'Please do some reading beyond the marketing hyperbole.
There's a lot of very accurate info available about improving
performance besides the typical marketing promotional stuff,
from those that really understand automotive engineering.'

I guess that is the point. People have done the reading and on this board voted in the SW direction'

In some way I guess Loren has assisted them in this decision by making their search for info easier. His numerous posts outlining his opinions on chips have only assisted in flushing out the arguments. And from where I sit the SW argument seems to have won in strait sets.

Does a chip on my shoulder count?

Bill, I guess it does, provided testing is done with a BUTT dyno as no other testing has relevance.

Steve did a custom chip for my 3.4 twin plug set up. Mine is kind of an odd set up since I chose to run the stock exhaust with the catalytic convertor. I will need to call him for some tweaking advice since my compression #s are much lower then I anticipated.
All & all, I am a happy camper with the chip he made for me. Two thumbs up.

"People have done the reading and on this board voted in the SW direction"

You're totally correct!!! It's called "herd mentality", and it's indicative
of a lack of understanding, acceptance of facts, and overall naivete,
i.e. the comments expressed most are devoid any factual validity and
are basically completely subjective.

Such as the following hyperbole:

"Since optimum ignition tables have already been worked out for each type of motor and fuel octane (91 to 100+), all that is really needed is to fine tune the fuel tables to the optimum ratio for maximum power."

"Fine tune", Right!!!!!!!! And what about the factors of; varying REAL octane
numbers, high temperatures, varying engines loads. That's why Porsche/Bosch
and others NOW use knock sensors to "fine tune" to closer peak performance.

"For custom built motors, or even stock engines, since every 911 motor has inherient flow variances from one to another"

Sure, Right!!!! There's that much difference (for stock engines) that the AFM
(senses air intake) and the O2 sensor (normal driving) can't compensate?,
i.e. more hyperbole. Besides, even at WOT the AFRs DON'T change torque
much from 11.5 to 13.5 which is where the stock AFRs fall on 3.2s. That's why
all the performance chips' fuel maps are basically at original stock values.
Porsche/Bosch weren't "asleep" nor did they leave much/any "on-the-table".

"Code mods for lightweight flywheels" More hypebole! Learned some new "buzz
words"??? e.g. from the Rennlist forums where those that know u-p coding have
yet to solve this problem. Any video game player can change timing maps using
a P.C. and then sell performance chips, but few if any can do u-p "code mods"
which some claim.

And the hyperbole doesn't stop!!!!!!!!!!! Thus resulting in the forum's credibility being marginalized.

The thing is, every one is entitled to their opinion. And it would seem that after the endless debate on this board every one is entitled to their own version of reality.

And anecdotal evidence on this board says that the reality is that SW chips are a good thing, dont break motors and people are pleased with them. Herd or no herd the punters are happy.

So Loren...Its OK to have a different opinion but just dont go giving yourself brain damage by banging you head again the proverbial brick wall. :) It just so happens that your version of reality is different to most on this matter. The irony is that its probably a good thing for SW and the free advertising he gets out of it.

Opinions are like *********s... everybody has one.
No reason to get our panties into a twist. The SW chips certainly have positive reports from people here who seem to know their cars. To each his own I suppose. No need to drill em because you disagree. Must be an engineer thing.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1160141703.jpg

Maybe if we just don't say anything, he'll go away,

ianc

__________________________________________

Loren – now that's not very sporting of you is it? Just because all the shops that you used to sell chips to are now sourcing them from me is no reason become a bitter man. That is the basis of free market competition. Life is too short to waste your time denouncing the competition and the Pelican members on the internet by editing your posts 10 times over because you couldn’t figure out what to say the first time.

You’ve made some pretty bold statements about what you think goes with tuning Motronic on a Porsche, so perhaps you would be so kind to share with us some of your data from what I’m sure is a result of your many years of dyno tuning experience??

Re: Does your Carrera use a performance chip ?
 

Good choice Markus, I'm sure you'll be happy!

I guess I'm just another satisfied SW customer...
I ran a Weltmeister Chip in my '85 for years, and while satisfied
with the performance end, I was getting bad gas mileage...
16-17 city, maybe 20mpg if I stayed at a steady 70mph.
With the OEM chip, I would see 18 and 22mpg under the same conditions.

With the SW chip, I just clocked in 28.5 mpg while driving at
a steady 90 mph From Reno to L.A. :D

Better idle, and much improved torque at lower rpm's as well!

I think that one of the most under rated benefit's of SW Chip's, is probably
a 20-25% increase (40% in my rare case!) in fuel economy at highway speeds!!!


Enjoy!!

Thanks again Steve, for an AWESOME product!!

Loren´s posts really helped me decide. I am a skeptic by nature and education. If there are no ney sayers I don´t believe those in favor. Took me almost two years to digest and assimilate the collective knowledge of this topic (superficially of course).

I think to some extent and generally, Loren is correct. There are most likely several chip manufacturers that sell products of questionable quality and in worst case - damaging for the engines. As far as I can understand, Steve Wong is not one of them.

That said, I am still cautious and I was not primarily interested in a faster car per se. Top speeds and 0-62 are of no interest to me what so ever. I don´t feel comfortable driving too fast and red light racing is not an option anyway with a 915 box. I have for example no use for an extended rev limiter. I would not use it anyway. Also, I wanted the safety with a program for 95 octane, even though I probably will use mostly 98.

No, I was rather looking for the low/middle rev to give more drivablility and more responsiveness in the speed bracket between say 20 - 80 mph.

Thank you Loren, for bringing a debate to the topic. Although, you would possible gain more followers with a less aggressive, ironic tone in your posts.