Background:
Equilibrium Tuning INC (EQT) is a business that sells aftermarket parts and services for the VW Mk7 GTI and Golf R. The owner of EQT is a person named Ed Susman.
Ed has made numerous disparaging statements about me and the work I have done obtaining information related to evaluating aftermarket parts.
Previously I posted evidence showing that Ed Susman made false statements about the adequacy of the PTS flow bench that I use for some tests.
Another post showed evidence that Ed Susman made false statements about my willingness to consider “real-world” data.
This post will discuss the testing that has been conducted to generate some of the information that is posted on this site and review more accusations made by Ed Susman.
Test Approach:
A test approach contains a set of test design techniques.
One technique I primarily utilize is recording information on my Mk7 GTI when operating on public streets. Measurements are made through the use of the vehicle’s organic sensors supplemented with non-organic sensors, primarily RTD temperature sensors, and manifold air pressure sensors.
Routine driving, while adhering to posted speed limits, is one condition that is regularly recorded. Another is a single-gear full-throttle “pull”, where the vehicle is accelerated at full-throttle in third gear from approximately 2,000 RPM to approximately 6,300 RPM.
The third gear pull is the workhorse of my data generation, with well over 500 third gear pulls having been made over the 4+ years that I have owned my GTI. This is also the approach several tuners I have worked with utilize for collecting data to make tune revisions.
Recording data using the vehicle has the benefit of exposing the vehicle to the intended operating environment. A downside relates to uncontrolled factors affecting the response variable of interest. Reliable repeatability is difficult to achieve, such that larger quantities of data are needed so that statistical techniques can be applied to estimate the quality of the data being used for comparison purposes.
I frequently rely upon hypothesis testing and power analysis to assign a confidence level to conclusions drawn using data recorded on the vehicle.
Another technique is using an airflow bench. This is a measurement tool made specifically for testing the resistance to airflow that a part causes. The flowbench supports verifying the calibration of the device before use, and the testing of parts under well-controlled conditions which eliminates many confounding variables and has high accuracy and resolution. This makes the bench well-suited to detecting small differences in airflow resistance between test articles.
With the automobile engine functioning as an air pump, evaluating how efficiently air is inducted and exhausted from the engine is an important consideration in maximizing engine power output. Evaluating the amount of resistance to airflow the intake and exhaust parts present is the purpose of using the flow bench.
These two techniques comprise the bulk of the techniques that I rely upon.
Occasionally I will use a chassis dynamometer, a device for measuring engine power output at the wheels. The cost and time associated with using this device limits the amount of dyno testing I use. The device offers a mix of pros and cons similar to the two techniques I rely upon.
The dyno supports data recording under some operating conditions, but not others. It facilitates controlling some input factors but is still affected by factors that are not of interest to comparing the input factor.
Definitions:
Before getting into the specific accusations made by Ed Susman of EQT it is helpful to understand a couple of words that Ed uses.
Flaw – an imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness
Merriam-Webster.com
Useless – having or being of no use
Merriam-Webster.com
Accusations:
Of the multiple instances in which Ed Susman makes his accusations, the theme is that information on this site is useless due to coming from flawed tests.
Evidence:
A trend seen from Ed Susman is to make accusations and fail to support them. In this case, Ed makes an accusation and claims to have substantiated it:
It was shown that Jeff’s data is limited and his testing is flawed.
Ed Susman – Owner of Equilibrium Tuning Inc.
Despite claiming it was “shown“, Ed failed to provide any evidence to support his accusations.
The lack of evidence led me to contact Equilibrium Tuning to have the company provide evidence that supports their accusations. The content of this email is shown below:
The business failed to respond.
This is now the third time in three requests that Equilibrium Tuning Inc. failed to substantiate its accusations about me.
The best method to predict deception compares what a person says against external evidence or known truth.
5 Things Liars Commonly Say – Psychology Today.com
Conclusions:
Ed Susman made baseless accusations that the tests I have performed are flawed and produce useless information.
Equilibrium Tuning was contacted for evidence that would support Ed Suman’s accusation and the business failed to respond.
There is no evidence that supports Ed Susman’s accusation, therefore, Ed Susman’s claims are false.
Implications:
The growing number of examples of false or deceptive information originating from Ed Susman and his business, Equilibrium Tuning, increases concerns about the ethical values of the business owner and the implications of this for consumers.
It also raises concerns about the business operations and adherence with the California Business & Profesional Code (Section 17200) known as “California’s Unfair Competition Law“.
Beyond fulfilling legal obligations, ethical values in business show strong moral character from leaders and employees.
Leaders.com
As an engineer myself, data is king. Go Jeff! They (EQT et all) are always welcome to improve on what and how you test, to improve the granularity or perhaps how to align closer to ‘real world’ data they mention. Otherwise, watch and learn from Jeff!
Thanks!