The real difference here is control. A simple fuel-heavy tuner can hit hard for a moment, but if it does not manage boost, EGT, and the truck’s factory protection strategy, the ECM starts pulling fuel and the power falls off. That is exactly why the Banks Derringer Tuner outperformed Pulsar where it matters: 0-60, acceleration through the gear, and sustained loaded pulls. Our approach is dynamic tuning. Derringer communicates through OBD-II, uses live vehicle data, adds boost to control heat, and manages power delivery with engine and transmission protection in mind. In the testing shown here, Pulsar made an early hit, then ran into excessive exhaust temperature, lost boost, and defueled. Derringer held power far more consistently, and with Ram-Air it pulled even harder. That matters on a truck because short bursts do not tow a grade, protect a DPF, or keep the transmission happy. Controlled power does.
Gale Banks introduces the comparison as a head-to-head test between the Banks Derringer inline tuner and the Pulsar module sold under the Edge, DiabloSport, and Superchips brands, using a 2017-2019 Duramax. He says the Derringer has already been validated by many independent shops on Ford 6.7, EcoDiesel, EcoBoost, and Duramax applications, and that repeated Duramax testing has consistently shown gains of 61 horsepower and 112 lb-ft of torque. Because the Pulsar advertises a 90-horsepower gain, Banks installed one and evaluated it on both the dyno and the road.
The comparison is framed around measured performance rather than advertised claims. Banks notes that the Pulsar costs $800, which is $321 more than a Derringer, yet his testing found the Derringer superior in acceleration, sustained power, boost control, and thermal management. The rest of the presentation walks through those tests in sequence and argues that the difference comes down to how each device manages fueling, boost, exhaust gas temperature, and factory safety systems.
The first real-world metric is 0-60 mph acceleration, chosen because it is easy to understand and directly reflects usable performance. In two-wheel drive and without torque braking, the stock truck ran 0-60 in 7.58 seconds. With the Pulsar installed, the truck improved slightly to 7.50 seconds. With the Derringer, the time dropped further to 7.25 seconds, and with Derringer plus Banks Ram-Air, it improved again to 7.14 seconds.
Banks emphasizes the size of the improvement rather than just the absolute times. The Pulsar cut less than one tenth of a second from the stock run, while the Derringer cut more than three tenths. Adding Ram-Air pushed the improvement to more than four tenths. He uses this result to question how a tuner claiming 90 horsepower can trail a tuner that Banks says produces 61 horsepower in repeated testing.
Banks then critiques the Pulsar's published dyno chart. The chart is shown with SAE-corrected numbers, and he focuses only on the stock trace and the highest-output trace. According to the advertised graph, the Pulsar reaches 470 horsepower and gains 90 horsepower over stock, implying a stock baseline of about 380 horsepower. Banks argues that this baseline is suspiciously low for a Duramax and that the chart appears to place stock peak horsepower near 2,500 rpm, whereas he says stock peak power occurs around 2,800 rpm or higher.
He contrasts that with Banks' own testing practice. Rather than using gasoline-style correction factors to inflate diesel dyno numbers, Banks says his team reports actual observed horsepower at 502 feet of elevation in Azusa, California. He stresses that all comparisons are made on the same day, in the same weather, with the same truck, same load, and same driver, and that Banks dynos have been cross-compared with dynos at Cummins, Ford, and General Motors. In his view, lowering the stock baseline makes the advertised gain look larger than it really is.
The first controlled dyno test is a 30-second steady-state, wide-open-throttle pull at 2,400 rpm. Banks describes this as equivalent to a constant full-throttle, 55 mph, fourth-gear mid-range towing pull at full gross weight on a substantial grade. The engine is brought to 2,400 rpm and then loaded for the full 30 seconds.
At the start of the run, stock produced 364 wheel horsepower, the Pulsar 428 horsepower, the Derringer 410 horsepower, and the Derringer with Ram-Air 432 horsepower. By the end of the 30 seconds, stock remained at 364 horsepower, the Pulsar had fallen to 379 horsepower, the Derringer held 409 horsepower, and the Derringer with Ram-Air held 429 horsepower. That means the end-of-run gains were 15 horsepower for the Pulsar, 45 horsepower for the Derringer, and 65 horsepower for the Derringer with Ram-Air.
Banks points out that the Pulsar briefly exceeds the Derringer early in the run, but only for about five seconds before losing roughly 50 horsepower by around 20 seconds into the pull. He interprets that as a sign that the Pulsar initially overfuels, then triggers factory intervention that removes power.
To explain the power drop, Banks examines exhaust gas temperature and boost during the same 30-second test. He says the factory ECM uses an EGT limiter at 1,472 degrees Fahrenheit, or 800 degrees Celsius, to protect the engine and turbocharger. In the test, the stock truck ended at 1,323 degrees F. The Pulsar reached 1,484 degrees F at 30 seconds and crossed the 1,472-degree limit shortly after five seconds, climbing well above 1,500 degrees. The Derringer ended at 1,460 degrees F, while the Derringer with Ram-Air ended lower still at 1,412 degrees F.
Banks concludes that the Pulsar is unable to hold EGT to its claimed 1,500-degree preset and that the stock ECM is forced to pull fuel to protect the engine and turbo. He describes this as a conflict between the tuner and the factory controller.
The boost traces support that interpretation. Stock boost rose to 26.6 psi at 30 seconds. The Pulsar started high but then dropped to 26.1 psi, ending about 0.5 psi below stock. The Derringer rose to 32.8 psi, a gain of 6.2 psi, and the Derringer with Ram-Air reached 33.3 psi, a gain of 6.7 psi. Banks says the Pulsar's early advantage comes from rapidly rising EGT energy driving the turbine, but then the ECM opens the variable vanes to pull boost back toward the stock calibration. In his explanation, the Pulsar lacks effective control of boost, air-fuel ratio, and EGT, while the Derringer deliberately adds boost to control temperature and stay near the 1,472-degree limit.
The next test is a 20-second, wide-open-throttle acceleration pull through fourth gear. Banks says the meaningful operating range is from the programmed downshift at 2,150 rpm to the full-throttle upshift at 3,150 rpm, because under wide-open throttle the transmission backshifts and the engine does not operate below 2,150 rpm.
In this sweep, the stock truck peaked at 403 wheel horsepower near 2,800 rpm, matching the advertised stock power peak. The Pulsar started strong but nosed over around 2,500 rpm and eventually peaked at 428 horsepower, for a gain of about 25 horsepower over stock. The Derringer finished at 463 horsepower, a 60-horsepower peak-to-peak gain and a best gain of 61 horsepower. Derringer with Ram-Air peaked at 482 wheel horsepower, a 79-horsepower peak-to-peak gain over stock and an 85-horsepower best gain.
Banks notes that the Pulsar holds roughly a 12-horsepower advantage for only about six seconds before dropping off. He presents this as another example of a short initial fuel surge that cannot be sustained once the factory controls intervene.
The torque chart follows the same acceleration sweep. Stock peak torque was 845 lb-ft. The Pulsar reached 960 lb-ft, a 113 lb-ft peak-to-peak gain and a best gain of 142 lb-ft. The Derringer reached 939 lb-ft, a 91 lb-ft peak-to-peak gain and a best gain of 114 lb-ft. Derringer with Ram-Air reached 976 lb-ft, a 128 lb-ft peak-to-peak gain and a best gain of 144 lb-ft.
Although the Pulsar posts a strong early torque number, Banks again emphasizes that it only lasts for about six seconds before dropping sharply around 10.5 seconds into the run. He argues that this is the result of excessive fueling rather than controlled power production.
The EGT traces are used to support that claim. During the acceleration run, stock rose to 1,394 degrees F. The Derringer rose to exactly 1,472 degrees F and stabilized there. Derringer with Ram-Air also rose to 1,472 degrees F and stabilized. The Pulsar climbed to 1,568 degrees F. Banks says that once the Pulsar crosses the 1,472-degree factory limit at about 10.5 seconds, it continues adding fuel and heat until the ECM intervenes hard enough to stop the runaway temperature. He argues that this extra heat superheats pistons, valves, and the turbocharger, creates heavy soot, and sends that soot into the diesel particulate filter, increasing regeneration frequency and long-term component stress.
Banks then revisits boost during the acceleration sweep. Stock peaked at 27.4 psi. The Pulsar peaked at 26.5 psi, nearly 1 psi less than stock. The Derringer peaked at 34.1 psi, adding 6.7 psi, and Derringer with Ram-Air peaked at 35.2 psi, adding 7.8 psi. Across the actual driving range from 2,150 to 3,150 rpm, Banks says the Pulsar loses boost beginning around 2,250 rpm and remains 2 to 3 psi down all the way to the upshift because the ECM is aggressively opening the turbine control vanes to pull boost back toward the factory target.
He then looks at exhaust gas recirculation. In the stock pull between 2,000 and 2,300 rpm, EGR starts at zero and then increases. With the Pulsar, EGR starts around 7% instead of zero and finishes a little above 6%. Banks interprets this as substantially more EGR flow than stock. In his explanation, that means more soot entering the engine, more soot reaching the DPF, and less room in the intake charge for clean boost air. He argues that the combination of increased EGR and reduced boost worsens soot loading and ring durability.
Because the test data suggested no meaningful boost control from the Pulsar, Banks includes an engineering inspection of the module. Doug from engineering checks the MAP signal path and reports essentially zero ohms between the relevant male and female connector points, indicating a straight-through wire rather than an intercepted or modified boost signal path. He also says he cannot find a bypass strategy on the board.
Banks contrasts this with the Derringer's ActiveSafety design. He says that if a Derringer loses power or suffers an internal failure, it bypasses itself and returns the truck to stock operation. By comparison, Doug reports that the Pulsar intercepts injector signals, the two throttle-pedal signals, and CAN network traffic, yet appears to leave many of those paths open-circuit if the module fails. According to his explanation, a failure on the fuel side could force limp-home operation with a major power loss, while a failure on the throttle side could drop the truck to zero throttle. Banks presents that as a safety risk, especially during a passing maneuver.
Banks closes by comparing package pricing and by criticizing the optional screen-based controls available with the competing system. At $800, he says the Pulsar costs $321 more than a Derringer. For $739, or $60 less than the Pulsar, he says a buyer could get a Derringer and an iDash SuperGauge. For about $100 more than a Pulsar, he says a buyer could get a Derringer and a Ram-Air intake, which in his testing raised best horsepower gain to 85.
He summarizes the comparison in five points: the Derringer wins the 0-60, acceleration, and towing tests; it delivers sustained power rather than a brief fuel spike; the Pulsar runs rich, loads the DPF, and increases stress on the engine and EGR system; the Derringer includes ActiveSafety; and a Pulsar failure can leave the vehicle stranded. He also criticizes the optional Insight screen because it allows users to disable protective limits, including raising the EGT limit as high as 2,000 degrees, commanding full power on a cold engine, maintaining full power through shifts, and removing transmission slip limits. Banks says his engineering team spent months refining Derringer's power strategy during shifts and argues that removing those protections risks damage to the Allison transmission, turbocharger, DPF, and engine.
The final conclusion is that the Derringer's advantage comes from controlled power delivery that works with factory safeguards rather than fighting them. Banks frames the product as the result of engine-durability experience from racing, engine building, and military engine programs that must survive a 33-day dyno test with much of it at wide-open throttle.