kick7ca

Objection your honor, speculation.

KC911

Objection overruled ! That's not really speculation...there's a reason "aftermarket chips" aren't allowed to compete with the "stockies", it's called an unfair advantage...

diamondcarrera

Im no expert -BUT I had my car fully set up c/w new chip set up over the period of a full day and dozens of dyno runs. The end results are fab both on paper from the dyno print out) and more importantly in the seat of my pants behind the weel!! I think that any off the shelf chip can give you a good result - BUT a far better bet is to get your car to a place where you can get a bespoke chip - there are masses of differentials car by car even from the MY. I used wayne schofield of chip wizards and he is out of this world - i cant recomend him enough - however he like me is in the UK......(261bhp)

Dave Thomas

Lovely speculation, but have you actually driven a 3.2 carrera? With and without a chip? With the stock chip, in the midrange, there's just a big flat spot in the power band. You could push the throttle through the floor and it won't get any better. A good chip (ie Steve Wong's) eliminates that.

Amber Gramps

AMEN, that is all I am saying....now, that hole in the power band is a spike in the power band. I can now brake the back end loose at will.

I liken this to the night I saw the UFO's over Phoenix fron my canoe on the colorado river. I saw it, my scout troop saw it, but because the UFO's didn't come as standard equipment in the minds of regular people, no one back home believed us. every body said we were just imagining it. It was just me, my scout troop, and the 60,000 people of Phoenix that saw it so it must not have happened. Right? Right! Just because you haven't driven a well chipped 911 doesn't mean they don't exist. And all the people that got the UFO's on video, they are all fake. Right? Right!

Amber Gramps

proof that chips work, even if you ain't had one of your own.

kick7ca

OK now I'm thinking you are imagining the performance gain.....

No I have not driven a chipped 3.2, but I chipped my '92 535i(m), and it's exactly as I described.
You guys compensate for the flat spot in the powerband by using a chip, you could instead compensate by using more throttle. Neither of us is faster than the other in the end. Your car just feels more jumpy at first, mine you need to dig into the throttle more. I can't see it any other way.

To clarify I'm talking about a stock 3.2 here. I realize with an open exhaust and cams it would be a different story, but on a stock catalyzed 3.2 I have to believe there is little to be gained and it's more hype than anything else, and giving up a margin of safety on 20yr $20K car is not something I think is wise.

Amber Gramps

Even I didn't believe the UFO story and I saw it with my own eyes. It wasn't till I saw it on TV that I believed my own eyes.....Not that TV is a good source.

Anyway. It isn't a "foot in the throtle" solution. The chip stores a program that constantly reads inputs(O2 sensor, MAF, and so on). Throwing more air and fuel in the intake and changing the timing position may not be the best method for increased power. Infact in may have the opposite effect that the one you are looking for. It may be that you want ot lean out the engine at various RPM's. The chip can do that. The guys that race tune the 3.2 engine or any engine, have real time "live" telemetry onboard the car. they tune, store, and study every variable. They take that info back to the shop and use it to better the car. Russell, and I'm sure everyone else, drive around with a lap top tracking every change they make. They keep track of the air/fuel and timing and can change it on the fly, in the car, while on the street, track, or dyno. When they are happy with the results they save the program on the chip. They can save it over and over. Ultimately we would all have the laptop programmer and tune the chip to our specific car. Not everyone can do that so we pay someone a to do it for us. If we are dealing with a totally stock car, it should be close.

KC911

Couple that with running low octane gas, and I don't think anyone here will dispute what you just said (except on the '84-86s of course). However, I'd venture that most of Steve Wongs' customers (or at least a BUNCH of us in the early days) had also done the exhaust mods, and most of us outside of CA have access to decent gas octane levels which alow us to SAFELY achieve a bit more performance. I've said all along, it's certainly not a "night & day" difference, but it IS better imo. Loren has from the git-go called us idiots and claimed we were only "feeling things". I didn't have a lot invested in the chip back then, and it was a "cheap" bang for the buck. After five+ years, I'm still happy. All that being said, lighten your car by 150 lbs (free), and you'll be even happier, and if you're going to spend $, focus on the suspension for the biggest "transformation" for these 20 year old babies. Suspension and seat time is where it's at...

Keith
'88 CE coupe

Dave Thomas

I don't wish to be rude, but you just don't know what you're talking about. I think you'd have to experience the same car without and with a chip, back to back, in order to get it.

With the stock chip, when you're cruising along at, say 2500 RPM, you can give it all the throttle you want, and it just takes it's time getting out of hole and into making some power. With the chip, it's already making more power at the same RPM and there's no delay when you open the throttle.

In a stock Carrera, you can't compensate for the flat spot or lack of response with more throttle. Stand on the throttle, it's still going to take it's time getting into the power band.

Steve's chip was the first thing I did to my Carrera, with the stock exhaust, and the improvement was immediate. The exhaust mods only made it better.

imcarthur

Below is a dyno chart that Steve W has posted on his site.

.

This is the only before/after that I have seen for a completely stock setup. No mention of what stock chip was in use. It might have been one of the ‘dogs’ that SW referred to in this post or it might have been the ‘good’ 358 or 302.

The dyno reality, is that there are not huge gains in evidence. HP differences are fairly small (~5HP) until above 4500 rpm with the big surge above 5000 rpm - which is not a territory that most of us spend a lot of time cruising in. The torque gains are more uniform but still not huge. It looks like ~5 -7 lbft for most of the range with the surge coming in the same place – above 4500 rpm.

As for that midrange flat spot? That seems pretty uniform in both plots.

I just don't see any wheel-spinning, fire-breathing improvement on these plots. I also don't see the low rpm drivablility that many mention, just slightly improved torque across the whole band.

fwiw

Ian

Peter Zimmermann

Well, I just caught up with this thread, and although it's very interesting, most of the actual electronic-speak is over my head. My name was mentioned along the way, and I just wanted to be clear about where I stand on this issue. Being a nuts and bolts guy, I would first like to say that I've endorsed Loren's ability with respect to his alternator and misc. ECU rebuilds, all of which are excellent. My shop used his products for many years, and I have no complaints with them. With regard to chips, I've never endorsed one, but am certainly aware of the "holes" in the acceleration mode (noted mostly in '84/85 cars) that people speak of. Of the hundreds of Carreras that I've driven, I've found that most aftermarket chips wake up a car in the sense that they tend to eliminate those holes; digging deeper into the throttle can't do that because the holes are electronic related, not just throttle position related. Sadly, about the only aftermarket chips that I've driven/installed are from Autothority, at the time that I sold my shop I had not learned of SW's products, so have no experience with them, nor do I have experience with any of the newer brands currently available. My comments regarding chips have always been my feeling, from personal experience, that out of every 100 3.2 Carreras, you will have two or three dogs, about 95 everyday, pretty nice running cars, and a couple that will just fly without the slightest hint of accel holes. A high quality chip will definitely help the dogs, have a minor to moderate impact on the 95 cars in the middle, and do little or nothing for those special two cars at the top. No dyno is needed, other than a properly functioning butt version of one, to feel the difference in most of the cars. It's real, and the chips do help. Regarding the chips themselves, I haven't the foggiest idea how they're made or programmed, much like I don't have the foggiest idea how the high-tech electronic machines, that my electronics engineer brother builds, work. I'll stick to my nuts, bolts, synchro rings, tie rods and rocker arms, but I'll always appreciate posts like those that SW has put up.

Dave Thomas

Thanks for posting that Ian. I think that this may be a case where the dyno doesn't tell the whole story; needs to be augmented with actually driving the car.

BTW, I don't think anyone's claimed "wheel-spinning, fire-breathing improvement". I just know I'm WAY happier with my car than I was with the stock chip. This is my first Carrera and frankly, I was rather disappointed with the mid-range performance at first.

I'm wondering if some timed acceleration runs, like from 2000-6000 RPM in 2nd, 3rd and 4th, same car, same day, stock-vs-performance chip, might paint a more accurate picture of the benefits of a performance chip?

imcarthur

Dave

I agree. The dyno is one tool, the butt dyno is another but rather unscientific. Timed runs might give another interesting picture.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-chip. UPS just lost a used SW I was buying from a Rennlister in Texas.

But it's good to hear a number of different views on the subject.

Ian

Amber Gramps

I think I know what happened to that chip.