Quarterhorse vs. TwEECer RT

[DRRummel]

I have heard some people say that the Quarterhorse is going to replace the TwEECer. Better/Easier/Cheaper. Anyone have any experience with both?

[Martin0660]

Not yet. . No doubt at all, the combo of Quarterhorse, Binary Editor, and EEC analyzer will make TwEECer obsolete.

The issue with TwEECEr is mainly the software supplied by them is behind, and there really isnt any effort to bring it up to date. I have already converted to Binary editor software with my TwEECer and it's leaps and bounds ahead.

The real benefit to Quarterhorse is the ability to make changes REAL TIME. With TwEECer, you need to write the EEC and that puts it back to the stock binary. If you are real radical with big injector, way different MAF, etc, that download time will load it up with fuel, etc. With QH you also can log any parameter that the EEC sees. That's so powerfull fo tuning on the Ford strategy as load scaling is a powerful part of it, and we have to ASSume with what we have today.

Quarterhorse with build in logging capabilites is cheaper than the base tweecer, let alone the RT model.

The issue right now is that QH is relatively new, and only in the hands of a few. After a little shakedown form some guys I trust, I'm ordering one. I will install it in a computer to use as a tuning computer, then will burn the binary to a chip for the permanant install. The downside ot QH is the limited number of tunes available on board, and it uses a memory battery that will fail in 5-7 years unless you can solder in a new battery. I expect a revision to adress that as it's been the primary complaint.