A Real Performance Chip?
 

Is there a real Porsche 911 performance chip other than those that
just tweak the ignition timing? Some apparently think so:

http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?t=409114

BAN! :mad:

Loren

Rather than stir that pot again - with the inevitable results - why don't you direct your energies to a useful discussion? Share some of your DME expertise or help solve the heater relay circuitry mystery.

Now gather round & sing "Why can't we be friends . . . why can't we be friends. . ."

Ian

Lorenfb why dont you go share your knowledge and wisdom with the boys on Rennlist? Maybe show them the errors in their ways?

I checked out the thread- I read about a guy who likes the chip in his car and another who has the same opinion. And some other guy is having trouble with his car.

I am not sure what I was supposed to take away from this. He loved his SW chip and loves his new one as well. Anything else?

Well,..what is the answer to the question you pose? More importantly, what do you (yourself) say?

To be honest, that much advance (30+) would keep me from using it, period. Especially with no knock sensing of any kind. Therefore, for now, she remains stock. Guess I'm a bit conservative here, although it is quite tempting to try, after hear SO MANY success stories as to partial throttle response improvement. Should this be had with fuel map alterations, then I would suppose this is a bit safer (if you will) than advancing the timing (drastically). Then again, I'm not as versed in this as you and others here on the forum.

I do know a bit more about it after speaking with one chip designer, understanding that I may customize things such as rev limits, etc. (no way would I increase that limit....). This particular designer stated (clearly) that his ignition maps don't advance 30 degrees.

I look forward to a good (constructive) discussion on this (fuel vs. ignition map alterations) to better my knowledge on this matter (and subsequently, a decision to make?). AGAIN, I do not know enough about it just yet to alter what Porsche did.....willing to learn. There sure are MANY happy, satisfied customers out there,..all of them who profess DRAMATIC partial throttle improvement results (not slightly, but dramatic). I just don't know at what cost down the road, IF ANY. Surely, "proof's in the pudding", as I've not heard of anyone damaging their engines using ANY current products....

......how about some commentary, Loren, as to this fuel map approach? Are they saying that ignition maps are not touched? Or they're only slightly touched up?

"Learn" me something here!!

Best to all,

"To be honest, that much advance (30+) would keep me from using it, period."

And that's the case for the performance chip hyped by those who post
here on Pelican. Tests were done in the past on that one and others
with results here with notes:

www.systemsc.com/tests.htm

It should be very clear about the issues raised with regard to ignition timing
from above and also evident from this thread:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/126613-autothority-mass-air-flow-maf-detonation.html

The DME ECM temp (AFM) timing retard only provides a few degrees retard,
not enough to compensate for most performance chip's "pushed" timing.

So Wayne (PP) is selling a product that can destroy our engines??

BUT what about the question's answer? As to fuel maps? and subsequent enhancement of performance?

Never mind: I just caught your statement at the website:

Fuel map changes have little to no effect, with the exception of the WOT map, when operating closed-loop via the O2 sensor.

I see this flag off in the distance......but I can't quite make out what it says......

bs

From earlier experience, this should be good. Both instructive, educational AND entertaining!

Trying to scare people by quoting ignition advance numbers is as stupid as the people who listen. It's not that simple and you know it.

"In the beginning...", Lorenfb appeared over on Rennlist, and a few months later here on Pelican, and told us that we were all "feeling things", the stock chip couldn't be "improved" (he later came around on the '84-86 versions, which were "fixed" in '87), and I don't recall that he ever ackknowledged the fact that many of us (outside of CA) have access to higher octanes, etc. His viewpoint can be summarized by his statement:

"Chips suck, case closed" - Lorenfb

There's tons of info in the archives (on both boards) and many reputable professionals have occasionly chimed in with their perspectives. Loren increased my awareness of the "chip issues" tremendously although I don't agree with his approach, nor his conclusions about Steve Wong's chips. Just my .02, but don't believe me, I'm just one of the "idiots"...ask Loren :).

[QUOTE=Lorenfb;3759211]"To be honest, that much advance (30+) would keep me from using it, period."

And that's the case for the performance chip hyped by those who post
here on Pelican. Tests were done in the past on that one and others
with results here with notes:

As usual this was out of context. No one said the chip used that number.
Here is the quote from the original thread.


Justin, I have the same chip as mnmasotto. The throtle response is instant and strong. It wasn't gained by advancing the timing to some crazy 30 degree number as some have thought but buy changing the fuel map.

You seem to be suffering from that rare disorder Chipaphobia and it has caused selective blindness.:rolleyes:

"It wasn't gained by advancing the timing to some crazy 30 degree number as some have thought but buy changing the fuel map."

Great!!!! Again, there appears to be the "ideal" performance chip as indicated here.
So, this maybe the new hyped chip on Pelican giving more buying options to Pelicanites.

So what's the negativity?

Subscribed.

I can't wait until the grenades start flying. I'm popping popcorn and have a cooler full of beer. And a few extra chairs if anyone wants to join me on the sidelines? This should be educational and entertaining.

BTW, I have a SW chip and love it. I can't say enough good things about SW. For the record, I don't have any of Loren's products and I can't say anything about him, good or bad. Never dealt with him. I'm listening ....

wj

Subscribed.

I can't wait until the grenades start flying. I'm popping popcorn and have a cooler full of beer. And a few extra chairs if anyone wants to join me on the sidelines? This should be educational and entertaining.

BTW, I have a SW chip and love it. I can't say enough good things about SW. For the record, I don't have any of Loren's products and I can't say anything about him, good or bad. Never dealt with him. I'm listening ....

wj

It started with your first post, you tell us.


Before you claim ignorance, "Is there a real Porsche 911 performance chip other than those that just tweak the ignition timing?" would be considered negative towards other unnamed proven performance chips that also change more than ignition timing.

BTW, where's the log to show proof that it doesn't exceed said safe limit of ignition advance?

Just because I'm bored:

Yet all the supposedly "too high" advance numbers occur at 20-30% load, not "heavy engine loads" so why are you trying to grow apples and oranges on the same tree?

Like Loren, I am very skeptical so I did some testing of my own. I've experimented with and disected some of the available chips out there and some are just too extreme. I've run a certain chip in my Carrera prior to disassembly, and I saw exactly what I was expecting with the extreme map on that particular chip.

There are options out there for tuned chips. So be careful with what you buy and ask a lot of questions so you know what your engine requirs. Chip tuning is not always bad nor always good. This is not an endorsement nor an indictment of any particular chip...