'No Bad Days' performance chip - first impressions

[Jack Olsen]

Ingo Schmitz and Mike Z developed a new performance chip for the 3.6 DME. A new chip is nothing new, but the one they've come up with is different than the others currently on the market, in that it is effectively two chips in one. You literally throw a toggle switch on your DME, before startup, and can run either the conservatively-programmed stock fuel mapping, or a performance variation.

The cool thing about this is that it allows you to effortlessly accomodate less-demanding driving days, and (especially in California) the presence of lower-than-optimum octane gas in your tank. 91 is the best we can get out of the pump, out here, and performance chips are optimized for 92 or 93.

You can get around the octane problem by adding four or five gallons of race gas to a tank, but this isn't always a practical thing to do. And when you're running the poorer gas, the 3.6's knick sensor is likely retarding the engine's timing, costing you power.

With the two-position chip, you can also improve your mileage and emissions at the flick of a switch.

TRE Motorsports put the chip in for me on Thursday, but I forgot to have them mark the outside of the box with which switch position corresponded to which 'chip.' This had the unintended effect of making my testing of the chip completely blind. I knew there were two positions, but I didn't know which was which.

Let me say right off the back that I suck at 'seat of the pants' testing. It probably can all be traced back to a grade school incident where my class did a blind taste test to see if we could tell the difference between Pepsi, Coke and RC Cola. I was the class smart ass, and the teacher played a trick on me by giving me three cups of Pepsi, and having me go to the head of the class to talk about the differences I tasted. The three sodas, to me, could be easily distinguished, and I told the class which was which without any trouble at all. The teacher pressed me to make sure that I was certain, and then let me in on the joke that the three 'clearly different' sodas I'd tasted were in fact all from the same bottle. The kids laughed. (Inside my head, I swore that one day I'd have a cooler sports car than any of them.)

Was I traumatized by this? Maybe. I don't know. But it probably made me more suspicious than most of the placebo effect.

Still, I could easily tell the difference between the two chips, at least at idle. The stock chip had a much steadier idle, which Ingo had told me about, while the performance chip hunted a little. My car has a lightweight flywheel, and air conditioning, which is a combination that would challenge any performance chip. Keep in mind, the hunting was barely perceptible -- if you were in the car, you'd have to study the tach's slight movement to detect it at all.

I didn't get much time to test the chips in driving, since I haven't had time to go out for a long run in the car in the past couple of days. But in town, it seemed that the performance chip revved a little more freely than the stock chip. Both chips seemed to have almost the identical rev limit on them.

Today, I took the car to a dyno, and was able to test the two chips side by side, on the same dyno on the same day. It's a pretty ideal set-up for comparison, to see if you really can extract extra horsepower and torque with nothing more than a chip.

Well, I ran them both, and I'll cut to the chase: I'd gotten it 100% wrong. The chip I thought felt peppier (in, admittedly, only a few minutes of testing) was the stock chip. The one I thought was more solid, but less spectacular, was the performance chip.

You can never overestimate the degree that your expectations will color your perception when you're doing subjective testing.

How can I say that? Because the difference that the No Bad Days chip makes is pretty amazing, when you look at the dyno chart. A stock 964 3.6 puts out 247 hp. With the B&B headers and muffler, and a stock chip on my car, this number jumps up by a very impressive 16 horses to 269 hp at the crank (allowing for 15% drivetrain loss, and with the understanding that dynos are only usefully compared on the same day on the same machine, yadda, yadda, yadda).

Still, that's good news. So, hat's off to B&B. 22 hp. Pretty great. YMMV, of course -- but I was happy.

Can a chip add more hp, on top of such a significant addition by the exhaust? Well, in the case of the B&B chip, on my motor, it added 17 additional horsepower, on the same car, the same dyno, on the same day -- the only difference was swapping in the No Bad Days chip.

I was impressed. Final crank number for BB2 was 286 hp, which was higher than I thought I'd get. It's similar to what Steve Timmins has dyno'd with a Cyntex chip and the B&B headers, but I always approach advertising claims cautiously. Marketing often involves overstating your product's virtues. But in this case, the claims were dead on the money. And the No Bad Days chip matched them.

Stock chip dyno chart:



No Bad Days chip dyno chart:

[bell]

nice review jack

[sammyg2]

That's all fine and dandy chipping a 3.6, but if they are really good at it they'll develop a chip that will increase the power from my stock 3 liter w/CIS

[rfng]

Originally posted by sammyg2
That's all fine and dandy chipping a 3.6, but if they are really good at it they'll develop a chip that will increase the power from my stock 3 liter w/CIS

I thought that was my domain. I can also install a knob to increase horsepower, we can it a variable boost control.

[MMARSH]

Well Jack it looks like you will have to stop telling people you car is only putting out 215 HP now.

[Joe Bob]

Hey Sammy.....ya can't chip a motor with no brain.....or is it ya can't drive a motor with no chip....or ya need a brain to chip a motor....ohhhh never mind.....

[Joe Bob]

Jack ....thanks for the Dyno numbers.....we were trying to reach you to go down and test OUR motors.....but I had to do a family portrait and Ingo had to drink BAD beer.....

[Bob's Flat-Six]

Good thread and I liked the Pepsi challenge too

[sammyg2]

But my CIS system does have a brain. It may not be as complex as Motronic, but it's there.
The O2 sensor sends a signal to the frequency valve which makes adjustments based on input. It analyzes conditions and reacts. Technically that is a brain. Now I want a chip for it

[campbellcj]

What was that Scarecrow's line from the Wizard of Oz again?

"If I only had a brain..."

[Joe Bob]

Originally posted by sammyg2
But my CIS system does have a brain. It may not be as complex as Motronic, but it's there.
The O2 sensor sends a signal to the frequency valve which makes adjustments based on input. It analyzes conditions and reacts. Technically that is a brain. Now I want a chip for it

The original CIS needed no brains....kinda like me in college... the later ones....80-83 had a Lambda unit...kinda like a brain...but mostly for smog....

Sorry Charlie....er Sammy, ya got a brain fit fer soot control.....

[ischmitz]

We also developed this thing that increases your manlyhood by 3 inches. It's a simple device that you can wear on any occasion. It comes with AAA batteries and an easy to read and comprehend instruction manual. No brain required. Dyno testing it yet outstanding, but we're working on it. Stay tuned.....

Seriously Jack, thanks for your results. The numbers are quite imrpressive and speak for itself. I couldn't make it today for the dyno run since I had to watch MikeZ mess with his contractors building his P-car garage. We had to do the beer sampling while the guy was hanging the door.

Tyson, did you make it? Where are your numbers? I was looking forward to understand what hit us during BBR III. And from what I remember it was carbs back then rather than the MFI you added since.

Ingo

[Jack Olsen]

Originally posted by MMARSH
Well Jack it looks like you will have to stop telling people you car is only putting out 215 HP now.

Not if everyone on this board agrees to keep real quiet about it.

Ingo, Tyson's numbers are in this thread. He's got his T making power like an S.

[Moses]

Wow! That's some endorsement. If I ever get my idle issue sorted out, I need to get one of those Mikey-Ingo chips.

[Joe Bob]

Moses.....the current chip is designed for the 964 motor. The 993 one is in the works.....we DO have a 3.2 single chip with a stock/3.2 dual switch performance one in the works as well.

Stuff like this takes awhile....%^)

[beepbeep]

It goes really rich around 5000 RPM (almost 10), did you make it do that? I always tought that A/F around 12.8 was best for performance?

[wolfturbo]

Jack,

Does this mean that I'm going to have to put some Pepsi in your gas tank on Tuesday to have a chance of keeping up with you???

Actually, I'm testing two secret weapons of my own, so hopefully I'll be seeing some positive results of my own. Best regards.

Rob

[sammyg2]

Mikey, Maybe my problem is that my O2 sensor is diconnected, so I'm, driving around without a brain

BYW Ingo, any more info on that manhood increaser thing?

[Moses]

Originally posted by mikez
Moses.....Stuff like this takes awhile....%^)

I've got LOTS of time. Let me know when it's ready. It sounds fantastic. Question: Does the "stock" chip perform the idle correction needed for a lightweight flywheel?

[widebody911]

So how much?