mark kibort

Didnt Dr Bob just get though saying spark map was not even altered in the 91 version for WOT, fuel alone has a hard time making 10 rear hp alone, unless you are way off to begin with.

So, i can ask this question because I havent seen anything that shows the chips do anything at all.

mk

Jean-Louis

When I installed the chip on my GT 6 years ago, felt also stronger but never put it on the dyno.

PorKen

Remove the spring tabs on the ECU connectors. It makes it much faster to R&R the brains.

PorKen

I hate admit it, but I'm with Mark on this one, at least for these '85-'86 S3 APP/clone chips. (I regret busting into this thread...one should not post when they are very tired. )


The first pic below shows the fueling change versus stock. The second, dyno runs from a few years ago with my first '86.5 auto w/X-pipe (STD corr., -10 for SAE), stock versus eBay. The AFRs with the big dip at the beginning are the clone chips, otherwise the AFRs are the same as stock. The lower number runs are likely from EZF air temp retard, -3° = ~10hp/tq. The ignition advance WOT maps are identical, so there's no difference in HP.


With EZF and EZK, the WOT maps are not added to the cruise map, like the WOT map is with the LH base map. They are 2D maps, by rpm only, not load. Disconnecting the EZF WOT input makes for more HP, and a flatter torque curve.


The LH2.2 fuel map is 10-bit, so there are two maps, one low order, and a smaller, high order map. All the changes have been made on the low order map, which indicates they didn't have a proper editor for the LH2.2. There is also no change in the rev limit as advertised. It's the stock 6380rpm.


These chips are 'safe' - made for use with stock cats. There is a little boost in torque at 3/4 load with more fuel, and better driveability with more advance between idle and WOT, so they feel peppier, but the idle, part throttle, and WOT maps are stock, so they will still pass emissions, and not melt the cats.


If I had paid $300-$600 for these, I'd be mad. There's very little 'tuning', and no custom programming.

mark kibort

There you have it. Any gains are imaginary or only on the street during part throttle.

Mike Frye

I'm surprised that there is no actual HP gain.
But.

HP<>Performance.

The performance chips do wake up the S3s significantly and noticeably. The max HP at WOT may not be where you see it, but it's there and very very noticeable.

For me the biggest difference was in the time it takes to get from 1500 to 4500 RPMs. The stock chips are dogs, but the timing and fuel map in that range really makes a difference in the AA or Clone chips. Maybe someone will come along with something better, but in the meantime it's WAY better than stock.

mark kibort

Or drive the cars like they are made to be driven! No WOT below 3500rpm!!

mk

928worldwide

dprantl

Boo! That's a really fun place to be when you have huge amounts of torque

Dan
'91 928GT S/C 475hp/460lb.ft

mark kibort

Trust me, its MORE fun to have more torque at the rear tires, that is found a little higher up the rpm range in a lower gear at a greater HP level!

dprantl

Nah, I don't usually like the engine to be screaming, especially when I still have enough torque to the wheels to win. I will of course have to go there if there is a good Gallardo or 997TT driver close by

Dan
'91 928GT S/C 475hp/460lb.ft

cold_beer839

I had the AA chips and an X-pipe on my '87 S4 auto and it felt stronger. But I am not a racer nor dyno jockey, it just made the car feel faster.

Picked them up here for $100, so it was not a bad deal.

PorKen

It's true, bragging rights are cool, but for driving, response is king. Getting the best average HP and torque makes for a better street car, but it's not as exciting. Now that the '85 5-spd is going to become the dyno queen, I'm going to advance the cams on my '86.5 auto for more thrust, even though that may knock a few potential HPs off the table.

It has been difficult to get my S3s to dyno consistently over 300 rwhp, but all the work I've done with ignition and fueling has turned the torque curve into a long plateau, and the engine is much more responsive. (There is a cork somewhere limiting the top end, I just haven't found it - yet.)

chaadster

Huh? Am I reading Ken's charts wrong, or are there 4 runs, two with higher Hp and Tq numbers?

They're not clearly indicated, but I was figuring the higher numbers were with the chip set.

Now, if you want to complain the gains aren't much, that's one thing, but it looks ridiculous to claim there are none.

Please enlighten me if I am missing something.

mark kibort

Nothing can be gained, because nothing changed in the max HP department.
There are always some variances between dyno runs. I think those fall into the normal variance range.
Plus, there is a mention of the dipping AFR curves, being the higher hp curves having a 3 degree retard ignition possiblity , maybe due to a cooler dyno run. But, the bottomline, there was no difference in the fuel map of the new chips under WOT.

mk