EQT BS Alert Issued 6/10

ALERT: EQT BULLSHIT WARNING for Facebook Group Golf MK7 Performance Club until further notice. Bullshit conditions have worsened, be prepared to encounter heavy bullshit as Ed Susman comments. If you are susceptible to baseless opinions, cognitive bias or logical fallacies, have a plan to seek data and protect yourself. Check alternative sources for more information.

Ed Susman Bullshit Warning. Take precautions. Go to go CallingBullshit.org or watch Calling Bullshit 1.1: Introduction to Bullshit for more info.

Ed Susman has been spotted spreading bullshit statements to a consumer:

Ed Susman Bullshit

The spread of Ed Susman’s bullshit can be monitored by looking for the following signs in other discussions:

#1 – False Statements

Below is one example of how the EQT tune compares with OEM (0% change baseline) and other popular Cobb-based tunes, see this post for more details:

Cylinder 1 Knock Threshold Adjustment
Cylinder 1 Knock Threshold Adjustment

EQT raises the Knock Threshold higher than the other tune options.

After the consumer has expressed an evidence-based concern regarding the knock threshold of the EQT tune being raised above OEM safety levels Ed Susman attempts to discredit the consumer by making a false statement.

Each of these videos addresses the topic of engine knock and the damage it can cause to an engine.

Ed Susman falsely states that the consumer’s concern about how the raised Knock Threshold could affect their engine’s health and longevity “is nonsense“.

Information from third parties indicates Ed Susman’s claim is false.

#2 – Logical Fallacies

In the next example of bullshit Ed Susman pretends to know how the consumer came to get the information that they based their opinion on, telling the consumer that “you heard from one specific person…

Practically speaking, without asking the consumer what their information source was Ed would not know since data logs showing the EQT tune has raised knock thresholds can be recorded by anybody with appropriate tools. This is known as the False Cause Fallacy.

You presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.

Your Logical Fallacy Is

Ed Susman’s referring to “one specific person” invokes another logical fallacy. This is the Genetic Fallacy where Ed is trying to discredit evidence based on the source rather than presenting a case for why the argument might lack merit.

The genetic fallacy reasons that one can accurately judge or assess something as good or bad based on where it originates from.

Genetic Fallacy

#3 – Logical Fallacies

Ed continues from the Genetic and False Cause Fallacies right into another false statement that is part of a Strawman Fallacy:

The strawman fallacy occurs when one misrepresents an argument so that it becomes easier to attack.

Strawman Fallacy

Ed falsely claims I have a “vendetta against EQT” attempting to portray himself as a victim while also trying to distract the consumer from the factual evidence about the tune’s raised Knock Threshold.

#4 – Logical Fallacies

Next Ed is combining two logical fallacies. The first is the Ambiguity Fallacy.

You used a double meaning or ambiguity of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth.

Your Logical Fallacy Is

Ed uses non-specific terms like All, Major, and Some Degree when making the claims that “All“, (everyone), “major tuners“, (undefined), adjust knock sensitivity “to some degree” (undefined).

Peppering the consumer with a series of arguments is the Shotgun Fallacy:

The shotgun argumentation fallacy occurs when one chooses so many arguments, firing many shots as it were, in order to disable your opponent from answering them all.


Although he strongly proclaims these things as facts, he provides no evidence to support them.

Note: For businesses that compete with EQT, I recommend understanding Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. and how it can help you in cases where competitors make claims that hurt your business. In the future, I’ll post an example of how EQT has used social media to mislead consumers about APR’s open intake and in so doing open themselves up to a Lanham Act lawsuit.

#5 – Unsubstantiated Claims

In his final sentence, Ed invokes the term “proven“.

Proven – “to establish the existence, truth, or validity of (as by evidence or logic)”


As the owner of EQT, Ed Susman makes statements informing consumers about activities his business has taken related to the products it sells.

The Federal Trade Commission says the following about businesses that advertise products and services to consumers:

Advertising must tell the truth and not mislead consumers.

Federal Trade Commission

The advertiser must possess at least the level of substantiation expressly or impliedly claimed in the advertisement.

Federal Trade Commission

Ed is required to show how his business had collected reliability information to arrive at this conclusion before making the claim.

Reliability is defined as the probability that a product, system, or service will perform its intended function adequately for a specified period of time, or will operate in a defined environment without failure.

American Society for Quality (ASQ)

In this statement to consumers, Ed Susman fails to substantiate the performance claims he makes for the products he sells.


Ed Susman’s short response to this consumer is replete with examples of false statements, logical fallacies, and unsubstantiated claims.

Another important point shown by this exchange with the consumer is how Ed Susman prowls enthusiast groups on social media to go after consumers who raise concerns related to Equilibrium Tuning products.

Ed’s capacity to pack so much bullshit into a short response is a warning to consumers that they must be on guard when communicating with Ed Susman.

Bullshit – “Communications that result from little to no concern for truth, evidence and/or established semantic, logical, systemic, or empirical knowledge.”

Petrocelli JV. Antecedents of bullshitting. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2018; 76:249-258.

For more examples, see the references below.


4 thoughts on “EQT BS Alert Issued 6/10”

  1. There is definately a lot of bad info out in the community about knock and which tunes do this or that. To me, the ones that show the most active KR are likely the ones with the least amout of “numbing” of the knock sensors vs. the ones showing the least knock which, to me, are likely are numbing the sensors more to achieve that condition. So the community in some ways has it backwards….Cobb tunes seem to get beat up on that they are knock heavy but that’s b/c they aren’t adjusting the sensors as much and are maintaining a factory-like knock sensor sensitivity. Knock is definatley a v. misunderstood condition by many w/r to tunes.

    1. Jeffrey Jones

      I agree. The chart I made showing the average boost pressure and number of occurrences of timing being reduced during pulls is an attempt to gain insight into how the knock threshold may have been altered. Tunes that operate at a higher-than-average boost level and have less than average timing reduction are suspect.

  2. I would be curious to hear about the tuner’s methodology and process to desensitize the knock control system. How do they know that the end result is safe for a wide range of vehicles for an Off The Shelf tune application? Or as mentioned above, is this simply a game of who can numb them the most in order to be able to claim their tunes knock the least?

    1. Jeffrey Jones

      I doubt they will divulge that information. Going off my experience custom tuning remotely using the Cobb AP, which doesn’t log the necessary knock variables, I’m not confident the process is very robust if the knock thresholds are raised.

Leave a Reply