Performance Chips
- Thread starter Guest
- Start date
ClubSport 911
New member
Me too ! - by now, all those horses have surely been unleashed ??
[
]
[
]
Errrrrr, slight problem with the US postal system - serves us right for trying to be clever and avoiding the import duty ! Anyway, should arrive sometime next week. Updates to follow ..................................
Jamie
Jamie
Guest
New member
So far, my insurers have been relatively friendly. I have faxed them a list of all mods and they always charge me something - like GBP20-25 - but then agree to cover. I have tended to phrase my mods as replacement of old parts and have suggested that the car is being made safer and more road worthy, however, they just accepted my Recaro PP seats without any questions. I am with Peart (policy with Royal & Sun Alliance).
To be honest though, how exactly would they know? The chips all look the same, and this chip has a setting that reverts to the OE map. I may decide to use the chip only for track days [].
BTW, we expect the chips some time next week. There was a right royal stuff up with the delivery arrangements (which, as I organised everything, I take the blame for), however, Steve W has excelled himself and sorted everything out. The man is a saint - I can't sing his praises loudly enough. Just hope the chip is as good as the service [].
Richard
To be honest though, how exactly would they know? The chips all look the same, and this chip has a setting that reverts to the OE map. I may decide to use the chip only for track days [
].BTW, we expect the chips some time next week. There was a right royal stuff up with the delivery arrangements (which, as I organised everything, I take the blame for), however, Steve W has excelled himself and sorted everything out. The man is a saint - I can't sing his praises loudly enough. Just hope the chip is as good as the service [
].Richard
Guest
New member
Seat of the pants!
My car is too low (together with big non-OE anti-sway bars) to get on a conventional dyno, so no chance to dyno.
I do have a winter drive I do every fine weekend (if car has otherwise been unused) to keep the battery charged and this includes a virtually unused on-ramp where I turn around. I use this for informal performance testing. It is slightly downhill but I know it inside out and backwards. I just drove it about an hour ago - first time with light seats. Car feels slightly faster and grabs more wheelspin on a sharpish first to second gearchange. I am fairly confident it will be a good test. However, I expect the chip to make the most difference to midrange response and part throttle response which should be easy to feel (but difficult to test). I don't expect much at the top end as the WOT maps are not too bad to start with.
If seat of pants is inconclusive, I will just have to wait for track day "races" []
Richard
My car is too low (together with big non-OE anti-sway bars) to get on a conventional dyno, so no chance to dyno.
I do have a winter drive I do every fine weekend (if car has otherwise been unused) to keep the battery charged and this includes a virtually unused on-ramp where I turn around. I use this for informal performance testing. It is slightly downhill but I know it inside out and backwards. I just drove it about an hour ago - first time with light seats. Car feels slightly faster and grabs more wheelspin on a sharpish first to second gearchange. I am fairly confident it will be a good test. However, I expect the chip to make the most difference to midrange response and part throttle response which should be easy to feel (but difficult to test). I don't expect much at the top end as the WOT maps are not too bad to start with.
If seat of pants is inconclusive, I will just have to wait for track day "races" [
]Richard
Guest
New member
Another question... I see that the price of these chips is very good.
However wouldn't it be better to opt for something like the Dastek Unichip? A chip that is mapped to an individual car (by dyno set up) & takes into consideration other enhancing modifications?
Of course the cost will be somewhat more expensive but I'd expect better gains?
I've never been a great fan of one chip fits all sort of thing. If you've got the cash then replacing the ECU with a fully mappable solution is best. Autronics is meant to be good whilst not breaking the bank.
Decent gains from forced induction cars are pretty easy to achieve but what have been the gains of these chips on the N/A 911?
However wouldn't it be better to opt for something like the Dastek Unichip? A chip that is mapped to an individual car (by dyno set up) & takes into consideration other enhancing modifications?
Of course the cost will be somewhat more expensive but I'd expect better gains?
I've never been a great fan of one chip fits all sort of thing. If you've got the cash then replacing the ECU with a fully mappable solution is best. Autronics is meant to be good whilst not breaking the bank.
Decent gains from forced induction cars are pretty easy to achieve but what have been the gains of these chips on the N/A 911?
JRSE,
I agree completely, there is no question that a custom mapped chip is better for maximising the performance of any given engine, however the Steve W chips (to my mind anyway) offer the best compromise of ability to individually specify the mapping on the chip to allow for known mods to the car and desired fuel octane level, and cost. These cost £127, a tailor dyno-mapped chip will cost you at least three times this much.
Remember this is not an irreversible mod, it takes about twenty minutes to physically change the chip, and indeed in the future when and if finances allow, I may well look at the custom mapped option. However, for the time being the definite improvements offered by the Steve W chip more than justify the expense.
Richard Bernau has installed his chip now, read his post on the "Steve Wong ECU Chips" thread for a really good explanantion of the subtle improvement it offers.
Jamie
I agree completely, there is no question that a custom mapped chip is better for maximising the performance of any given engine, however the Steve W chips (to my mind anyway) offer the best compromise of ability to individually specify the mapping on the chip to allow for known mods to the car and desired fuel octane level, and cost. These cost £127, a tailor dyno-mapped chip will cost you at least three times this much.
Remember this is not an irreversible mod, it takes about twenty minutes to physically change the chip, and indeed in the future when and if finances allow, I may well look at the custom mapped option. However, for the time being the definite improvements offered by the Steve W chip more than justify the expense.
Richard Bernau has installed his chip now, read his post on the "Steve Wong ECU Chips" thread for a really good explanantion of the subtle improvement it offers.
Jamie
Guest
New member
Yes indeed a day on the dyno could easily set back to £400 plus. £127 seems very good value, even if there are only a small amount of extra horses. Unfortunately tuning manufacturers promise great gains (from filters, exhausts, chips, etc) but in reality when on your own car it always falls short of the quoted increases. At least Steve Wong ECU Chips aren't being misleading with what it offers.
Guest
New member
No I don't think your car would benefit as this chip will be based around a standard set up. Instead I'd look at a dyno session for custom map to get maximum gains from modifications already made. It will be more expensive but the only way to take into consideration what you have already done.
[/quote]
No I don't think your car would benefit as this chip will be based around a standard set up. Instead I'd look at a dyno session for custom map to get maximum gains from modifications already made. It will be more expensive but the only way to take into consideration what you have already done.
[/quote]
I disagree. If you send Steve a list of your mods he can produce a chip to maximise the performance of the mods, it does not have to be based on a standard set-up. That said, whether it would offer significant gains over the chip you have already installed I couldn't say.
Jamie
No I don't think your car would benefit as this chip will be based around a standard set up. Instead I'd look at a dyno session for custom map to get maximum gains from modifications already made. It will be more expensive but the only way to take into consideration what you have already done.
[/quote]
I disagree. If you send Steve a list of your mods he can produce a chip to maximise the performance of the mods, it does not have to be based on a standard set-up. That said, whether it would offer significant gains over the chip you have already installed I couldn't say.
Jamie
937carrera
New member
Jamie,
My turn to disagree....[]
I don't believe that any "off the shelf" / "plug & play" solution can ever be as good as a custom chip programmed by someone sat in your car on the dyno who knows what they are doing.
Just to confuse matters, it may also be possible that a good off the shelf chip could be better than a custom chip done by someone who doesn't know what they are doing, people will make different choices depending on how optimised they want their car to be and what modifications have already been done.
As I stated earlier, I have seen 3.2 Carreras from the Club Championship on dynos which had very different requirements. (as an observer, not programmer, I hasten to add)
My turn to disagree....[
]I don't believe that any "off the shelf" / "plug & play" solution can ever be as good as a custom chip programmed by someone sat in your car on the dyno who knows what they are doing.
Just to confuse matters, it may also be possible that a good off the shelf chip could be better than a custom chip done by someone who doesn't know what they are doing, people will make different choices depending on how optimised they want their car to be and what modifications have already been done.
As I stated earlier, I have seen 3.2 Carreras from the Club Championship on dynos which had very different requirements. (as an observer, not programmer, I hasten to add)
937 Carrera - maybe I've missed something but I have never suggested for a second that these chips are better than a dyno tuned one - entirely the opposite in fact. However for me the bargain price of Steve's chips offer the perfect compromise - for now at least !
Jamie
937carrera
New member
Oh, we agree than [][]..... I must have misunderstood post 40031 where I thought you were disagreeing that a custom chip was the best solution, sorry
][]..... I must have misunderstood post 40031 where I thought you were disagreeing that a custom chip was the best solution, sorry
Guest
New member
Interesting to see how he would get on with a list of modifications compared to having the car there with them to test with. No doubt the cost would be somewhat greater (?) and still not as accurate as using data from dyno runs. Depends how serious you are about getting more power and how deep your pockets are.
ClubSport 911
New member
Have you ever seen how a typical dyno run optimises for anything other than WOT. ? I 've had about 20 answers to this....
Here is what Steve W has to say (and frankly I agree) about the typical rolling road tune:- Of course, if you have other evidence of exactly how (using a rolling road) you optimise the map for part throttle, then I'm keen to learn. Every one I have witnessed testing so far, puts the car in 3rd gear (or sometimes 4th) floors the throttle and watches the graphs climb on the pretty screen.
Let's get / keep the debate going - it's interesting.
RGDS
Steve
Dyno tests only measure power in one map, and that is the full throttle fuel map. There is no way to measure the power increase this way in the part throttle maps. Tuning the full throttle fuel and ignition map for full power is very simple, as all they are two maps of a 1x20 matrix. At any given point, there is a fixed value for fuel, and a fixed value for ignition. Assuming all we care about is the peak power at 6000 rpm, all a tuner needs to do is change the single digit value at 6000 for the fuel, and the single digit value for ignition, and produce a hp number. But this is just thinking in one dimension, and only thinking about the full throttle map is thinking in two dimensions. This is all some chip tuners do just to claim a power increase on the dyno. Increasing total area under the two dimensional full throttle power curve is great, but optimizing the part throttle maps is thinking in three dimensions and is much more important than any peak value at 6000 on a dyno is. Thinking in this respect and optimizing the part throttle curves now increases the total volume under the 3D power map, from 0 to 100% load, from 800 to 7000 rpm, nothing any dyno can measure, but every driver will in real world situations, as part throttle is where a driver spends at least 95% of his time.
Here is what Steve W has to say (and frankly I agree) about the typical rolling road tune:- Of course, if you have other evidence of exactly how (using a rolling road) you optimise the map for part throttle, then I'm keen to learn. Every one I have witnessed testing so far, puts the car in 3rd gear (or sometimes 4th) floors the throttle and watches the graphs climb on the pretty screen.
Let's get / keep the debate going - it's interesting.
RGDS
Steve
Dyno tests only measure power in one map, and that is the full throttle fuel map. There is no way to measure the power increase this way in the part throttle maps. Tuning the full throttle fuel and ignition map for full power is very simple, as all they are two maps of a 1x20 matrix. At any given point, there is a fixed value for fuel, and a fixed value for ignition. Assuming all we care about is the peak power at 6000 rpm, all a tuner needs to do is change the single digit value at 6000 for the fuel, and the single digit value for ignition, and produce a hp number. But this is just thinking in one dimension, and only thinking about the full throttle map is thinking in two dimensions. This is all some chip tuners do just to claim a power increase on the dyno. Increasing total area under the two dimensional full throttle power curve is great, but optimizing the part throttle maps is thinking in three dimensions and is much more important than any peak value at 6000 on a dyno is. Thinking in this respect and optimizing the part throttle curves now increases the total volume under the 3D power map, from 0 to 100% load, from 800 to 7000 rpm, nothing any dyno can measure, but every driver will in real world situations, as part throttle is where a driver spends at least 95% of his time.
Guest
New member
Interesting reading. I'm far from Knowledgeable and hoping to learn more!
Aren't there Dyno's that can measure part throttle engine smoothness? I am friends with a Ducati (ok it is a superbike) tuner and I am pretty sure they take readings other than WOT. (Click here for info)
AFAIK car tuners are using the same technology. Surely data from this can then be used in the map setting? Obviously as stated before their is a price hike for doing all this but it's delving into tuning a little further.
Sounds like you are referring to power runs, putting the car into 3rd or 4th at WOT. Great for bhp and torque curves.
Aren't there Dyno's that can measure part throttle engine smoothness? I am friends with a Ducati (ok it is a superbike) tuner and I am pretty sure they take readings other than WOT. (Click here for info)
AFAIK car tuners are using the same technology. Surely data from this can then be used in the map setting? Obviously as stated before their is a price hike for doing all this but it's delving into tuning a little further.
Sounds like you are referring to power runs, putting the car into 3rd or 4th at WOT. Great for bhp and torque curves.
Guest
New member
Good point, I have never seen anything other than dynno runs at WOT - although I haven't seen what is done for a custom chip mapping. I have seen the dial-in of a MOTEC system. This was as scientific as blasting round a race track then downloading data and tweaking settings. Repeat until happy.
One point I think that some people are missing is that Steve Wong has done extensive testing (including dyno tests I think) on various cars in order to arrive at his chip mappings. This is why he can provide different chips for cars with different modifications. Presumably he has to build in a little margin to account for engines in different states of health but essentially all 3.2 engines are the same. They are made of the same oily bits (ignoring US/Euro differences) so why shouldn't a chip that works on one engine work just as well on another. I am going to stick my neck out and ask the question, what is the big deal about a custom chip burned from dyno pulls? Why is it necessary? Even if I am wrong, and Steve's chip only gives you , lets say, 80% of the benefit of a custom chip this still means that in aggregate you will get say a 4% benefit rather than a 5% benefit (or an 8% rather than 10% etc). Do the math, it is still good value - and I defy anyone to feel a 1 or 2% improvement, in fact, this is below the margin for error on a common inertia dyno.
Just my $0.02.
Richard
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
