And for those that know more than Porsche about playing with tuning,
here's the DME ECM from the limited addition 911 3.2 Club Sport where
Porsche increased the redline but did NOT change the timing from the
stock '88/'89 DME ECM. Read the spec sheet also to see that the motor
had mods too. The Club Sport was setup for club racing.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1330384217.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1330383936.jpg

and that stock ECU, for the 88-89, changed what (in the programming?)

Thanks,

Doyle

RUF tunes cars, if you talk to them will they say they do it because they know more than the porsche technical people? or that they have an idea for a more focused product.
you work on DME's and say you update the older DME's. why is that? shouldn't you leave them alone, or do you know better than porsche too?

"RUF tunes cars, if you talk to them will they say they do it because they know more than the porsche technical people?"

Right, and what do you think they'll say? Come on!

Any answer for what I asked in post 71 Loren?

"and that stock ECU, for the 88-89, changed what (in the programming?)"

Just drive a pre-'88 DME ECM car and then the later car. As everyone who does,
all notice; a smoother idle, better cold starting, more mid-range responsiveness, better mileage,
and overall better driveability. The later EPROM had twice the capacity to enhance the
the overall functionality of the DME ECM.

"Any answer for what I asked in post 71 Loren?"

Just do a search. It's been discussed before, O.K.!

Do a search for the answers to:

1-Do we know that ignoring this recommendation is detrimental, is 40 really the number and is it that black and white?

2-Have you seen first hand, or has anyone else seen first hand, damage caused by detonation?

Have you seen any damage first hand Loren? Or is it just hear say and speculation? I'm not trying to be a dink here, if you've seen it I''d like to hear about it.

Come on Loren....give me something specific. "overall better driveability" won't cut it, as to specificity of the answer (nor "better cold starting", nor "mid-range-responsiveness", nor any other "generalized" observation. As an Engineer, I know that you KNOW this Loren,...and would provide good source to know what- EXACTLY- the P-Engineers changed in the '88-'89 evolution in the SW programming

Again, I'll mention (or ask for) specificity in the programming changes.....(to achieve those-possibly-results).....

Thanks!

Doyle

I would (and have) always ask those who run in this world of altering programming if (should, say, preignition.detonation, etc.) variables would be actually measured/quantified (somehow).....

?

Doyle

Hmmm. High compression ratio. Strange thing about higher compression and detonation. There's a relationship there.

Maybe, if you squint REALLY hard, you might get an idea about the relationship between timing advance and compression ratio in very similar motors. And if you understand what an analogy is, you might understand that manufacturers often build in a margin of safety when constructing a complicated system. This safety margin can be exploited in some systems *without causing damage to or decreasing the service life of the system*.

That that I see that you are making a competing product, the line of thought you pursue becomes very clear as to motivation. Until data exists to give credibility to your claims, it will be quite easy to dismiss them as mere bad-mouthing of a more-successful competitor. I won't hold my breath for the data to be provided.

"That that I see that you are making a competing product"

Like what?

"This safety margin can be exploited in some systems *without causing damage to or decreasing the service life of the system"

And you know what the margin is, right!

And on the topic of 'pushing' the timing (sorry tuning), anyone with a laptop,
a $100 internet sold app, an EPROM programmer can be a 'tuner' too,
even a music grad from USC can do it! "Fight On".

Bottom line: See, everyone is a tuner based on the above quote.

- 'Performance' tuning, a real joke! -

Keep going Loren...you're doing a great job of introducing the newest generation to your BS.

Internet BS is the same everywhere. Only the forum and particulars change. USENET used to be full of all sorts of claims, but those folks found their way out of the newsgroup universe into the internet forum universe.

Innuendo and hypotheses are not legally actionable, so folks can do that all they like without fear of anything but a sour taste in the mouths of others. But one starts making actual claims, then one has to back them up. Which is why Loren doesn't go so far as to say that Mr. Wong's product will do any actual damage. Instead, he asks leading questions that make implications. When pressed for data or detailed responses to pointed questions, lo and behold - a subject change! Or a recasting of the question to place the burden of proof on the questioner.

In any case, an internet veteran such as myself should be ashamed for feeding an obvious troll. I apologize to my fellow Pelikaners for my lapse.

"In any case, an internet veteran such as myself should be ashamed for feeding an obvious troll. I apologize to my fellow Pelikaners for my lapse."

Right, like this joke of a statement:

"This safety margin can be exploited in some systems *without causing damage to or decreasing the service life of the system*. "

Like repeat the hyperbole that sucks most into buying 'performance' chips!

So with 110 posts, who are you Eric? Tell us about you? And what contributions have you made
to the Pelican Parts forum in solving problems for members since Aug 2011, maybe 6 months or so? Tell us all the great knowledge base you provide, other than a "copy & paste" from other threads like most!

Oh, just from found one Eric:

PM = "private message"

"bump" means the same as "ttt" and "btt" - "bumping" the topic to the top of the thread list. HTH.

Hey, I'm impressed. Now that's a real technical post! Have to give you credit Eric.

Loren you still havn't answered my question. Have you ever seen first hand, any damage caused by detonation in an engine running a performance chip?

Loren, Evidently your ban from a couple of years ago hasn't taught you anything. I was one of the people that had many personal attacks by Loren. This keeps up and and I will post the links to many of them. You are the one screaming about getting personal attacks. You should know, you are very good at doing them to others. Also several threads over on one of the competing boards were sent to the abyss never to be seen again due to your bad behavior there. Some things do not change!!!!! Still haven't seen your data on the destroyed engines caused by performance chips. Asked for your data on this years ago, where is it?

As for my car I am getting just over 260hp from my Carrera. No stock chip will get me anywhere near that. I have a 3.4 with a fairly hot cam and modifications to hold up to more power. I first had a 911chips chip that replaced another performance chip. My car had 88,000 with the car having a performance chip in it since 20,000 miles and when I rebuilt it it looked great. Virtually everything in spec. Rebuild done due to broken head studs. The car was smoother and better performance from the first chip. My car runs great and will keep up with a stock 88 turbo. Steve Wong is a master at tuning these cars and will never hesitate to recommend his services to anyone. My custom chip has been in the car for 15,000 very enjoyable miles.

"Loren you still havn't answered my question."

Given what you posted incorrectly here about the jumper wire, you'd probably not understand
anything technical posted anyway.

"I think with it connected and running a modded chip, you may get some knock. I'd be inclined to unplug it. Unless someone chimes in with a reason to have it connected."

The jumper wire retards the timing, so leaving it connected will reduce the likelihood of knocking. Unplugged causes a more advanced timing.

So, are you getting a credit for the chip you purchased for pressing your issue, sounds like it?

"As for my car I am getting just over 260hp from my Carrera."

Please, in your dreams!

And we have another technical wizard, right? Aren't you the one who had problems with a simple
task as adjusting valves or something very basic? Have to dig up some of those of your great
technical posts. I thought your car got water damaged, right?

andy, perhaps you are well intentioned in your efforts to draw information from loren.

I would hazard that the cognitive errors and biases in the presented stream are obvious, and the attempt to discuss will be met with unsatisfactory results.

Given that cars have a lifespan, and that certain sets of tunings can change the time between rebuilds, then I submit that each owner/builder is responsible for their own choices and the effects on the lifespans. It may be that driving habits, and motor oils, have a greater effect on longevity than the effects of a tuning chip.

Loren, As usual you have no idea of what your talking about. My car has never seen water and I did the rebuild on the engine, not exactly an easy task. Had it dyno'd, but i am sure that that is inconclusive to you. 261HP to be exact. You have attacked me one too many times. You contribute nothing to this forum other than to attack people like you just did to me again.

Put up or shut up. Your proof, no hyperbole. But sadly as it has been this way for the last 8 years nothing will be shown or presented to prove what he is talking about. I see another ban in your future. It will be more welcome than the last one......