My point is that reprogramming the eprom offers a much broader range of changes and is much more precise than a cut-and-try method of adjusting the spring tension.

BTW, if you guys believe that Porsche got everything right with the original eprom and their settings can not be improved, then why wouldn't you believe the same to be true of the spring tension?

J.P.,

I have a stock chip on my late production 86 3.2 which means the same chip that's on an 87 up to 89.

I went both ways on the tension, reducing, increasing, road testing over and over again until I settled on what I considered the best performance setting for my engine which just happened to be about 6 notches on the high spring tension side. But that's only an appoximation because every engine is different. You may feel that lowering the spring tension as Loren suggests is the way to go. Try it. I did and drove it that way for some time until I tried going the other way. There are no rules here, it's just a matter of finding the sweet spot and keeping it there. ( Can you have this much fun and freedom with a chip?)


I also have reindexed the pointer to match my GM multec injectors, something you will not need to do. But don't let me stop you if you feel so inclined. You could always put it back to it's original setting if you remembered to mark it first.

Wavey,

Porsche did not make the eproms or the air flow meters, Bosch did. It just doesnt make sense to add another level of complication when trying to optimize the performance envelope on an engine when there clearly is nothing wrong with the stock chip. Making too many changes at a time is asking for trouble.
With the air flow meter changes you are only making changes to the fuel map. With the chip you change both and risk detonation with over aggressive timing changes requiring premium fuel. By leaving my timing alone I can still burn regular without fear of detonation, get all the performance I want and still get 30 mpg on the road. Will a chip do that?

If we can play with ride height, camber, torsion bars, air fuel ratios, tire sizes etc., why not air flow meter settings?

Why would you want to take the fun out of owning and playing with your own car?

Cheers,

Joe

Loren, why don't you demand that this guy produce charts from multiple dyno runs to prove that what he is doing is really making an improvement? You know - so we can be sure he's not just relying on his "feelings". You do that for everyone who likes their Steve Wong chip.


That is HUGELY debateable and has pretty much been proven to be wrong.


I couldn't agree more, except I'd also include reprogramming the chip, way higher on the list than screwring with the AFM spring. There's much more performance to be found in the chip.

BTW, what's the big deal with running premium fuel in what is clearly a high performance car? Why would you go through all the cut-and-try BS with the AFM spring, then run cheap gas?

Why would I run premium if my engine is tuned to run regular without any problems? Besides the regular I use is not cheap anymore!

Remember, my engine is not chipped.


Cheers,

Joe

Sorry, since you were playing with your spring I assumed you were interested in better performance.

You actually do get better performance from regular if your engine is tuned for it, faster burn, more btu's than premium.

I have used premium many times and I can tell you from personal experience that there is no noticable performance advantage compared to regular.

Cheers,

Joe

Sure, but compare that to an engine that takes advantage of higher octane gas, by advancing the ignition within reasonable limits. That's one of the areas where Porsche left plenty of room for improvement in the original chip. Combine it with a performance exhaust system and there's no comparison.

If your goal is to make small changes and not spend any money, then the kind of tweaks you're talking about are fine. If your goal is to take advantage of the untapped performance and you don't mind spending a few bucks, then the chip and exhaust are the way to go.

I think we're talking about two different things.

"Sure, but compare that to an engine that takes advantage of higher octane gas, by advancing the ignition within reasonable limits. That's one of the areas where Porsche left plenty of room for improvement in the original chip." - Wavey -

Total B.S.!

You got totally sucked into the marketing hype. Don't feel bad, you' not alone in wasting $280. You need to buy one of those fuel aerators to make your car go faster too and it's much cheaper than $280. It's just like using; "Broadfoot intake, Magnecores"

You're a marketer's dream target consumer, i.e. one who believes anything he hears or reads.

Loren, since you've never answered the question when asked in many other threads, I will assume you've never driven a Carrera with a Steve Wong chip and a performance exhaust system. And since you've never answered the other frequently-asked question about trying to develop a performance chip and failing, and therefore having a huge chip on your own shoulder, I'll assume that's true.

PLEASE CORRECT THESE STATEMENTS HERE AND NOW IF THEY ARE WRONG.

The only BS in the multitude of chip threads is the biased lie you continue to spread. Please open your mind and educate yourself before spreading any more misinformation. Those of us who have real-world experience already know that you're full of it, but it's really wrong to mislead the newcomers.

Can we touch on the regular vs. premium burn and BTU rate; is it true that regular is better in both regards?? Gas in our area is laced with Ethanol which reduces BTU.
j.p.

Loren:

I'm "on-the-fence" with you and your responses....you have an amazing level of in depth knowledge on some issues...and then....."*some* of your responses just amaze me.

Why....for God's sake....would you say this is "BS" when this is EXACTLY what Porsche did in moving from the 84-86 Carrera's ( tuned for US grade 87 fuel) ...and moved onto the 87-89 Carrera's ( tuned to use US grade 91 fuel)? More aggressive chip tuning, as it were, to allow use of premium fuel octane, and get a few more ponies for it.

No BS at all....it all comes down to the level-of-agressiveness when doing this ( and I guess, from your persrpective..."who" makes the changes..the factory or others).

Wil

"Why....for God's sake....would you say this is "BS" when this is EXACTLY what Porsche did in moving from the 84-86 Carrera's ( tuned for US grade 87 fuel) ...and moved onto the 87-89 Carrera's ( tuned to use US grade 91 fuel)? More aggressive chip tuning, as it were, to allow use of premium fuel octane, and get a few more ponies for it." - Wil -

This is correct, but it is NOT a continous linear process which has unlimited potential.
It's true the Porsche was a little conserative with the early DMEs, i.e. It was the 1st
fully electronic ignition - advance cuve in firmware, so Porsche decided to "error"
on the less aggressive side of the advance curve. Later, as they had more field
experience, they advanced the ignition maps a little further. This evolution does
NOT imply that the ignition maps can be further advanced without problematic results.

As I've said many times, performance chips have been available for the 3.2 for the
last 15+ years, all with the same marginal results and problems, e.g. pinging, poor idling,
"holes" in the torque curve, & emissions (NOX) - advanced timing.

We're making progress, Doctor .......

Wil

Loren , let's also agree on something else.
1.) When Porsche went from the 84-85 programming...to the 87-89 programming, it wasn't because of a philosophical increase in understanding...it was because Porsche consciously chose to map the original chip for 87 fuel ( thinking that unleaded premium was unavailable in the US)...and later understood that indeed we did have unleaded premium available...and tuned accordingly.
2.) True...like most other things in life, as you increase operational efficiency...you march ever-closer to destructive failure ( therefore, agreed...this can't go on in linear fashion). Those who understand industrial centrifugal compressors understand that the closer you operate to a "surge line"...the more efficient you run...but go to far..and you're toast.
3.) changing maps to a bit more aggressive doesn't "follow" that you AUTOMATICALLY enter the "pinging zone". In that direction? Yes. Definitely hit upon it, as you say?.....No.

Wil

What a ridiculous comment - no one has ever made that claim! You're using hyperbole and argueing a moot point. Give it up.


THAT STATEMENT IS BLATANTLY FALSE! All chips are NOT the same. Steve Wong's chips are more conservative with maximum advance and rev limit than most other brands, and he works with the fuel maps across the range rather than just at full throttle. Weltmeister, Autothority and Europroducts allow over 30 degrees of maximum advance, whereas my Steve Wong chip allows 27.5 degrees. Autothority's chip allows 6920 rpms, my SW chip allows 200 rpm over the stock limit. My Carrera idles perfectly cold or hot, there is NO pinging, and there are definitely NO holes in the torque curve! With the converter installed my NOX levels are well within requirements (just had it tested).

You are basing your statements on outdated information. This has been proven to you many times with perfectly acceptable dyno charts, yet you persist. You may have been right as recently as 2 years ago, but things have changed. Given that you have yet again refused to answer the previous questions, we'll have to assume that you have never driven a Carrera with one of Steve's chips and therefore have no idea what you're talking about.

I personally couldn't give a $#!* what you think, but it's really wrong and unfair to purposely spread misinformation and mislead those who are seeking accurate, current information.

Just chiming in here with an honest question, I have an 84 Carrera with a stock soldered in chip. I want to use 87 Octane really bad. The 84 owner's manual says use 91. Costco only sells 87 or 93.

Ask any PCA guy, they'll tell you "do what the manual says"

According to some posts on this thread, my car is mapped for 87 octane. So, the Germans had this is mind.

True?????

The owners manual says 91 RON (research octane number) which is equivalent to 87 (R+M)/2 here in the US.


Cheers,

Joe

Keep in minmd that's their MINIMUM octane requirement.

Thanks!!!!

Made my day and my wallett!!!

"Steve Wong's chips are more conservative with maximum advance and rev limit than most other brands, and he works with the fuel maps across the range rather than just at full throttle." - Wavey -

SUCK IT UP!

"We'll have to assume that you have never driven a Carrera with one of Steve's chips and therefore have no idea what you're talking about." - Wavey -

What, are you the "pitch man" for this chip?

You don't have to justify your spending $280. Some people make mistakes in life!