Christer

Unless you have a before and after, this is all utterly meaningless (as other have said).

50HP should be enough to see a clear difference (even with 60lb disadvantage), but maybe yours doesn't make the power or maybe Springers makes a lot more than normal for some reason?

Without the before and after this is clearly a waste of time, and I would also advise against spending any money until this product has been tested and verified.

jeff522

With regard to the weight, for every 11.5 to 12 lbs a car drops it "gains" about 1 hp. So its a little over 5 hp difference based on weight.

I found the compression that was done interesting. If one car had a true hp advantage it should have shown up you would think. There are a lot of independent variables involved. Airo mods, tire size and width, drive line weight, state of tune, driver reaction time, and rpm at the start of the run just to name a few. Once the weather clears- we have 3/4 of an inch of ice right now, and some other issues get resolved on my car I will get some 1/4 mile trap speeds. I did show an improvement in speed by going to the Autothority MAF over the stock set-up.

For me just having the stalling issue with the LWFW resolved is more than enough reason to use the Vitesse MAF. The closest non dirt non drag track is at least 3 plus hours away. So when I do a mod its really just for the fun of it. That's why I have this car, its fun to drive. Anything that my brain tells me makes it more fun I will most likely do. I guess I never really grew up when it comes to cars. My fun-o-meter reading is pretty high on my 964 right now, but I am always looking to get it a little higher.

fast951

It's amazing how easily a thread can take a dive! I guess some comments are best ignored, there is no need to go down there.

I agree with everyone, a before and after would show the difference. If the customer, Derek, wishes to do so, it is up to him! His car, his $. I never claimed 1, 2,30 or 50hp gain. Without a before and after, it will be pure speculation and an insult to your intelligence.

The dyno session was intended to tune the car not to create marketing photos.
The goal was to tune Derek's car to be safe on the race track running the same fuel when tuned (93oct). The dyno was used as a tuning tool, not a marketing tool!

The dyno facility was picked by Derek, the customer. I have never been to it before or since the dyno session. What you see in the dyno chart is what we got. Dynoing the car on a different dyno will show a different dyno curve (or numbers). No 2 dynos read the same.

When tuning a car, there are many variables to consider. My main concern is to tune the car so it can perform lap after lap. A "sexy" dyno chart tells me nothing. A car tuned for a dyno chart (where you risk it to get the most out of it just to display a nice chart) will not perform well lap after lap. If your goal is to extract the last 1% out of your street engine by eliminating the safety margins just to show a good dyno run, I am not the person to tune the car for you.
Yes, I can add more ignition timing and I can lean the mixture to show you a nice "sexy" chart. But it is not the way I do things, I want the lap after lap performance. There is no free lunch!

The lower the octane you use, the wider the safety margins should be (less performance). There is no magic here. Depending on where you are located, some areas have terrible fuel, even at the same octane as in other areas. Tuning (or detuning) will be done accordingly. Not having access to every fuel sold around the world, we do work with selected individuals to figure out what works best. Of course we start with the most detuned setup and work our way up.

I am yet to see two identical engines perform the same. A high powered car does not mean it will win over a less powered car. Way too many variables are involved: weight, gearing, tire diameter.

A few asked via emails if you can run larger injectors with the Motronic. The answer is yes!

As always, our goal is to provide you with the best products we can. We know how to make engines perform. If there is power to be made, we will make it; as long as we do not sacrifice safety! Our main goal is to provide a good product, and not to dump a product on the market just to make a sale. If our goal was simply to make a sale, I would have collected funds from every person who requested a kit. Instead I have a waiting list to when the products are ready to ship.

Excuse the long post.

mjshira

I am strongly considering this kit for my car, here is why. I have a unique engine with cams and head work and the stock chip and associated logic are not allowing me to have the same smooth operation as they would on an otherwise stock engine. In order to optimize AFR across the range of RPM, I need a system that can allow me to adjust variables. Other than going all the way to Motec, this is the only system I know of.

I do not expect 50HP from this. But I do expect that if I take this step my car will run in a more smooth manner and will perform on a consistent basis regardless of RPM range.

A lot of people have a set view on chips. I have run chips in cars and the value of them normally comes down to the company or person behind them. Steve Wong for example makes a good product for an engine with external modifications (964-993).

As others have said, we should be able to disagree without insults. Insults and bashing from behind a keyboard are not a very, forgive the term, manly way to act. Most of the people who do that kind of stuff wouldn't do so to someones face...

deoxford

Guys,
Over the Holidays I will have some time to take it to the Dyno with the stock chip and AFM.
I will post the results

Also ,
Does any of the other new Vitesse kits have anything to report yet?

mjshira

I am in the on deck circle ;-)

Christer

Please don't take this the wrong way....I understand what you are saying about safety. I have myself had a car on Motec with no knock control go ballistic when I hit a patch of bad fuel and didn't know it.....

HOWEVER, what is the point of fitting a MAF and chip if you don't get anything out of it? I mean, maybe your MAF and Chip kit is *safer* than a stock DME setup, but I doubt that anyone would pay to get their car running *safer* than a stock set up......or what??????

fast951

Christer, I think you misunderstood my statement. Of course people want performance gain. The MAF kit will make power, however it is not pushed to get 105% out of the engine. I extract power, yet still leave a safety margin.

Christer

Hi John

I hope therefore that a future real-life test shows that the work has indeed produced an increase, because as I understand it that does not appear to be the case now.....right...?

fast951

Why would you say there is no increase? There is no before and after dyno chart, correct. This will be available as soon as customers dyno their cars.

If you are basing your opinion on the drag race, the drag race tells us nothing. There are way too many variables and unknowns involved to draw any conclusions. In a race such as the one above, tire size, weight (car, driver, fluids), engine setup, way too many unknowns to draw any conclusions. Don't you agree?

Christer

Yes, there are a lot of unknown variables - and that is why I *always* suggest a dyno before and after - at least its a guide if its done on the same one......

Let us know how you get on!

deoxford

Guys,
Once again I posted this info for a mod I am enjoying . NOT to prove or argue some point.
The reason that I said it was a 50 hp increase is because I thought that the stock 964 3.6 has 250hp

After the dyno, my car now shows 303 hp , so it is ~ 53hp

Ritter v4.0

So to be clear, the increase is from the aggregate mods- not solely the MAF.
Guess you could bolt the cat and primary back on and deduce the gain from the MAF- but I say, if you enjoy the car irrespective of the numbers, then ENJOY!

And see you at RA ( I snuck in apparently).

deoxford

David,
Keep me posted on Barber

springer3

I agree MAF is the way to go. Porsche and most other manufacturers have decided the same. However, if your factory set-up is still working as designed, there is no upgrade in power available from this MAF conversion. If the factory system wears out or fails, I am glad to know there is an after-market alternative that is almost as good or possibly just as good as what the factory provided.

To increase the performance of my 964, I will be looking at weight reduction. Every 13 lb (5.9 kg) weight reduction is the same benefit as adding one HP to average power across the RPM range. Fuel economy, braking, and handling are also improved by lowering mass. My 964 is 1000 lb heavier than my now-sold 1970 911 T. Granted there are safety, comfort, and performance improvements, but surely there is some pain-free fat that can be trimmed (from the car!)

Our evaluation was not a drag race. By design, there was no driver skill involved. Derek would have won a contest of skill. We designed a test of engine power production over the range of 2000 RPM to redline. The area under the dyno curve is what we evaluated. but we eliminated the variation in weather conditions by driving side-by-side. It seemed uncany at the time, but both cars stayed within half a car length during six or seven WOT runs. Any difference was early on, and therefore due to the fact that we could not get the pedal down at the identical time.

I went into this hoping to justify a purchase to get more power from an easy modification. What we discovered is that the MAF produces no measurable power increase.

The VAF (barn door) technology is obsolete, but like many obsolete technologies, it works just fine. The devil is in the details, and the factory evidently got every KW/HP available consistent with reliability. If John's MAF is that good, he deserves a lot of credit for a job well done.