Who has advanced their timing for more power?

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

"Porsche left some large timing margins in some of these cars to accomodate poor gasolines worldwide and with experience, one can safely alter the ignition mapping (advance weights/springs or mapping tables) a bit to make noticable improvements in mid-range throttle response and torque without unintended consequences."

And the gasolines 20+ years later are WORSE!

I think that is why the best chips today are tuned on today's 91 octane gasonline, and even with that, there are significant margins as these cars were originaly tuned for 87 octane.

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

"
"In short, there ARE some significant gains to be found with responsible, intelligent changes to advance curves depending on the individual engine."

Significant, HARDLY, and only for those that have an interest in selling/hyping group
buys of performance chips, e.g. Rennlist and others. Porsche could have further advanced
the timing in the Club Sport DME, (event racing where high octane fuel would be
recommended and/or used) but kept it the same as the '88/'89 stock DME.

Does that also include your chips also Loren? I see some pretty good gains from 911s on the dyno charts here: http://www.911chips.com/dyno.html
I'd be pretty happy with 16+ hp gains, but those are probably insignificant to you. How much power can I get from your chip?

I never heard that the Club Sport was intended for racing. I always thought it was a stripped down street car. Where did you get that information from?

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

Right! And NOT the self-proclaimed ones that profess to be "super engine builders"
who weren't "knowledgeable" until they began reading the hyperbole of the internet,
or those tuners that develop chips using a laptop while driving to tune the engine.

You know the best chip programmers I know tune chips not only on the dyno, but from real world operation on the track and the street. I have some engineering friends at BMW Motorsport, and although the initial programming is done on a dyno, they spend much more time on the road with a laptop driving around on the streets and highways of California to finalize the program. They say, there's lots of conditions on the road that cannot be replicated on the dyno.

Here's that E90 M3 that came by for a visit last month with a laptop in the passenger seat plugged into the car's DME, driving around aimlessly from Camarillo, to Woodland Hills, to Death Valley, to Las Vegas and L.A. But it sounds like you know your shiitz more, and they need a new chief of engineering. You better show them what's up before they bring that thing to the market! God forbid they Bangle up another car!

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

Another one who "doesn't get it", i.e. the point of the thread:

There's a maximum allowable 3.0/3.2 911 timing advance without knock sensors
and as an example it's NOT in the 40+ degree advance area that ALL performance
chips have.

Where does this 40+ degrees come from? Can I see some of your dyno data that shows how you came to determine what the maximum advance is, and the physics or principles of how you came to that conclusion. Please, inquiring minds want to know!!!!

[Lorenfb]

BOOM!!! HEADSHOT!!!!

- KTL -

So let's be specific and not present off topic dribble:

"I don't want to get off topic"
"If I had set my DC20/Super C2 cam timing to the advanced spec of 2.4mm (recommended range of 2.2 to 2.4mm) I would have valves that are well below the recommended piston-to-valve (P-V)clearance of 1.5mm intake and 2mm exhaust. In my case I couldn't even set my cams to the recommended range and had to settle on 1.85mm"

- KTL -

As was said before, the 911SC and earlier Porsche guys seem
to understand the issues by their many clear posts, where others
as usual are brain dead or have a clear vested interest in
promoting performance chips which ALL have excessive timing
advances to enhance the performance "feel".

Typical 3.2 chip guy:

"Like, what's detonation, my car feels stronger with the performance
chip and most Pelican 3.2 guys do it anyway. Like, I can't hear any new
noises, just that great sound my new muffler makes. Don't be so negative
about performance chips. The tuner's real cool & said don't worry about it"

Bottom line: The 911SC and earlier guys did good by this thread!

[Steve W]

So Loren, the SC has a vacuum advance mechanism on the distributor? After the static timing is set, what is the purpose of that?

[RoninLB]

How is the chip advance figured at the various rpms ?

from my p1 detonation post, the EGTs will fall on pinging. So that means you measure to max EGTs then retard the advance that caused an EGT drop?

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by Steve W View Post
A lot of the Porsche shops here in California tell me you sell performance chips...

Originally Posted by Wavey

Let's see... where's my Funk & Wagnell... H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e... hmmmmmm, seems to fit.

Wavey,

One rather large difference here. Both of these gents sell chips but one of them tries to hide this fact when he posts. The same person attacks anything that the other person says, while the other gent has slowly gotten an excellent reputation here on PP and elsewhere, both by his products and level headed postings here on PP.

Notice that Loren has not and usually will not answer Steve's questions? Why does he love to attack anything that Steve posts? Ask yourself why sometime...

They both seem to be good at what they do (one of them very good) but if we could ever get the one who is in constant "attack mode" to chill a bit it sure would be better for his reputation and possibly business.

Joe A
(who worked with Steve W years ago on a chip for my 3.2. Ran for several years with no issues what so ever and is still running now in another car. A gent and a scholar.)

[Wavey]

I couldn't agree more on all points, Joe. In case there's any confusion, my dictionary comment was directed to Loren.

[Joeaksa]

Wavey,

Was not sure who you were referring to in the post. My dealings with Steve have been nothing but excellent and would recommend him to anyone. Loren on the other hand seems to be very good at part of his business (he refuses to discuss his selling performance chips) but seems to shoot himself in the foot in about 95% of his posts on PP by trying to go after Steve and others.

[KTL]

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

BOOM!!! HEADSHOT!!!!

- KTL -

So let's be specific and not present off topic dribble:

"I don't want to get off topic"
"If I had set my DC20/Super C2 cam timing to the advanced spec of 2.4mm (recommended range of 2.2 to 2.4mm) I would have valves that are well below the recommended piston-to-valve (P-V)clearance of 1.5mm intake and 2mm exhaust. In my case I couldn't even set my cams to the recommended range and had to settle on 1.85mm"

- KTL -

As was said before, the 911SC and earlier Porsche guys seem
to understand the issues by their many clear posts, where others
as usual are brain dead or have a clear vested interest in
promoting performance chips which ALL have excessive timing
advances to enhance the performance "feel".

Bottom line: The 911SC and earlier guys did good by this thread!

I guess I should have stated that my cam timing condition is a temporary one until the appropriate pistons are in my budget. The time was right to recondition the cams while top end rebuild was in process. My point in pointing out the cam timing issue was a comparison/parallel to SUPPORT the issue at hand of not messing with adjustments without fully understanding the relation to other components and the possible catastrophic outcome.

A few guys with SC's post good advice on ignition timing and you then collectively laud all SC and earlier owners as the only Porsche owners who "get it" when it comes to ignition timing? Yep, that's about par for the Loren course...............

Bottom line: Lorenfb = Hardest head and biggest blinders on the Pelican BBS, bar NONE

[Nine9six]

Originally Posted by Steve@Rennsport

Hi:

One should be aware of a phenomenon called "Sub-audible detonation" and these are shock waves that break rings as well as top ring lands.

I cannot count the number of times that we watched the rings fall on the floor during engine disassembly and the customer said they never heard a sound. Some of these people are ex hot-rodders and not rookies in this regard.

Detonation thresholds in air-cooled engines are NOT static; they change with engine temps (oil and cylinder head), outside air temps, mixture, fuel quality, and load (throttle position & RPM). Further, no two engines are alike, even of the same type. Failure to take all these variables into account when adjusting ignition timing can be an expensive exercise.

My best advice to anyone reading this thread is to never,.....EVER,....rely on your ears as "defacto knock-sensors" unless you have deep pockets ($$$$).

I hope this helps,

Excellent comment!

[RoninLB]

I'm speculating that detonation may lead to pre ignition.

[vanwyk4257]

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

BOOM!!! HEADSHOT!!!!

- KTL -

So let's be specific and not present off topic dribble:

"I don't want to get off topic"
"If I had set my DC20/Super C2 cam timing to the advanced spec of 2.4mm (recommended range of 2.2 to 2.4mm) I would have valves that are well below the recommended piston-to-valve (P-V)clearance of 1.5mm intake and 2mm exhaust. In my case I couldn't even set my cams to the recommended range and had to settle on 1.85mm"

- KTL -

As was said before, the 911SC and earlier Porsche guys seem
to understand the issues by their many clear posts, where others
as usual are brain dead or have a clear vested interest in
promoting performance chips which ALL have excessive timing
advances to enhance the performance "feel".

Typical 3.2 chip guy:

"Like, what's detonation, my car feels stronger with the performance
chip and most Pelican 3.2 guys do it anyway. Like, I can't hear any new
noises, just that great sound my new muffler makes. Don't be so negative
about performance chips. The tuner's real cool & said don't worry about it"

Bottom line: The 911SC and earlier guys did good by this thread!

Loren, you must be one of the most arrogant people I have ever seen! There are soooo many people on this board that are so far beyond your understanding of the 911 engine, some of whom posted in this thread. You never cease to jump in and vomit your typical "all 3.2 owners are idiots, and all chip manufacturers except me will blow up your engine" BS.
I wouldn't let you touch my car, nor would I ever buy a product from a schmuck like you. Once you can learn to make CONSTRUCTIVE posts without attacking other people maybe you will find the climate more to your liking.

[BLEW911]

Originally Posted by Steve@Rennsport

I'm not comfortable with being quoted out of context like Loren did so some clarification is needed here.


1) IMHO, there is absolutely, positively no substitute for experience when tuning these engines. Knowing precisely how many degrees of advance these engines will safely tolerate using whatever gasolines, compression ratios, camshaft profiles and displacements must be factored when I setup a distributor in my distributor machine or when mapping Engine Management systems (Motec, for example). It takes experience to know what margins are safe and when an ignition profile is too aggressive for all the variables. Speculation and conjecture based solely on theory is utterly useless in this regime.

2) From experience, Porsche left some large timing margins in some of these cars to accomodate poor gasolines worldwide and with experience, one can safely alter the ignition mapping (advance weights/springs or mapping tables) a bit to make noticable improvements in mid-range throttle response and torque without unintended consequences. In short, there ARE some significant gains to be found with responsible, intelligent changes to advance curves depending on the individual engine. Blanket statements, either positive or negative, are simply inaccurate.

3) Stating wide generalizations about aftermarket chips is just as absurd as making blanket statements focused on race, religion, creed or national origin. Like people, there are good ones and not-so-good ones and tarring everything/everyone with the same brush simply displays incredible ignorance about the subject.


Porsche's family of air-cooled engines vary in design, displacement and ignition mapping tolerances so I'd strongly caution anyone contemplating such changes to discuss such things with experienced and knowledgable personnel intimately familiar with the engine in particular BEFORE making any changes (Steve Wong is one of them). IMHO, this is NOT a DIY'er, "Kentucky Windage" sort of exercise when seeking to make engine improvements with ignition timing alterations unless one can live with the consequences.

Steve@Rennsport, This post makes the most sense to me. Geting BACK to MY original question...I'm thinking a re-curved distributor would be preferbable to bumping the timing 3 degrees. Now, any recomendations for the dist. work? This is something I need to think on.

Don

[Lorenfb]

"all chip manufacturers except me"

Where is this promoted/said except by a few idiots????????
No where do I promote nor solicit performance chips, e.g. Pelican, Rennlist, web site, & etc.
Also, I recommend to all my major customers, Porsche dealers and indepedents, to NOT use them!
Also, I recommend not flashing late 993s nor 996s for performance.

Over and over again, many miss the key point of this thread:

The pre-3.2 911 (rational) guys express that the ignition timing should not be changed
from Porsche's specs given the possiblility of detonation based on technical data. Then you
have the others (irrational) who think differently when is comes to advancing the 3.2 911
timing way beyond the Porsche maximum via performance chips when you have the
SAME engine, i.e. 911SC & 3.2 other than 200cc. Not understanding what the pre-3.2
guys are saying, over and over again, results in a real potential problem when using ANY
performance chip.

And then you have the other few who are "space cadets" and love to slam.
But that's the case for most forums.

[Lorenfb]

"This post makes the most sense to me."

Maybe not!

"Geting BACK to MY original question...I'm thinking a re-curved distributor would be preferbable to bumping the timing 3 degrees."

Maybe not all pre-3.2 911 owners get it.

[911 in SC]

Loren, I'm a relative newbie here. After reading your post, I have to ask - do you have a chip in your '88 911 3.2 listed in your signature?

Also, I find it offensive that you call me irrational simply because I own a 3.2 instead of a 3.0. Does that mean you're irrational too?

[Lorenfb]

"After reading your post, I have to ask - do you have a chip in your '88 911 3.2 listed in your signature?"

After reading this thread and all similar for the last 4 years, it's obviously NO!

AGAIN

No where do I promote nor solicit performance chips, e.g. Pelican, Rennlist, web site, & etc.
Also, I recommend to all my major customers, Porsche dealers and indepedents, to NOT use them!
Also, I recommend not flashing late 993s nor 996s for performance.

[911 in SC]

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

"After reading your post, I have to ask - do you have a chip in your '88 911 3.2 listed in your signature?"

After reading this thread and all similar for the last 4 years, it's obviously NO!

Jeesh, lighten up a little bit! All I did was ask a simple question. I've only been on Pelican a little over a year. I don't understand why you are so offended by my simple question.

Does the company listed in your signature sell 'chips' for a 3.2? Again, just a simple question. It really isn't clear on your website at all.

[BLEW911]

"Lorenfb" just went on my ignore list. I try and avoid people this offensive in the real world so why not here?

Don

[TimT]

"Lorenfb" just went on my ignore list

LOL.... I thought of that but then I wouldn't get reminded of businesses to avoid and suspect advice...

He obviously carries a HUGE chip on his shoulder, continually slams anything having to do with re-mapping a chip!!

Yet offers NOTHING to back up his hyperbole!!

LOL I look for chances to use these big words that Loren throws around sometimes.

I think Loren should be charged a fee every time he uses "hyperbole"

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Lorenfb

"all chip manufacturers except me"

Where is this promoted/said except by a few idiots????????

I think it's the Porsche shops around Los Angeles that mention about how you've been trying to sell them your chips for years (opps, or do we mean your copies of other companies chips). You know lying is a sin and you know sin leads to Hell. We don't have to start bringing up shop names and the owners now do we?

Anyways, a serious question Loren, what is the function of a vacuum advance on a distributor? I ask this because the other day after I set the distributor on my SC to 32 degrees at 6000 rpm, after I connected the line to the vacuum advance, the ignition timing advanced about another 15-20 degrees. If you add it up, the total advance came to about 47-52 degrees - YIKES! From your previous posts, sounds like Porsche fuched up big time and all of us SC owners should disable the vacuum advance, right? Please let me know because I don't want to blow up my motor, however if you don't know, just say so because I don't expect you to know everything. TIA.