration, and thats the mark. Aks people what happens when and if eventually you get over that peak after stepping more and more, then it will climb to about 3000 - 3800. Thats not some number I pulled out of my head, thats an end user experience and confirmed with other drivers. haha when your a CVT driver your part of the brother hood of limited performance when you want it.

The point is everyone was put together this way by design, I dont fault mitsubishi for it because they are playing things safe. But our cars was built with a CVT engine in its design, The CVT guys built it to interact with these power points. thats an observation that any owner can make by driving the car. I know it sounds like a sweeping generalization, but long before Sprint Booster I believed this and demonstrated it.

I have studied the CVT alot and worked with alot of people who have as well, all trying to tap it for its potential, and there have been places where I have been wrong in my assumptions. And I have admitted it, there are clear dangers of running in D mode under boost, my idea was great as a basic theory, but I did digging and revised my understanding, this is why fewer gears can potentially be better and safer, understanding why its designed the way it is. but that was because I went out there and asked the questions of people in the know and Mitsubishi when and if they are in a kind mood to tell me things that the average person should not know or concern themselves. I have run into people that have blown up and melted CVTs made mistakes and also revised their game aka tightened their game.

Compared to some people out there I know only the tip of the iceberg, all I have is some semi good ideas that may, make things just a little better. I endorse the use of Sprint Booster based on that logic, and I have further done as much research as possible about it and its potential negatives before making such an enforcement. I also humbly disagree with anyone and everyone who think cost is a negative. We live in a free society * if you ignore the recent bailouts. lol but more or less a free market. people are allowed to charge what ever they want for any good or service. The market and the MARKET ALONE will determine if it will fail or success, unless you have a not so smart president of the past 8 years that beleive no regulation is good, and everything will work out in the end, *BUTTTTTTT thats a different argument reserved for the off topic thread hahahah. My point is, Cost is just a point somewhere along the points of supply and demand. In a simplistic look, If its to expensive the price should come down, if its too cheap the price *should go up. Notice how i used the words, should lol and not Will. haha most of the time this governments fault.

My last point about this is if its 300 dollars, its 300 dollars, no one is putting a gun to anyones head. If I say its worth 300 dollars, thats my opinion, with anyone wants to try it, because of that, well thats up to them. I rail against other things two, I think Ipods at one point were to expensive, useful but a tad expensive, meh, its a value judgement i guess. But I keep my opinion to myself if I dont have anything / something nice to say. I try to follow this, if i dont welll I am human. I will admit I say some pretty dumb things from time to time too. There was a time I was against the *funny design of the Injen intake* but hey I ate those words, after trying it, benchmarking it, and hell interviewing the engineers who made it. * which I might add I will be posting this week on the forum, keep a look out for it guys* But hey I bought it... it also might have to do with the fact that I am a long time Injen fan / owner. So i stick to what works, other people do too. But I try to the best of my ability not rail too heavy against something unless I try it out. Fujita was one, but at least when i hear a company is continually trying to improve their product no matter how bad, I will always throw a couple of stars behind that.

This is a long post, so I applogize again, crypto, most of what was said in here wasnt directly focused at you, so please dont take any directed offense to it at all. I just quoted your questions and tried to respond to it, but I did expand on the points further to answer follow up questions since I have been accused by some, for not answer the question.

I did have a question
You did drive a CVT? I would ask if you have driven a latest generation 2.0L Lancer. Different car companies implement a different layer of software for controlling the behavior of their transmission. For example Nissans, honda, i would assume though that ours maybe closer to the Caliber since we share alot of platform similarities and the 4B11 platform.

 

Please read my post quoted response to cryptos post.

Again my reponses are in color, and amby is in black

ambystom01: "Again, throwing out big words does nothing for your argument. You're not answering the question at all."

Please highlight what big words I am using, if your talking about the purple words, that is something quoted from the Mitsubishi website. I am not that smart of a guy Amby, just a regular Joe, that has a little free time here and there. I actually Study History and Poli Sci. and was a former NYSE Prop Trader. I guess the only thing that education adds up to is the ability to call things as I see it.

If this product does exactly what I've been saying, and simply gives you a longer WOT signal (because you hit WOT faster and are more likely to encounter it during daily driving), it is indirectly changing the transmission's behaviour in a manner that can be achieved without the product. If you drove around at WOT all the time, the transmission would adapt to this.
If there are multiple layers, how will changing one cause this dramatic effect you keep on claiming? Again, that makes no sense. I highly doubt these controllers are custom tuned, I suspect it's a universal map and they simply change the plugs to allow a plug and play application. You're giving them far too much credit.

to answer your post directly after posting that,
Yes I give the logic controls designed by mitsubishi alot of credit. a CVT is a very impressive and dynamic peice of technology. from a hardware point, I do beleive they are equality a good if not better then the fix gear Auto tranny. They continue to win manufacturers over due to their low failure rate. In part by very careful design and safe operation considerations. Did you read the articles posted in my earlier post about the CVT transmissions, they are very impressive if you would take the time to read them. at least from a hardware stand point.

If all you're doing is increasing the throttle signal, your statement regarding the ECU fighting your input makes zero sense. Again, you are massively overindulging what this product can and cannot do.

Separate the two, there are logics that are very complex that go in to the operation of a cvt transmission, if it was that simple there would be more CVT transmission companies out there. Jatco is one of them.

This is not a manual transmission Amby, this isnt push this pedal and bang your in gear thats it. They have probably dozens of operations per second or even ms second that go in to ever movement of the cvt. I think you underestimate CVTs
In terms of the net effect Sprint booster has, please read my pervious post to answer.

Please read my post quoted response to cryptos post.

 

I'll make this easy, I'll simply it to two simple questions.
1. How can changing throttle input change the way a CVT transmission operates?
2. How is this any different from what is possible on a stock by simply applying more throttle input?

 

without sounding like a broken record i will just point out my previous post. and highlight the starting point

1. I think i have put my own opinions and conclusions in here, but in the simplest form the Mitsubishi website definition is best, INVECS-III CVT to answer your question
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...e/invecs3.html

INVECS-III CVT achieves low fuel consumption and a smooth ride
INVECS = Intelligent & Innovative Vehicle Electronic Control System
CVT = Continuously Variable Transmission
INVECS-III is an advanced system that automatically selects the optimal gear ratio based on road and driving conditions ("optimal control"), and utilizes "learning control" to match the particular driver's driving style. In addition, a CVT that brings out the efficiency from the engine performance is provided. Like a conventional automatic transmission, there is no jolt when shifting gears and every time the accelerator is applied there is enjoyable, smooth acceleration.
Furthermore , a torque converter enables creep forward driving (slight deceleration) when the accelerator is not applied and hillstarts are made fun.

The Continuously Variable Transmission makes for optimal driving pleasure by downsizing the pulley piston, reducing the oil pump discharge rate, and controlling direct torque control. All of this results in efficient engine output, offering drivers an exceptionally smooth ride. Based on driver demand as measured by accelerator travel information, optimal efficiency is achieved between the engine and CVT according to the motive forces experienced under driving circumstances. Supple acceleration and smooth driving feel are realized in all kinds of conditions while also improving fuel economy.

I asked this of mitsubishi techs, and Travel information factors position and throttle position change.


2. Read the section after that until the end and get a better idea of the moving goal post effect.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/6889495-post46.html

 

ok let's go over this step by step.


1. Does the sprint booster work by increasing the signal from your gas pedal to make the ECU think you're giving more gas than you are?
yes


2. How is this any different that just pressing down on the gas more yourself?
it isn't

3. How does the ECU/TCU learn a more aggressive driving style by the sprint booster increasing the output of the acceleration signal. vs. the driver pressing the gas harder?
it doesn't. You pressing the gas harder is the exact same as the SB increasing the pedal signal

4. Can you teach the ECU/TCU the same aggressive driving style by being more aggressive with the gas pedal?
yes

 

This makes zero sense, once again you're quoting what Mitsubishi says about the CVT which is irrelevant, it'd be quoting fundamental engine dynamics to explain how a grounding kit works or a Tornado works. I've said over and over again that CVT can adapt to driver input, all automatics can do this to an extent. This is irrelevant to the real issue though. A stock car can and does do this very thing, thus the SB does nothing in this sense.
Your moving goal post argument makes no sense either, the SB increases the throttle signal, it doesn't change the ECU tune or anything like that. If, as you say, you see this moving goal post effect at anything under 90% throttle, any throttle position that even after being "boosted" is still under this 90% ceiling would still be affected, only throttle positions which after being boosted are over 90% throttle input would be free, just like on a stock car.

 

I just don't see how this is a controversy. It seems that people are confusing the definition of "improvement", or at least using the word differently.

It's been established that this product does not "improve" the performance of the car

It has been established, contingent upon the tastes of the driver, that this product "improves" the feel of the car

So here, as per the thread, if something is an improvement to the specific driver, then it is worth it (but only to them).

I think Amby is just trying to dispel myths about "performance gains" on this product. It's like flavors of soda. Some people like their gas peddle punchy, some people like it au natural. You aren't changing the soda to champagne though, in the end your car performs the same

 

Basically yes, I've seen a lot of hype being stated about this product which is completely unsupported. My big worry is a lot of people will buy into it and we'll have a bunch of uninformed people running around.

 

I'm with amby on this one. I see a lot of junk being sold and I refuse to let my customers and the community buy into it. The majority of other parts out there are great, even from our competitors. But when people are being misinformed or led to believe that something is more than it is, then I refuse to just sit by and let people waste their money.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I will answer the highlighted part of your question first before I go into my longer rant. The 90% number is abitrary , but you get the general idea. But the part when i commented on the official quote from the website you glossed over and didnt put much weight in it. "All of this results in efficient engine output, offering drivers an exceptionally smooth ride. Based on driver demand as measured by accelerator travel information." To define accelerator travel information would mean but not limited to... pedal position, and its movement up or down over time. Since Sprint Booster as you say based on speculation amplifies signal strength, is it not entirely possible that under normal none 100 WOT use, and the pedal travel distance over time can have a different effect then your implied 100% Mash pedal alternative. If that sounds complicated, I will try again cause it can be complicated.... if I accelerate say from the pedal throttle position 40 to 60. with sprint booster, the CVT actually interperates the speed in of that gain as well as one factor of many when interperating user desire. So we are not just talking about the 20% change, but also the speed at which that change occurs. That is one example, maybe i didnt do a good job, but if you understand the basic idea then that is what I am talking about. Fingers crossed. If it didnt work, let me know and I will try to take another pass at it.




The only thing that makes me more confused about you is how you can take every piece of evidence or material fact and then slap it out of the park as if you you hit a grand slam. Your methods are highly unscientific if this is the way you pursue evidence. I give you something, not gob-a-ly-gob as you dismiss it as, but actually points of view or reference, and you hunt for something that doesnt make sense, and then you make an argument that has nothing to do with anything relevant to answering the main questions. What is sprint booster, What does it do (implied or not), and does it Work?

I mean you sit and tell me, that Mitsubishi's own explanation about their CVT platform is not worth anything. You seem to equate everything that doesnt agree with your position to Zero. Mitsubishi describes something about something they helped to design on software level. It describes one of the central factors to the device and you tell me, Its no different then something else, or it doesnt prove the point. What else do you want me to get other then the source code for the CVT platform. what else would you like me to do? I mean is say it right there. I underlined it. " Based on driver demand as measured by accelerator travel information" It goes further to even explain exactly what I have been talking about with the standard operating factors of a CVT Transmission in its stock unmodified form. "optimal efficiency is achieved between the engine and CVT according to the motive forces experienced under driving circumstances. Supple acceleration and smooth driving feel are realized in all kinds of conditions while also improving fuel economy.

Now you have thrown together a claim that a CVT transmission and its adaptive program is no different then maybe some advanced Automatic. in some ways these transmissions are similar but in some if not most respects the CVT is far more superior, I say some, but not all. Any Automatic can learn, but generally by design from the manufacturer, very little can be done on top of that. Mitsubishi with Jatco's assistance has talored their variant of their transmission to suit their needs, their standards. I can only speculate how many months of development that must have taken. Not to mention the months of field testing, and even still, how much minor tweaking it took for the final implimentation.

Bringing this argument full circle. A CVT is not a regular Automatic. It has so many more floating variables to its control(input) and its operation (fix gear vs. variable). These transmissions dont even operate in the same way. Anyone who has driven an automatic and a CVT can tell you that. I have yet to run into someone who says that they drive the exact same. Not to say anything negative about regular automatics, they work, they work well. But you cant compare the two and say they do the same thing. They dont, not to the level of sophistication as a CVT. Technology has advanced to make Automatics better, but there is very little you can do about the fix gears and how inefficient they can be in some capacities.

To go straight to Jatco themself with what what you will call a useless quote
http://www.jatco.co.jp/ENGLISH/PRODUCTS/at_qa.html
Q. Do automatic transmissions have poor fuel efficiency?

It has now become possible to optimize the required hydraulic pressure through electronic control. There has been amazing progress in technology and a further broad improvement in fuel consumption through the expansion of the lock-up range, realization of high torque converter efficiency, decreased friction in the power train, weight reductions through optimal design, etc.
In addition, CVTs (Continuously Variable Transmissions), which allow gear changes that aim for the best engine fuel efficiency zone through the free selection of gear ratio, enable greater improvements in fuel efficiency than automatic transmissions.

Q. What is the difference between CVTs and automatic transmissions?

In contrast to gear changes at each step in the case of automatic transmissions, it is possible with CVTs to set continuous gear changes. This transmission mechanism realizes both excellent drivability and low fuel consumption, completely eliminates gear change shock and realizes powerful high-quality running performance.


Since when does hype constitute a reason to bash any product? lol Now Amby this is a general statement not just sprint booster, but anything, You have legitimancy to throw your contempt of any product on anyone else unless you can personally back it up. All you have is your personal opinion, people can agree, people can disagree, but if you dont have the credibly back it up. Thats a problem You do 0 research, you hear something, lol and if you dont like it. well then, thats the end of that. The market decides if something fails or succeeds not you or me. Dont worry about the market, it has a way of sorting things out. And before you fire back with another crass comment or turn this on me. I am fully well ready to change my opinion on something, if the evidence supports it. Its either Yes, Plausible, or No. But I tell myself I will go as far as I can within reason to back that conclusion up.

I see a very specific use of sprint booster for the Lancer CVT, I have yet to try it out in a manual, I know enough not to open my mouth about something unless I have tried it. Not to make this an insult, but i perfer debating with crypto because based on his posts he seems to be open to the realm of not having his mind 100% made up and claim it as the gospel truth. I like his response to my email, short but sweet

It seems that your mind based on our debates for the past 3 weeks + has been made up. I offered to send you for nothing less then to at least try it, and then talk bad about it. I have a hard time respecting someone who has alot of time on there hands to make weak arguments on something he has no time to try. I have said this before. I do not think it is in your nature to ever admit that your wrong. Or that you maybe wrong on even a certain point. Your entitled to have an opinion but you have a pretty weak position about proving your claims. I have researched this type of device for some time, and have read the very article that you cited against this particular product. But at least with my scenario, this does work to bring my CVT up quite a few notches when it comes to responding to my demands.

Simply put its easy to sit from afar and say something words, but if you have no idea wtf your talking about and actually been involved with anything related to it. How can you be scientific and say it doesn't work. You make constant and I mean constant claims about things such as like the tornado, pulstar, and what ever else you want to bring up. But you always come back with some crass negative comment. Pulstars dont work, Tornado is crap. LOL Using higher octane is a waste of time and money. But lol you say that based on what others say or if you just like it or not, or if their marketing is in consistant, which is not scientific. I can say that for the sake of science, I tried pulstar. claims were valid, science was valid, but incompatible with our car. And not capable for turbo applications due to the metals used. But that was based on testing and hands on feedback. you may question my results sure, no problem. But I and a few other people have already proven that it works. Tornado, a buddy of mine and i took it to the dyno on two cars and it didnt work. I think the claims are not valid, and the evidence would point to it not working across the line

In some ways I like debating, I have no problem going toe to toe with you, I rather not. If your mind isnt open to the possibility 0.00001% that you maybe wrong.

If the answer is your mind is open, then I still invite you, and its a sincere offer, everyone here can hold me to it. I will reach in to my own pocket and buy, scanned invoice and all posted here, and send you one. Like I said to you before, no one else is doing this, just me. Try it. If it works in what ever capacity, great, if you dont like the "feeling" fine, if it doesnt do anything. Report back and say that to. But you cant keep sitting there, raging against the machine and just say "well just because"

If you say yes, I dont dance on the table, I wont say anything. All we are doing is talking about experiences. I am not out to prove anything, i am doing what I normally do, just testing stuff.

I have a list of things an arm long that I want to try.
All I do is call it as I see it.

 

If buy one one for amby, are you going to tackle me and say. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! lol j/k

 

If you buy one for me, I'll likely burn it.

 

I get your point. And have a better idea of how the world works in your eyes lol its a lovely place

 

The point is that what Mitsubishi says about the CVT is irrelevant, it's like telling someone what cancer is while proposing that marshmallows cure it, it avoids the real question. You continue to state irrelevant information as if it supports your claims when it doesn't. The fact remains that this product only increases the throttle signal, nothing more. It doesn't retune the ECU, it doesn't retune the TCU, it merely gives the impression that you are flooring the car when you are not, that's it.
Hype without support is dangerous in the automotive world. Pulstar plugs are a perfect example, people bought into the hype, bought the plugs and experienced no gains, some people had to deal with crappy idle, limp power and fouled plugs. There was no rational as to how the plugs worked, they just used good marketing terms to draw in the naive. Sprint Booster sounds identical, when you look at how it works, it suddenly seems like a whole lot of BS. You can claim this is my opinion all you want but at least I can back up my claims with hard science and logic, at the moment your claims go against fairly fundamental automotive principles. You're correct that the market ultimately decides but that's shaky ground to be standing on. The market has also decided that fried chicken, corn, mashed potato and gravy in a bowl is a wonderful idea but I (and most people I know) think it's terrible.
My mind was made up when I learned how the product works, and came to the realization (as others have) that it's all a lot of BS. You can say that my opposition to try it makes my argument weaker but that is itself a flawed argument. I'm also unwilling to try **** sex and crack cocaine so clearly I cannot talk about how harmful crack is or how unpleasant **** sex is.