Range Technology Beta Testing

[Byrds8]

I thought it was not necessary to remove though. Would the update have failed if it wasnt removed or would they have otherwise seen/noticed it was there?

 

[44sixpack]

It probably wasn't necessary to remove it, but if I was having any programming done I would just to be safe. it's not going to hurt the Range because it's post ECM, but if there were any problems they may blame it.

 

[Byrds8]

It probably wasn't necessary to remove it, but if I was having any programming done I would just to be safe. it's not going to hurt the Range because it's post ECM, but if there were any problems they may blame it.

Thanks. I may try it with it on and just see how it goes. Would rather not have to pull it off and put it back on. Just increases the risk of bending pins etc each time Id do it.

 

[Stretch1560z]

This is what I posted on earlier...when someone Fs up the pins on their ecm...then its on.... We need to get together as a group and tell Range we need answers not ...and gm and their engine killing BS...there ya go AXE...I have a Range Module ordered...NOT SKEERED... But its time to quit experimenting on our trucks and get facts not BS questions.

 

[Stretch1560z]

And gm and their JANKY ELECTRONICS AND JUNK LIFTER ENGINEERING ALONG WITH S#!**Y BEARINGS...Im gonna run it hard...thats why I paid for a warranty...shouldnt have to use it but for little stuff not replacing ur power train...Reliability...not any auto mfgr anywhere...were screwed.

 

[Waterdog]

The sad part is it looks like mpg is no different in the real world with or without dfm. It’s all on paper to appease the climate gods. My mpg is definitely improving with the range plugged in. The numbers don’t lie.

 

[44sixpack]

My economy is running .1 mpg better after a month. not much, but better is better.

 

[Stretch1560z]

Domt get me wrong, I enjoy my ZR2, however the durability and reliability are nowhere near prior Chevy models I have owned. Most of this is electronics and the manufacturers rush to out do each other,over engineering, bs govt regulations etc. Having to buy more electronics to correct mechanical is not how it should be, nor having to tear into an 80k truck to replace engine components to make reliability that should have been there from the beginning. Half the electronic gizmos on these vehicles will probably never be used or needed, but we're stuck with it. I've seen what the overengineered electronics have done to power generation, equipment that has functioned decently for years now controlled by electronics that fail constantly. Guess its the world we live in and gotta live with it. Also it was probably a bad week to give up my ZYN habit and get off nicotine for good. PEACE OUT

 

[44sixpack]

Be that as it may the GM 1500 is rated one of the most reliable last year by JD Power.

I only have 6k on my 6.2 now and I haven't had one issue with it so far with the vehicle. I changed my oil the 2nd time yesterday and I cut the filter open, it was perfectly clean . so there's no way to know what will happen from here on, but I can say it didn't leave the factory with any bearings out of spec or a defective lifter that would be showing by now.

 

[AXE]

This is what I posted on earlier...when someone Fs up the pins on their ecm...then its on.... We need to get together as a group and tell Range we need answers not ...and gm and their engine killing BS...there ya go AXE...I have a Range Module ordered...NOT SKEERED... But its time to quit experimenting on our trucks and get facts not BS questions.

I think it's pretty low risk install. The pins are robust and seating the module is smooth. Good seals and locking mechanism.

 

[AXE]

My economy is running .1 mpg better after a month. not much, but better is better.

So you said previously stated you didn't think your ZR2 ran smoothly before the range module, perhaps there's another issue to be resolved.

 

[AXE]

Be that as it may the GM 1500 is rated one of the most reliable last year by JD Power.

I only have 6k on my 6.2 now and I haven't had one issue with it so far with the vehicle. I changed my oil the 2nd time yesterday and I cut the filter open, it was perfectly clean . so there's no way to know what will happen from here on, but I can say it didn't leave the factory with any bearings out of spec or a defective lifter that would be showing by now.

Did you send in an oil sample? Only way to know if your getting excessive were until it pukes out hard bits.

 

[44sixpack]

I didn't expect my fuel economy to improve, I actually expected the opposite. so even a .1 improvement is a win to me. I have it set on the 450 mile interval so we'll see what happens next.

I have build dozens of flat tappet performance engines and I've seen enough cam failures to know how to read filter media. sure it's not precise as an analysis but if you even have a minor problem you can see it. it's had enough run time to know there's nothing serious wrong out of the box is all I'm saying. down the road anything is possible.

 

[securityguy]

I didn't expect my fuel economy to improve, I actually expected the opposite. so even a .1 improvement is a win to me. I have it set on the 450 mile interval so we'll see what happens next.

I have build dozens of flat tappet performance engines and I've seen enough cam failures to know how to read filter media. sure it's not precise as an analysis but if you even have a minor problem you can see it. it's had enough run time to know there's nothing serious wrong out of the box is all I'm saying. down the road anything is possible.

For you to even say you got a 0.1 mpg increase is laughable There are SOOOO many parameters and variables that change on every drive you take, it's impossible to say you got 0.1. We all know that no two drives or five drives are identical in every way.

 

[44sixpack]

For you to even say you got a 0.1 mpg increase is laughable There are SOOOO many parameters and variables that change on every drive you take, it's impossible to say you got 0.1. We all know that no two drives or five drives are identical in every way.

Well duh. I'm saying my average when set on the 450 mile setting is .1 better than it normally ran prior to the installation. what part of " average " is statically precise for each individual event ? average economy is the best we can do and it's .1 mpg better.

I can draw pictures if you send me your crayons maybe that will explain it better.

 

[AXE]

I didn't expect my fuel economy to improve, I actually expected the opposite. so even a .1 improvement is a win to me. I have it set on the 450 mile interval so we'll see what happens next.

I have build dozens of flat tappet performance engines and I've seen enough cam failures to know how to read filter media. sure it's not precise as an analysis but if you even have a minor problem you can see it. it's had enough run time to know there's nothing serious wrong out of the box is all I'm saying. down the road anything is possible.

I'm mostly doing g samples for my own curiosity. I thinkmif I ever have a problem, it'll be interesting to see the progression in the oil analysis. If it's simply a early catastrophic failures, then the analysis won't mean much, other than knowing it wasn't a typical wearing out problem.

I figure there's really not much you could do besides trade it or wait for it to go bad and fix it.

 

[securityguy]

Well duh. I'm saying my average when set on the 450 mile setting is .1 better than it normally ran prior to the installation. what part of " average " is statically precise for each individual event ? average economy is the best we can do and it's .1 mpg better.

I can draw pictures if you send me your crayons maybe that will explain it better.

You continue to be an @$$. Enjoy your 0.1mpg increase

 

[DNZR2]

You continue to be an @$$. Enjoy your 0.1mpg increase

You continue to be an @$$. Enjoy your 0.1mpg increase

Must be the Amsoil

 

[44sixpack]

You continue to be an @$$. Enjoy your 0.1mpg increase

You are the asshole, I said over the last 450 miles my mpg was up .1 and you had to belittle it. considering it is commonly accepted that the DFM increases fuel economy an increase of any kind or even no change when disabled is noteworthy.

I don't give a FF what you think of it but others may find it interesting. if people continue to find increases it can be said the Range actually increases MPG . unless you spend a lot of time licking windows that's an interesting discovery no matter how minimal it is.

 

[securityguy]

You are the asshole, I said over the last 450 miles my mpg was up .1 and you had to belittle it. considering it is commonly accepted that the DFM increases fuel economy an increase of any kind or even no change when disabled is noteworthy.

I don't give a FF what you think of it but others may find it interesting. if people continue to find increases it can be said the Range actually increases MPG . unless you spend a lot of time licking windows that's an interesting discovery no matter how minimal it is.

It's not the Range unit...it's the Amsoil you're using As I stated above, over the last 450 miles your mpg was up 0.1. Was that 450 miles identical to the last 450 miles you drove without any deviation??? Of course not. You can spin this however you like but your mpg reference is total BS!