a "small market" does not mean "low volume car". It has nothing to do with the bosch processor why the LLT has very little support. Look at the history of the V6 pony cars, whether GM, Ford, or Chrysler the aftermarket have never fully embraced these cars. The 3.8 V6 ECM in the 4th Gen F-bodies had no issues being tuned, but still, very few people modified them.

For the comment on needing OEM/Tier 1 support for DI tuning, I agree. Luckily we fit in that requirement, so we will be able to ensure a proper calibration once the ECM is cracked. All of the 2011+ F150, and all other 2013+ Ecoboost Ford vehicles us a Bosch ECM that people said would be untunable, yet we were able to tune a 2013 SHO within a month of them being on the market, and had perfected our tune within 3 more weeks after that.

I have to agree with Andy. There will be enough demand to tune the V8 that lots of people will crack the ECU. The issue is the mechanical High-pressure fuel pump. There are inherent limitations and if you aren't going to add port injection to get around them then you are probably looking at big bucks. I wish I had the $$$s to experiment with running a second pump on the other camshaft. That would provide enough fuel, but then you have to figure out how you don't over fuel at idle and low RPMs. It will be very interesting figureing it all out.

LPE and Hennessey can advertise anything they want. But have they actually gotten their hands on a LT1? I doubt it.

And then there is the cost....if it cost $75,000, who will buy that? Not me.

Then if you read and talk to people about their experience with H*********, I definitely would not.

part of what isn't be discussed here is the fact that if you go ahead and buy an "X" engined car from GM; and then go out and spend money at "Y" tuner shop...

you're not spending money at GM anymore.


it may seem like a bonkers idea to some of you guys who love ripping your brand new cars apart (and given the money you have to spend, no one can really judge you for it) but there is a business case for GM to engineer these new Gen 6 (is it 6?) v8's to be built to the near peak of their capability.

in engineering; everything is foreseeable to a certain degree...

so don't be surprised that once the ECM is figured out; blocks start blowing up (or other critical components) unless HEAVY modification ends up being done to the engine.

at that point/cost; you might as well just buy the hi-po version of that "X" engined car... you guessed: from GM.

I suggest you do more homework as the C7 uses the Siemans PCM from Europe, not Bosch and it has been used for 3 years over there and not one person has cracked it, nor how the PCM has to connect and exchange protocol client to server
It so bad that owners of performance cars in Europe are forced to change to different PCMs and remove engine functions that older PCMs were not designed for.

Add other functions are now in other controllers even if PCM was cracked they still would not be able to do proper tuning without touching other controllers.

Lots of hype on doing C7 mods when hackers have no clue on how GM designed all the coding for DOD, VVT, DI, or even rev matching so its a bet that IF PCM was hacked there will be lots of LT1s blown up as was seen when the E38 and E67s PCM were used in later C6s much less understanding either the E92 or E95 PCMs.

It would be foolish for anyone buying a C7 now hack the car up and GM yank all warranty as new PCM is sure to report via Onstar if PCM has been hacked.

thank you!


****ing finally, someone with some common sense.

side note; any links you can provide as to the use of said PCM?

If you do an internet search for "E92 ECM" there is a ton of info out there from countless people trying to hack or backward engineer for E92 and failed

Here is one thread
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c7-g...7s-future.html

E92 is not new, has even been used on the Cobolt SS, Dodge, BMW, etc

I know 3 vendors who make tuning tools and they all had to give up as the software is too complex.

It has to with the VVT, DI and DOD.

Other then that look at the early years of C4,C5,C6 and the first 2 model years had one PCM and 3rd year switched
Example for C6 the 2005-06 LS2 had a E40 PCM and since it was a short cycle some tuning tool vendors did not bother to backward engineer the E40 as it was not worth the support for just 2 model years

Now C7, 2014 model, well 2016 EPA requires 36 MPG so you can be sure again 2 model years and then who knows what PCM will be used

E92 is supposed to be a better auto learner to changes, if so and certain mods can be done with any tuning then it lowers the need to have a tuning tool and less tuner tool vendors will want to spend the R&D costs to backward engineer a 2 year E92 ECM

Add all the new LT1 changes, even CAMs as intake and exhaust valves have swapped locations vendors cannot do as with C6 and claim "secret" C6 custom CAMs that were nothing but 3rd party CAM grinds for the LS1/6

Now the 2,000 plus PSI for DI and DOD with VVT and you can bet very few mods will even exist to buy for LT1.

Exhaust, same deal as now there is another set of exhaust butterflies to prevent 4 cylinder exhaust drone and what now controls them and the ones in the mufflers.

I think it is clear that any thought as was done with C6s were brand new ones owners hacked/modded in first month is not going to happen with C7 and frankly with those new engine functions would anyone want to even gamble on mods and claimed hacks against their new car warranty ?
And being LT1 design is new and no vendors have experience fir it would you want to be their testpig or bogus claims ?

As I do custom tuning I can clearly say that the state this country has been in that far fewer C6 owners wanted any mods in fear of losing GM warranty and the fact GM now knows if their ECMs were hacked

Thanks for the update/confirmation.

cheers. i join the above post in saying thanks for the info... much appreciated.

The more that is found out about C7 design the more unknowns there is about tuning, control and what new controllers there are which will not be touched by the PCM itself.

Tenneco announced it is supplying key emission control technologies, including electrical valves, for the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, one of the most highly anticipated vehicles debuting in 2013.
Considered one of the key performance features of the car, the Corvette’s exhaust system delivers a unique signature sound.
Most notably, the Corvette’s standard exhaust system is the first vehicle to utilize electrical valve technology for sound tuning.

The electric valves are designed to work in concert with the vehicle’s Active Fuel Management (AFM) system, a fuel-saving four-cylinder mode versus eight-cylinder mode.

The valves open and close to control the Corvette’s exhaust sound as it switches between the two engine modes.


In addition to the valves highlighted in the AFM system, the exhaust system features an option which includes two additional electrical valves in the tailpipes, tuned specifically for enhanced sound quality.

These valves remain closed during normal driving conditions and open during harder acceleration, creating lower backpressure, more engine power and most importantly, Corvette’s signature sound.

So it sounds like everyone is just saying lets not even try? Again, if we believed what everyone on the internet said we could do we wouldn't have even tried on Ecoboost Ford applications. EVERYONE said the same doom and gloom type stories with it's encryption too. Same with 2011-12 Chrysler, encryption too complex for the aftermarket to figure out. It is quite interesting that so many people say it CAN'T be done, yet the car isn't even in any customer's or shop's hands yet.

Hey, MAYBE I'm wrong, but then again I have history on my side saying I'm right, and we will gain access to it. Also, just because the people who have tried to tune other applications that utilize this controller think its too complicated to understand doesn't mean we will. A Human wrote the code, programming language, etc. I am pretty sure other humans can figure it out. This isn't our first go around with DI tuning, Our business is developing, and improving on brand new engine families, especially when no one else thinks it can be done.

93 when LT1 was announced it was going to move to flash memory everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

95 when everything was moving to OBD-II everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

96 when the LS1 was revealed everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

05 when we moved to an E40 everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

06 when GM moved to E38 everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

08 when DI stated being used (LNF Cobalt) everyone said it would be untunable. WRONG

That is just the GM applications that were doom and gloom. There may be some downtime while the aftermarket figures it out, but with enough backing and time, it gets done.

All further complexity in engine design and management does is further separate the good shops from the bad, exposing their true knowledge and skill set.

Everyone ?

Not hardly, everyone, meaning all of us who have been custom tuning back to the old E-prom ECMs of 1980s never had a issue tuning any of the ones you mention and the tools like Tunercats, LT1/LS1/LS2 edit filled the gaps of all the above early on.

Huge difference in a tuning program hacking a security code and today's C7's controllers learning from past hacking GM made sure it will be much harder to hack and far easier to tell if the controllers were hacked on

In the end I'd suggest to C7 buyers not to be the tuning testpigs as we saw with the C6s a huge amount of engines blown to hell by claims of "secret" tuning methods.

GM is not dumb and has learned a lot and has some surprises as what OnStar will be doing in the background to see if C7s were hacked.

it's not even a matter of saying that nothing should be tried...


it's BEEN tried for years now across the pond. what a lot of people tend to forget is how complicated reverse engineering electronic components is; especially when they're a set of brains tied together that dictate the actions of a small metal box that explodes hundreds of times a minute.


sure, it's doable. but not cost effective...

that's the main issue; while everything in this world is hackable, does it make sense to spend X when you only get back X/100?