
| | Wednesday, July 10, 2002 - 07:58 pm IF you have the new TurboLink v3.0 AND you have a ScanMaster "fast update" chip (either W, Y or Z model), we'd like to talk to We have a Beta version of the fast update stuff about ready for some field testing and would like a couple folks to run it around in their cars to see how well it works. A real bonus is that you have a ScanMaster 2.0 or 2.1 to compare readings with. email us at support@acceleratetech.com or accelerate@acceleratetech.com if you want to participate. Thanks!
|
| | Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 11:01 am Ken Iam new to the discussion group, but have had an 87 limited t-type for 3 years now. I have been an avid reader of all the posts and have learned a lot. I have put a lot of info to use but now I am in a position that I need to get a scan tool or your turbolink which I think is great. My question to you is will turbolink give me more info than I am getting with a Tech 1. I work at a GM & FORD dealership and have access to a Tech 1. Went for a spin the other day and put it snapshot mode which will let it record and replay all the info back to you. Thanks, Robert ô¿ô
|
| | Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 08:45 am Hi Robert... All the tools read the same datastream, so it's basically a matter of how the info is captured and displayed. I think TurboLink does that better, hands down, than any handheld tool. You can see all of the info at a glance (not just a select few) and the new strip charts and spreadsheet are really a good way to get a comprehensive look over time. The Tech 1 is a nice piece, but not really aimed at the enthusiast. Also, TurboLink can optionally display boost (using the boost harness), which the Tech 1 can't. For a better comparison, take a look at: http://www.turbo-link.com/tlink/scanchart.html
|
| | Sunday, November 24, 2002 - 01:06 pm Hi Ken... Thanks for the info. As soon as I can locate and purchase an inexpensive laptop with at least the recommended requirements you will be selling another Turbolink as well as the boost harness. Thanks again... Robert
|