David,
I've memorized the Magnuson-Moss Act. I've been in a lemon lawsuit with Subaru of America for the past 3 years. The dealership I purchased my Impreza from installed a turbo kit, STi WRX exhaust, and STi suspension on the vehicle. Prior to installation, I had one wheel bearing fail. After installation, another 8 failed. Since that time, the turbo has been removed, aftermarket wheels (RaceLine RL-7s) have been removed, and the car has otherwise been returned to stock, yet 4 more failures were experienced. Subaru still contends that the aftermarket equipment "not approved by Subaru of America" caused the factory REAR wheel bearings to fail (no fronts ever failed) in spite of the fact that they have no evidence to back up their claim, and no expert has examined any bearings, either before or after the dealership-installed aftermarket parts were in place. Subaru now has a TSB out on wheel bearing failures, but it came over 2 years after my lawsuit was filed, and they're still contending aftermarket parts caused the failure.

The fact of the matter is, an automotive company's District Service Manager has final say as to the cause of a failure of a vehicle/its parts unless the owner of the vehicle takes the company to court. Wheras the Magnuson-Moss Act states that it has to be proven that an aftermarket part caused a failure, it doesn't automatically guarantee the owner of the vehicle sufficient funds to retain counsel to take the company that's denied him warranty coverage to court. Lemon law does provide relief for having to try the case, but what if it's a first time failure?

You advertised your product as safe and undetectable. I'm simply requesting elaboration, as I'd really be unhappy if a DSM determined that the WORKS ECU Flash voided my warranty by allowing my engine to run out-of-spec.

At any rate, could you please answer my question as to how you figured out that the stock internals were up to the raised rev limit?

Thanks.

 

I'm glad you're handling this one, David. This guy doesn't seem real easy to deal with...

Thanks for answering my questions earlier today. BTW, SabreLion, David was out of the shop most of the day and couldn't be online... Patience is a virtue.

 

David,

Can I get a reflash (your brain package) with like a 8000RPM limit? Would it still be $450?

I am planning on running on HKS 264's/272's with Ti retainers and HKS springs and ARP bolts, so the engine can handle the high redline, right?

 

..

 

SabreLion;

If you would be so kind .... please allow me to chime in here. David and WorksRally are not claiming that is safe to raise the rev limit on a DSM.

David and WorksRally are; however, offering a NEW PRODUCT that allows those of us who are interested to remove and/or change the rev limiter by means an ECU flash.

If you are interested in determining whether it's safe or not, then please allow me to suggest that you do your own DSM research in regard to this subject. I have seen DSM's that redline as high as 9000 rpm, and run great, but it does NOT mean that it is safe, and yes it is probably wise to make the proper adjustments to your motor if you were planning to do so -- that is, if you are concerned about doing it right maintaining longetivity (can you say Jun intake manifold upgrade??? ) THEN AGAIN, raising your rev limit slightly, such as with the norm Works flash would most likely be fine IMHO ..... as it is fairly conservative point considering what I've witnessed and heard about. Not to mention, that with a reg Works flash, the tune continies to make power beyond 7000 rpm, so it is critical for the rev limnit to be higher.

Bottom line .... IMO .... I think you are barking at the wrong tree SabreLion, as David and Works are merely offering all of us a convenient and effective solution for raising our rev limiters ... hell some people are just looking for a higher top speed. Is it safe though? Is adding more power safe? Sure, within reason though. Does added HP sacrifice engine longetivity/reliability? Is life FULL of trade-offs?

SabreLion, please don't take this the wrong way, as I do not intend to sound insulting, nor am I trying to be smartass. I'm simply stating that ... to attain prompt and accurate answer/feedback to your question, you should do your own DSM research, and then draw your own conclusions from what you find. On the other hand, if you are looking for a short answer, then think common sense.

 

"all while maintaining factory reliability" is listed on their main page under The Brain's announcement. I don't believe it's a stretch to interpret this as Works Rally stating that their product is safe. Throughout most of his posts, David talks about how safe his product is vs. piggyback solutions. Even his signature "Live without compromise" would seem to point to the fact that their upgrades are safe for DSM cars. I'm simply requesting that the sources and data they used to determine that a raised rev limit is appropriate across the board for all USDM Evos be presented.

Without providing documentation as to how they ascertained a certain rev limit is safe for all Evos...

That defeats the purpose of going with Works Rally. Works Rally offers an ECU flash which supposedly is for the end-user who does not wish to have to do research, and is simply looking for a safe and guaranteed way to increase the power of their Evo without fuss. David has said time and time again that the Works ECU solution is safer than going with mutliple piggyback computers through use of reasonable logic. However, I'm asking him to inform me as to how the rev limit raise number was found, and how it's guaranteed to be safe. If part of his upgrade is found to be "unsafe" for the casual enthusiast who would opt for a Works ECU upgrade over another competing piggyback upgrade, then the whole product is rendered unsafe due to this failing. By your logic, Works Rally is either aiming their product at the wrong market, or wrongfully assuming that the casual enthusiast who only has the know-how to exhange an ECU also has knowledge of how other DSMs have fared, what the tolerances are, what the stock rod bolt limits are for this particular application, etc. It is unfair to expect that a user of a "simple" plug-in module do their own external research to find out if a product that Works Rally sells and allegedly stands behind is safe for the USDM Evo application. This is why I'm requesting that Works Rally come forth with their data.

So wait, if it'd continue to make power beyond 9kRPM, would it be critical for the rev limit to go that high as well? If you don't admit that your logic fails beyond a point, it's faulty. Regarding RPM, I'd be much happier if I knew that I'd be staying at stock RPM levels unless I'm given data by Works Rally that clearly shows that this is a tested, proven, and safe rev limit for USDM Evos.

No, I'm going to the source of the product and requesting valid data before I make a purchase so that I may be an informed consumer. If you can't go to the manufacturer of an aftermarket product and request specifics as to why it was engineered a certain way, why should that vendor be trusted? Any engineering firm work its salt will gladly back up their product with data showing how they reached conclusions. Works Rally does not specifically state "Untested. Use at your own risk" on it, therefore I seek data from the only valid place that can provide it. Further, without this data, Works Rally's ECU flash CANNOT be considered "convenient and effective." Is Works Rally's product full of tradeoffs? Per their own motto, it can't be. And I ask them to prove it in the area of safety.

Your response was well-crafted, but misguided in a few areas. If I wanted to do extensive research on the engine and get into the nitty-gritty, I could give Vishnu or whomever else a call and talk about it all day. If I want a plug-in ECU upgrade that's safe, reliable, and provides a performance boost without being detectable by the dealership, then I'd look at Works Rally...but only if they can do the research for me. By offering the product as they do, to enthusiasts who don't want to have to mess with complicated electronics nor with a custom tune, Works Rally should be able to stand behind and back-up their product as safe, with data proving the safety of a raised rev limit, since it does take the engine beyond factory rev limits, and the group of enthusiasts they're aiming for likely will not have a doctorate in physics.

 

Is it just me or this rev limiter flash is too much? Man, at least a hundred people would probably do it if it was around $100-$150, but $350 just for a rev flash?

I would love to have it, but I think its a little too expensive.

 

I will need to have one of our engineers provide a more technical answer than I am able to provide, but I can tell you that the increase of 250 rpm to the rev limit was not something done arbitrarily because it sounded good.

There were two factors at play in picking the rev limit. The first being, how much linear power can we extract out of an ECU flash -- in other words, how far can we stretch out the effective power band while still following a linear power delivery in line with what is going on at the lower rpms.

Secondly, how much is safe. Since the inquiry is squarely aimed at the second question, I can answer that our engineers have spent many, many years in house working for leading tuners developing not only chip tuning software, but also hard components for some of the biggest name tuning houses. Based on this experience, they looked to variables like engine harmonics, and the strength and ratings of valve train components like the valve springs (at what point do these bind and float the valves), head studs (how much pressure can they hold without stretching), head gasket (how stout is the HG and at what point is it likely to leak), and even the pistons themselves (can they handle the extra revs -- including with or without increased boost).

Based on this assessment, a conservative rev increase of 250 rpm was selected. Then we began the long term testing which included running the car at close to rev limit for extended periods of time on the track and dyno and monitoring though data logging and checking the specs on valves and such, to verify that the rev increase was in fact safe. Only after the long-term evaluation was complete did we begin incorporating the increased rev limit into what was to be our final prototype of the ECU flash, and then that was subjected to long term and extreme conditions testing as well.

Keep in mind too, that besides our engineers backgrounds in doing this sort of thing (this is, after all, what they went to school for and how they earn their living), the Evo 8 did not arrives on our shores out of nowhere. This car has a history of over 10 years of production and tuning know-how in other markets giving us a pretty good indicator of where our starting point needed to be in our own development program.

Likewise, we began our own development (specing hard parts, measurements, teardowns and such) on a Japanese Evo VII GSR long before the Evo 8 made it to our shores. As such, we had a pretty good idea going in of what it was that we were looking at by the time we took delivery of our Evo VIII.

Other thoughts. We nearly always leave power on the table in order to err on the conservative side. Our tuning philosophy, and in fact, our 3-year unlimited miles warranty (exceeding Mitsubishi's own warranty), bear this out. We want people to drive these cars hard at the limit and know that they are no compromising their Evos by doing so. Our air/fuel ratios, timing maps and rev limit are all on the conservative side, and certainly more power could have been gained by tuning closer to the ragged edge. However, we are conscious of the fact that out audience is not a race team that will be tearing down the motor after each season, but rather, consumers who pay top dollar for a car that they expect to last well past 100k with no more than routine maintenance. It is with this audience in mind that we design our products.

In fact, every time a new product is proposed, we look to what kind of benefit it provides to the end consumer (more power, better throttle response, more communicative handling, stronger braking capacity, etc.) and then weight this benefit against any inherent trade-offs in terms of the added expense, reliability, and overall drivability. If we are not absolutely satisfied that the mod is both safe, and that its potential benefits by far outweigh any trade-offs, the project never leaves the drawing board.

Of course, down the line, WORKS expects to offer more "hard-edged" competition oriented products, but these will be designated as such and will appeal to a more narrow cross-section of our customers. At the moment, however, all of the WORKS initial product offerings are the types of mods that serve as an effective and safe starting point for the widest possible audience of Evo enthusiasts.

-- DavidV

 

Good answer, but regarding the warranty (quoted above) - what does this cover? Just the ECU itself? If the engine were to fail and there were no other aftermarket accessories on the powertrain of the vehicle, and hypothetically, 2 dealerships both claimed that it was due to higher-than-normal revs, or an 'aftermarket tune', to what degree would Works Rally take responsibility? This is all hypothetical, of course.

Thanks.

 

Our warranty only applies to our own products, as we have no control over Mitsubishi's building its components nor of the end user's driving habits or choice of non-WORKS modifications.

So, to answer you question, WORKS would stand behind the safety and reliability of its products -- including the rev limit change -- but this would be limited to our refunding payment on, and flashing back to stock, the factory ECU at the user's request.

Keep in mind that it is very easy to destroy a motor by over revving it in a missed-shift scenario. An example of this is the large number of recent BMW M3 and Celica GT-S motors that were destroyed by users shifting to 2nd gear when they had intended to shift to 4th.

If a dealership technician determined that the cause of a motor failure were due to higher than acceptable revs, the obvious question at that point would be whether this was due to 250 additional rpm from the Brain Flash, or more likely, a missed shift resulting in gross over-revs and a destroyed engine.

As we have no control over Mitsubishi's manufacturing nor the end user miss-shifting the car, our warranty coverage is limited to our own products.

One other note given the original subject matter of this thread: We offer no warranty and accept no liability for custom rev limits in excess of 7850 rpm. We expressly disclaim liability on these custom rev tunes, and the end user is informed in no uncertain terms that he/she is raising the rev limit at his/her own risk.

While the higher rev limit may be of use to users with modified valve trains (upgraded valve springs, stronger headstuds, etc.) wishing to better match the rev characteristics of the motor to, for example, a higher lift/duration cam profile, this is a product that is not part of the usual menu of safe tuning options offered by WORKS.

-- DavidV

 

p.s. Sabrelion, that sucks about your Impreza. I can understand where you are coming from and why you would be more than a little gun-shy modding your Evo after that experience.

I can assure you that we have our reputation at stake with each and every WORKS performance product that we send out, and we take our time and do our due diligence to ensure that we have the best customer satisfaction rating -- both short and long term -- possible.

We take great pride in what we produce, and a big part of the reason it sometimes takes us a bit longer to bring new products to the market is the overkill of testing that we perform before a new product is deemed ready for public use.

-- DavidV