Lorenfb

"that is so elementary and no where near as advanced as today's solution"

What solution? That's what the thread is all about, i.e. the Mickey Mouse chips that don't
work reliably.

NEED TO DO MORE COPYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve W

You sound like a jilted ex. I guess when you have nothing further to constructive to contribute, you resort to personal attacks.

Have fun.

Mark in Baltimore

Sounds like I hit a nerve with you. My bad.

All too easy...

nile13

Loren, I can tell you what shift **** I have on my Miata if that makes you sleep better. It's a Voodoo round ****. And I probably get waves as I go by corner workers. Not sure, I try to look at the course as I drive. And so does Mark, I'm sure.

Oh, the ECU in that car is also slightly massaged. To fit my needs. If that's OK.

CalvinC4S

camlob

I am on Steve's side for the obvious reason that I have owned tuned cars in the past....We need him here. Keep up the good work Steve.

trophy

I cannot stand that Loren pops his ugly head in to posts just to Disagree with Steve and Steve.

in a 'Mr T' voice... I pitty the fool!

Its funny that you ask for proof every time one of these post's comes up however you have never once provided any proof of your own. You subscribe to your own hyperbole!

Loren please go away, your continual bickering is a waste of band width, we just want to hear from people that have something constructive to say. Climb back into you hole and leave the good folks of rennlist alone!

skywachr

The most unfortunate part of threads like this is that some of the TRULY most knowledgeable members of this forum who easily qualify as certified Porsche experts based on their professional experience (not me by any stretch) do not even dare to participate because they do not want to be shouted down by the chorus of those who continuously parrot the words of those who know less and may additionally have a monetary stake in the outcome of the discussion. Too bad. We all lose in the process.

CalvinC4S

The guy speaks the truth IMO. I don't think he is here to start an argument but to share his experience and opinion.

It is a fact that chip tuners dial in advance to get that small HP gain. It is also a fact that the timing is set optimally by the factory to run on pump gas. You can lower that margin but why? Your knock control will open it up again and clog up your event history.


Chips make sense on some cars but not the N/A 993 running pump gas.

Mark in Baltimore

Engine tray off.

trophy

I agree there is some truth is what he says, however the way he goes about it is all wrong. And he really does troll for posts that the Steve's are posting in. He doesn't seem to post when people are asking specific questions about ECU's, ECU wiring etc (or not that often as he did in the OBD2 thread). He has a vast about of knowledge, his delivery style needs a little work...

Any type of tuning will look at the ignition curve, doesn't matter if you are tuning a distributor, an OE ecu with a chip or a full aftermarket system, this is how you find power. Granted when talking about pump gas you are absolutely right, however there are different grades of pump gas.

Manufacturers are conservative when it comes to tuning, they have to provide reliable, warrant-able (if thats a word?) engines to the public that are able to cope with many variables in operation (fuel, temp, altitude etc). Tuning is used to narrow the parameters and provide an increase in performance. Of course there is a trade off and the risk is well known, and well documented. However when I chipped my car I knew the risk, I accepted the risk and I chose to purchase fuel at specific places to ensure everything worked appropriately.

Overall I just wish that the approach used by Loren was more appropriate, he would get more people listening to him and we could have a solid debate on fact and opinion rather than have it degrade into a slinging match.....

ENGINE TRAY ON!!

Aircooled Dave

Interesting thread. I’ve always replaced the FW on my cars with a ‘lightweight’ version so this has been an interesting read. I do find it strange that Porsche DME can’t compensate for the quicker rpm drop with a LFW. I have never experienced this on any other marquee. I have experienced additional noise (gear rattle) when things like A/C or lights are on, but never had a stalling issue due to DME not ‘keeping up’ with the falling rpms. Anyone have an exact answer to why this problem plagues Porsche and not other mfg of the same vintage?

I agree with ‘trophy’. Loren does add some value here and there is some validity in his statements, but his style does leave a bit to be desired. This is not meant to be argumentative, but it is comes off as overly harsh and confrontational. I’m not going to speculate on the reasons, but that is how it looks to someone reading this with no vested interest either which way. Nevertheless, there is good knowledge in there.

I do agree that some chip tuners are better than others. You can see this in any enthusiast marquee from BMW to Audi to Porsche. To be honest, this is true of anything in life from choosing a good gardener to your wife picking out a pool boy. And most people, especially those of us who were around when you could add hp to your car with the twist of a screwdriver, know that any tuning deals with both fuel and ignition. This is fundamental. If you added bigger cams with more overlap you had to advance your initial timing and likely needed a distributor re-curve to keep your MAX timing within reasonable limits along with jetting/choke changes, idle adjustments, etc….Just because tuning is done via DME re-flash (or outright replacement with MOTEC or the likes) doesn’t change this. The fundamentals are still the same. What separates good from bad chips is how good the tuner is. Just like the old days.

One could certainly state that Porsche fully optimized the engine tuning from the factory. I believe this is to be true for what the product they had to deliver. However, in real application they need to make sure the car works in all markets/conditions with margin. They simply can’t accommodate different tunes for slight variations in octane, temperature, engine VE variations, etc…This is where tuning can give you a little edge. It seems that the debate here is whether or not this can be done safely. By nature that is somewhat subjective as it depends on what someone considers ‘safe’.

I personally have not used a chip in any 993, but I have used them successfully in many cars in the past ranging from Subaru’s to BMWs and a few VWs in between. I’ve had Conforti software in my BMW along with a LFW for 8+ years now and she’s still running like a champ.

trophy

I am not sure why some '95's stall and some don't, However I agree that it is odd that you can put LWF's in many cars without a problem.

My Thoughts (in no particular order), as to why some have problems and some don't.
1: Vacuum leaks in system
2: Faulty or Dirty ISV
3: Low initial idle due to (Coils, distributor's, leads, spark plugs) or any number of normal tuning issues.
4: Other modifications like RS Pulley

My gut is more focused on the ISV and ECU's reaction time to the faster drop in rev's, I just don't think think the ECU and ISV have the resolution or speed to react quickly. Ensuring that the ISV is squeeky clean can surly help it's 'reaction time' but I think the process used by chip tuners and what I will be doing for my own aftermarket ecu are appropriate.

CalvinC4S

This is dead on, however with the adaptive knock control system in the 993 that margin is very very narrow.

inkatouring

All true, but the point of this thread was not to advocate for chips for performance gains. In a 95, the stalling associated with a LWF makes a chip change almost mandatory. If you install a chip in a 95, there is a reduction in stalling due to the LWF -- and that is indisputable. And all chips are not equal -- that, too, is indisputable.