So far... . the EZ is yielding 1. 5 mpg better than the VA on my '99 6sp. 4x4. ... Still testing between the two. . trying to duplicate conditions as accurately as possible.
jjdiesel, In an earlier thread, Charliep reported "... Returning to SLC from Vegas empty, and back to 69mph, I recorded 20. 0 (EZ) and 22. 2 (VA). "
So, while one user gets ~1. 5 better with the EZ, another gets ~2 better with the VA. And others see changes of less than 0. 5 mpg with the same boxes. I'm still trying to sort out whether these differences are due to differing set-ups (auto vs manual, HO vs non-HO engine, bigger injectors vs stock injectors, etc. ) or, due to the fact that there are several different software versions of the VA but all go by the same name. To add to the confusion, our engines have different software versions programmed into the ECM's.
I hope nobody takes my comments the wrong way - I really appreciate everyone reporting their experiences, especially when their experience is different from what others have reported before. "More power" is much easier to measure than "more mpg". Grab a stopwatch, or visit a dynomometer, and within an hour you'll know if you have more power or not. But verifying "more mpg" can take weeks or months of meticulous note-taking.
OK, everybody, keep those reports coming!
(Marco, if you're holding copies of the timing curves that answer my ponderings, go ahead and share what you know. Don't worry, we won't hack our own ECM's - you'll still be needed!)