Barry, please question if you have a question.
Thinking about this I think that Don and I are not comparing apples to apples. My testing was done on an auto trans truck with DD1's, a DD boost module and a stock TC. Don did the test with a manual trans and DD2's using the EZ as his boost module. The difference in boost module is a non-issue, it is the trans that I think is the biggest difference.
I thought the VA came on harder and earlier, but the stock TC lets the RPM come up very quickly. Both the EZ and the VA made the same boost numbers peak and at normal cruise speeds. Both boxes had the same seat of the pants power when at WOT. I drove the truck in question several thousand miles with one box, then the other, and sometimes just as Don did with the VA in place and the data link of the EZ disconnected. The place I noticed the biggest difference is around 1500 RPM. To me the VA would be right there waiting for me to ask and the EZ was a bit lazy untill about 18-1900RPM. I also noticed that the throttle position that did not slip the TCC was much more sensitive with the VA than the EZ.
I think that Don in his testing is able to hold the RPM at a lower level for much longer than I was, and therefor got some different results.
The last issue of interest for me was that I recorded the fuel economy during both periods and the VA was ahead by almost 1 MPG. For me the VA with a boost module and DD1's is a better box than the EZ with DD1's. I did not test the two boxes with any other injectors, swapping injectors is easy but the washers get expensive and I could only go smaller. What fun would that be?
Don, can we talk you into doing some more testing? Time to boost, peak boost, EGT at WOT, EGT and boost at cruise, and maybe 50-80 time at WOT? You have a better test vehicle than I had when I did my testing since you can hold a gear and use the entire powerband. IMO a dyno would be the best place to test both for power at various RPM, but that gets expensive.
Anyone else have experience with both?