Boosting 3.2L output during top end rebuild
10-11-2004, 03:14 PM
#31
Racer
Jim, first note that wheel dynos are best used to compare power changes to an engine between modifications, and shouldn't be used as an exact measurement of power at the flywheel. Dynojets do however seem to measure power consistently from one to another, no matter where they are in the country. This particular 88 was a Clubsport, and Clubsports are rumored to have been blueprinted by the factory and thus produce spec or above spec power. As Dave says, their only other modifications are hollow valves, and it's chip is programmed with a rev limiter increased to 6840 from the standard 6520.
Airbox mods best show their gains the closer the engine approaches the 250 hp mark. At 220 hp, the gains are modest. The combination of the airbox mod with a freer flowing sport muffler alone should generally produce about a 6-7 hp gain. I would expect your hp increase to match at least with the gains shown in the attached dyno chart. It may even be more as the 84-86 Carreras were detuned even more that the later cars, and were rated at 207 hp, 200 in California. The 84-86 Carreras were provided with 24 pin 050 DMEs and are not the same as the 082 DME Loren mentions. 24 pin 082 DMEs only came on the 87 Carreras, of which could either come with a 207 hp chip, or a 217 hp chip, just as the 28 pin 88-89 Carreras could come with either a 207 or 217 hp chip.
The engine dynoed above also was dynoed with a chip for 91 octane, as the owner lives in San Jose, CA and the best gas we can get in this state is 91. Most of the full throttle power gains come from air/fuel optimization, and not so much increases in ignition timing, which are kept conservative.
I'm not sure where the randomness and noise in the dyno chart displayed are. You may want to invest in a better computer monitor or an eye exam.
Airbox mods best show their gains the closer the engine approaches the 250 hp mark. At 220 hp, the gains are modest. The combination of the airbox mod with a freer flowing sport muffler alone should generally produce about a 6-7 hp gain. I would expect your hp increase to match at least with the gains shown in the attached dyno chart. It may even be more as the 84-86 Carreras were detuned even more that the later cars, and were rated at 207 hp, 200 in California. The 84-86 Carreras were provided with 24 pin 050 DMEs and are not the same as the 082 DME Loren mentions. 24 pin 082 DMEs only came on the 87 Carreras, of which could either come with a 207 hp chip, or a 217 hp chip, just as the 28 pin 88-89 Carreras could come with either a 207 or 217 hp chip.
The engine dynoed above also was dynoed with a chip for 91 octane, as the owner lives in San Jose, CA and the best gas we can get in this state is 91. Most of the full throttle power gains come from air/fuel optimization, and not so much increases in ignition timing, which are kept conservative.
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
Using this statement and evaluating the graphs, all the "deltas" between the graphs
are in the noise level, i.e. the errors (measurement, setup, repeatability, etc.) when
considered would result in no significant difference in the multiple data sets. Given that,
one can't conclude a real difference between stock chips and performance chips.
Having the tabular data would further indicate the randomness of
the "deltas" which would further indicate insignificance between chips.
are in the noise level, i.e. the errors (measurement, setup, repeatability, etc.) when
considered would result in no significant difference in the multiple data sets. Given that,
one can't conclude a real difference between stock chips and performance chips.
Having the tabular data would further indicate the randomness of
the "deltas" which would further indicate insignificance between chips.
Last edited by Steve W; 10-11-2004 at 03:35 PM.
10-11-2004, 04:47 PM
#33
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
"Your car should have an earlier chip (should be a 24-pin), and the upgrade to Steve's chip should be more noticeable than in the later cars" Dave Thomas
Not true - Late '87 cars (24 pin DME) with the 082 DME produced
the same HP as the '88/'89 with the 28 pin DMEs. Check the Porsche
specs.
Not true - Late '87 cars (24 pin DME) with the 082 DME produced
the same HP as the '88/'89 with the 28 pin DMEs. Check the Porsche
specs.
Loren, let me ask you this: have you ever driven a Carrera with a Steve Wong chip? I'm assuming you haven't, because if you had, you would stop denouncing chips in general and Steve's chips in particular.
10-11-2004, 07:12 PM
#34
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems that the subject has generated a good if not heated debate. Not my intent but I see good input here. Great discussion.
Steve: I'm getting that not only the upgrade matters but it matters how it is done. You mentioned "matched" components. That is, 3.2L Euro 10.3:1 p/cs, Extrudehoned intakes, Webcam 20/21s, SSIs with a GHL muffler, and a matching chip. Hopefully further study will grace me with the knowledge to know what matches and what does not. The opportunity to screw things up by ignorance is out there. I can not afford trial and error.
I know my engine has coated internals. How does this differ from the ceramic coating done by the businesses to whom you ship your parts? I have a co-worker that shipped his 944 valves, heads etc off to be coated. Has anyone had luck with having a coating applied? Downside?
The main debate here seems to center on chipping the engine. Is chipping alone worthwhile without the exhaust upgrade? Stress on other components?
Thanks,
Reg
Steve: I'm getting that not only the upgrade matters but it matters how it is done. You mentioned "matched" components. That is, 3.2L Euro 10.3:1 p/cs, Extrudehoned intakes, Webcam 20/21s, SSIs with a GHL muffler, and a matching chip. Hopefully further study will grace me with the knowledge to know what matches and what does not. The opportunity to screw things up by ignorance is out there. I can not afford trial and error.
I know my engine has coated internals. How does this differ from the ceramic coating done by the businesses to whom you ship your parts? I have a co-worker that shipped his 944 valves, heads etc off to be coated. Has anyone had luck with having a coating applied? Downside?
The main debate here seems to center on chipping the engine. Is chipping alone worthwhile without the exhaust upgrade? Stress on other components?
Thanks,
Reg
Last edited by afinepoint; 10-11-2004 at 09:22 PM.
10-12-2004, 01:25 AM
#35
"This has nothing to do with whether they're 24-pin or 28-pin." Dave Thomas
Wrong!
Get a 24 pin DME with a 2732 EPROM (082) and compare it to a 28 pin DME with a
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. They're basically the same.
Wrong!
Get a 24 pin DME with a 2732 EPROM (082) and compare it to a 28 pin DME with a
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. They're basically the same.
Last edited by Lorenfb; 10-12-2004 at 11:15 AM.
10-12-2004, 01:40 AM
#36
"Dyno runs 001 to 003 are on a stock car configuration with the stock chip. Dynoruns 004 to 006 are with a performance chip only change. And dyno runs 007 to 008 are with the performance chip but the exhaust change with the replacement of the cat with a euro premuffler."
Graphical data makes basically no logical sense:
The graphs show the most effect from the chip mod versus the major exhaust mod.
The exhaust mod should have required a different chip to maximize the better flow
over the stock setup's chip.
Also, most/all the Bruce Anderson chips tested produce better results than indicated
by the graphical data on this thread.
Again, questionable results.
Graphical data makes basically no logical sense:
The graphs show the most effect from the chip mod versus the major exhaust mod.
The exhaust mod should have required a different chip to maximize the better flow
over the stock setup's chip.
Also, most/all the Bruce Anderson chips tested produce better results than indicated
by the graphical data on this thread.
Again, questionable results.
10-12-2004, 03:10 AM
#37
Racer
Reg, what I meant was that matching the chip programming to the engine modifications and fuel requirements provides the optimum benefit from the time and money invested in the mods. There aren't too many mods possible that would not 'match' another. They are all cumulative and only limited by your pocketbook. The only higher level of power optimization after building your motor involves custom tuning in the car with a dyno and/or air fuel analyzers, data loggers, and laptop, which is provided as a service to local shops and clients here in Southern California, or by sending in your dyno runs with afr data logs for further optimization.
There are several good suggestions provided in this thread to boost broad range torque and hp. A chip can only do so much with what its given, but it does boost the low and midrange torque and response at part throttle much more than the full throttle dyno chart shows. This works equally on both bone stock motors and heavily modified ones. As the previously posted dyno chart shows, there are noticeable gains attainable from a stock motor with stock exhaust. The gains and benefits to a bone stock motor are very much the same as they would be to a modified one.
Steve Weiner does have a very interesting setup which he displayed at the GAF this year that would make a very noticeable increase in throttle response and overall hp. They are set of precision machined high butterfly injection manifolds with velocity stacks designed for use with programmable fuel injection, however each manifold is spaced exactly the distance of each head for a perfect straight shot into each intake port without any lazy s manifold adapters. This would allow the use of high overlap long duration cams and take advantage of long equal length header primaries for superior flow and response. They can be used on any displacement 911 motor. Used alone by themselves on a stock 3.2 motor, Steve indicates the peak power gain is about 30 hp, with the increase in throttle response making it feel more like 50. This contrasts with the single butterfly shared plenum manifolds of the stock motor which does not take too kindly to mods such as wild camshafts.
AFAIK, the benefits coatings are to reduce frictional losses between components, and to increase thermal efficiency by containing more of the energy of combustion from being dissipated as heat. Although they may or may not improve power output, it really has no effect on chip programming. You may want to ask one of the other resident experts here as I've never worked with anyone that has had it done.
Not sure I understand where you are perplexed. But here's how I am seeing your question. If the chip used was optimized for gains with the stock exhaust as shown by runs 004-006, then, ? you expect even greater gains with the modified exhaust than shown by runs 007-008?
Your math must be different than mine. Or did you think the Bruce Anderson data is showing power in rear wheel numbers? Perhaps you could point out exactly where the BA data produce more power gain?
There are several good suggestions provided in this thread to boost broad range torque and hp. A chip can only do so much with what its given, but it does boost the low and midrange torque and response at part throttle much more than the full throttle dyno chart shows. This works equally on both bone stock motors and heavily modified ones. As the previously posted dyno chart shows, there are noticeable gains attainable from a stock motor with stock exhaust. The gains and benefits to a bone stock motor are very much the same as they would be to a modified one.
Steve Weiner does have a very interesting setup which he displayed at the GAF this year that would make a very noticeable increase in throttle response and overall hp. They are set of precision machined high butterfly injection manifolds with velocity stacks designed for use with programmable fuel injection, however each manifold is spaced exactly the distance of each head for a perfect straight shot into each intake port without any lazy s manifold adapters. This would allow the use of high overlap long duration cams and take advantage of long equal length header primaries for superior flow and response. They can be used on any displacement 911 motor. Used alone by themselves on a stock 3.2 motor, Steve indicates the peak power gain is about 30 hp, with the increase in throttle response making it feel more like 50. This contrasts with the single butterfly shared plenum manifolds of the stock motor which does not take too kindly to mods such as wild camshafts.
AFAIK, the benefits coatings are to reduce frictional losses between components, and to increase thermal efficiency by containing more of the energy of combustion from being dissipated as heat. Although they may or may not improve power output, it really has no effect on chip programming. You may want to ask one of the other resident experts here as I've never worked with anyone that has had it done.
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
"Dyno runs 001 to 003 are on a stock car configuration with the stock chip. Dynoruns 004 to 006 are with a performance chip only change. And dyno runs 007 to 008 are with the performance chip but the exhaust change with the replacement of the cat with a euro premuffler."
Graphical data makes basically no logical sense:
1. The graphs show the most effect from the chip mod versus the major exhaust mod.
2. The exhaust mod should have required a different chip to maximize the better flow.
Graphical data makes basically no logical sense:
1. The graphs show the most effect from the chip mod versus the major exhaust mod.
2. The exhaust mod should have required a different chip to maximize the better flow.
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
"
Also, most/all the Bruce Anderson chips tested produce better results than indicated
by the graphical data on this thread.
Again, questionable results.
Also, most/all the Bruce Anderson chips tested produce better results than indicated
by the graphical data on this thread.
Again, questionable results.
10-12-2004, 03:22 AM
#38
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by afinepoint
1984 3.2L.
What is the most practical means of improving engine output during a top end rebuild? I have heard of replacing the heads with 930's. Is that cost effective or even reasonable? I am not trying to outrun cup cars just get quicker acceleration off the line and passing. (aren't we all!)
At the track I am definitely horsepower limited on the straightaways.
Who has the better and more reliable rebuild kits?
Reg
What is the most practical means of improving engine output during a top end rebuild? I have heard of replacing the heads with 930's. Is that cost effective or even reasonable? I am not trying to outrun cup cars just get quicker acceleration off the line and passing. (aren't we all!)
At the track I am definitely horsepower limited on the straightaways.
Who has the better and more reliable rebuild kits?
Reg
For a noticable difference in acceleration, you will need to either:-
1. upgrade to a big bore, higher compression P&C set, such as a 3.4 or 3.5L upgrade and even then, you'll only see approx 10-15% extra HP. Add a MAF and Twin Plug conversion to that too.
2. OR, swap your motor for a used low mileage 964 or 993 3.6L engine.
3. OR, since you are freshening up the top-end, perform a low boost, bolt-on turbo system conversion. Don't worry about the bottom end, it's all 930 hardware.
Any of the above will require a few thousand dollars invested anyway, so be prepared to spend some money.
Best "bang for buck" IMO, if done right, is option 3
10-12-2004, 06:34 AM
#39
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again lots of good advice. I am listening.
Heres something I thought of in the early AM while preparing for work.
My main truck is a 01 F-350 with a 7.3L diesel. The engine puts out slightly more HP than a 911 but of course considerably more torque. Here is my question.
Puttting a performance chip on the 7.3 can boost horsepower 100+ without any other modifications. The chipped 3.2L (and apparently other) 911 engine(s) with a racing pedigrees gets a small fraction of that. Why?
$500 (chip alone) for the Ford = +100HP.
$$$$ (chip + mods) for the 911 = maybe +70. ???????
I know we are talking different worlds but is the diesel engine's potential that untapped? Is the 3.2L already working nears it's limitation? Has Porsche extracted all it can?
It is knowledge as well as a route to greater performance that I am seeking .
What is happening internally that makes such a large difference in these two machines?
Reg
Heres something I thought of in the early AM while preparing for work.
My main truck is a 01 F-350 with a 7.3L diesel. The engine puts out slightly more HP than a 911 but of course considerably more torque. Here is my question.
Puttting a performance chip on the 7.3 can boost horsepower 100+ without any other modifications. The chipped 3.2L (and apparently other) 911 engine(s) with a racing pedigrees gets a small fraction of that. Why?
$500 (chip alone) for the Ford = +100HP.
$$$$ (chip + mods) for the 911 = maybe +70. ???????
I know we are talking different worlds but is the diesel engine's potential that untapped? Is the 3.2L already working nears it's limitation? Has Porsche extracted all it can?
It is knowledge as well as a route to greater performance that I am seeking .
What is happening internally that makes such a large difference in these two machines?
Reg
10-12-2004, 07:31 AM
#40
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
"This has nothing to do with whether they're 24-pin or 28-pin." Dave Thomas
Wrong!
Get a 24 pin DME with a 2732 EPROM (082) and compare it to a 28 pin DME with a
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. The basically the same.
Wrong!
Get a 24 pin DME with a 2732 EPROM (082) and compare it to a 28 pin DME with a
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. The basically the same.
10-12-2004, 11:19 AM
#41
"Get a 24 pin DME with a 2732 EPROM (082) and compare it to a 28 pin DME with a
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. They're basically the same."
As I said, all 082 DMEs are basically the same. Any time and effort spent "looking"
further is a "waste".
Just go spend some DE time and not worry about chips. The time and results will
accomplish more.
2764 EPROM and compare the performance. They're basically the same."
As I said, all 082 DMEs are basically the same. Any time and effort spent "looking"
further is a "waste".
Just go spend some DE time and not worry about chips. The time and results will
accomplish more.
10-12-2004, 12:25 PM
#42
Originally Posted by Lorenfb
As I said, all 082 DMEs are basically the same. Any time and effort spent "looking" further is a "waste".
And you couldn't be more wrong.
PLEASE, drive a Carrera with and without a Steve Wong chip and an exhaust change before you dispense any more misinformation.
10-13-2004, 01:03 AM
#43
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Land of Milfs and honey (SoCal)
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by afinepoint
Again lots of good advice. I am listening.
Heres something I thought of in the early AM while preparing for work.
My main truck is a 01 F-350 with a 7.3L diesel. The engine puts out slightly more HP than a 911 but of course considerably more torque. Here is my question.
Puttting a performance chip on the 7.3 can boost horsepower 100+ without any other modifications. The chipped 3.2L (and apparently other) 911 engine(s) with a racing pedigrees gets a small fraction of that. Why?
$500 (chip alone) for the Ford = +100HP.
$$$$ (chip + mods) for the 911 = maybe +70. ???????
I know we are talking different worlds but is the diesel engine's potential that untapped? Is the 3.2L already working nears it's limitation? Has Porsche extracted all it can?
It is knowledge as well as a route to greater performance that I am seeking .
What is happening internally that makes such a large difference in these two machines?
Reg
Heres something I thought of in the early AM while preparing for work.
My main truck is a 01 F-350 with a 7.3L diesel. The engine puts out slightly more HP than a 911 but of course considerably more torque. Here is my question.
Puttting a performance chip on the 7.3 can boost horsepower 100+ without any other modifications. The chipped 3.2L (and apparently other) 911 engine(s) with a racing pedigrees gets a small fraction of that. Why?
$500 (chip alone) for the Ford = +100HP.
$$$$ (chip + mods) for the 911 = maybe +70. ???????
I know we are talking different worlds but is the diesel engine's potential that untapped? Is the 3.2L already working nears it's limitation? Has Porsche extracted all it can?
It is knowledge as well as a route to greater performance that I am seeking .
What is happening internally that makes such a large difference in these two machines?
Reg
however remember, that 7.3L diesel is more than TWICE the displacement in size but the Carrera has a little more than TWICE the HP per liter. This means the Carrera is far more efficent in producing its power.
Now lets do some fun theorizing, If you take a built carrera, at say 3.2L that has 275hp at the crank, lets say you built the motor for forced induction (like your diesel) and added a turbo and power rose from 275 to to lets say 450hp (theorhetical but also very possible) then you have a 3.2 liter that is pushing 140.6 hp per liter or 75 hp per cylinder.
your diesel at 140.6 hp per liter would be at 1026.3 HP! but in all likelyhood your diesel would be around the same 450 hp modded or around 61 HP per liter. So you can see where the precision motor really packs more of a punch for its size than thors crude hammer.
gains in N.A. cars are about the same now as they were 15 years ago. A new S4 gets 17hp at the flywheel with a chip, where an Audi 1.8 Turbo A4 can get 35hp from a $500 chip due to the tuners ability to remap timing, fuel AND boost can be increased slightly. even monkeying around with the hydraulic camshaft adjusting can puond a power curve flat.
And all you so called "car guys" who think chips are B.S. really need to open your eyes. Dyno tests prove it. not only in Peak HP which is less important, but at the same time it raises AND flattens your power curve making the car much more driveable with better low end response AND passing gear, which is more important.
A stock chip is mapped to run with the worst fuel availible, which means the manufacturer has to take into account midwest corn fuel crap or the cheap owner that uses 87 mule **** in a Turbo charged Audi in 110 degree heat with his foot to the floor, all this mapping is made for the engine to run at its best under ALL conditions and still pass smog.
However if you custom tailor a chip, with the significant factor of better gas, then you can adjust timing to be more aggresive and thus giving more power which in essence is what chip tuning is all about.
BTW, Loren, what do you do for a living?
10-13-2004, 08:05 AM
#44
Excellent treatise, fixnprsh! Thanks for taking the time to post.
Your points about the mapping are right on, and I believe well understood by everyone except Loren. Do a search on Lorenfb both here and at the Pelican site and you'll see this has been going on for years. He believes that all chips are crap and that there is no improvement to be made over the OEM chip. I suspect that he knows better but just enjoys argueing.
His typical MO is to post a ridiculous comment, demand proof of a power increase, find reasons to not accept the proof, claim we're going to blow our engines up, reduce his arguement to personal attack, claim it's hopeless and we're all too stupid to get it, then crawl back into his hole, only to emerge the next time and start a new fight. Kind of like the 17-year locust, only every few months.
Here's the funny part; you ask what Loren does for a living? He rebuilds DME units! No $#!+, look it up. Obviously not a dumb guy, just has a thing for the OEM chip. And being obstinate.
Your points about the mapping are right on, and I believe well understood by everyone except Loren. Do a search on Lorenfb both here and at the Pelican site and you'll see this has been going on for years. He believes that all chips are crap and that there is no improvement to be made over the OEM chip. I suspect that he knows better but just enjoys argueing.
His typical MO is to post a ridiculous comment, demand proof of a power increase, find reasons to not accept the proof, claim we're going to blow our engines up, reduce his arguement to personal attack, claim it's hopeless and we're all too stupid to get it, then crawl back into his hole, only to emerge the next time and start a new fight. Kind of like the 17-year locust, only every few months.
Here's the funny part; you ask what Loren does for a living? He rebuilds DME units! No $#!+, look it up. Obviously not a dumb guy, just has a thing for the OEM chip. And being obstinate.
10-13-2004, 02:35 PM
#45
I don't know if that a sideline or his main "job." He also rebuilds the OEM CD boxes. Loren has a good electronic technical background and is a valuable information source. He is argumentative tho.
I don't know why he doesn't agree with Steve Wiener on the possibilities of advantages from custom chips. His position used to be the correct one - up until perhaps a few years ago. But dyno data since then support the improvements that can be had with a better chip and apparently even without risk to the engine from low octane gas. It looks to me like the chip makers have improved and Loren has not caught up with the new info. I would definitely follow Steve W's advice. However, don't expect miracles. Significant hp will cost money.
I don't know why he doesn't agree with Steve Wiener on the possibilities of advantages from custom chips. His position used to be the correct one - up until perhaps a few years ago. But dyno data since then support the improvements that can be had with a better chip and apparently even without risk to the engine from low octane gas. It looks to me like the chip makers have improved and Loren has not caught up with the new info. I would definitely follow Steve W's advice. However, don't expect miracles. Significant hp will cost money.