[flash]

yes, yes and yes



and has the added bonus of the trade-in value if you upgrade with other options later

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

Pete does strongly reccomend the Air Box mod and K & N Filter with his stage 1 chip.



Regards,



jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[w.a.]

[quote name='94SilverCab' date='Jun 21 2006, 07:40 PM']Pete does strongly reccomend the Air Box mod and K & N Filter with his stage 1 chip.



Regards,



jay

[right][post="23120"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



This combo also work with a B&B cat back in the mix?

Best,

WA

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Mark]

[quote name='w.a.' date='Jun 21 2006, 08:28 PM']This combo also work with a B&B cat back in the mix?

Best,

WA

[right][post="23122"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



Yes. The airbox mod and K&N filter work best with just about anything from stock to catback to header back.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[w.a.]

[quote name='Mark' date='Jun 22 2006, 07:27 AM']Yes. The airbox mod and K&N filter work best with just about anything from stock to catback to header back.

[right][post="23138"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]





Excellent! I have parts that are, or soon to be, in transit!

Best,

WA

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Darth Coupe]

Digging up an old thread I know, but in my research on things and the engine work ahead of me, I am trying to cover all of my bases. On the G-Tech tests performed, why are the numbers coming out higher? The bone stock measurement of 236 HP is great on a G-Tech, as a G-Tech always measures wheel horsepower per the weight entered. Not trying to be confrontational, just trying understand how the G-Tech tests were conducted.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

not sure what you mean - the g-tech tests i did were not higher - they actually pretty much paralleled all of the dyno tests each step of the way - i just followed the instructions - i was very impressed with how accurate and consistent it really was - best 25 bucks i've ever spent - gotta love ebay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Darth Coupe]

I am referring to the numbers that are shown in your tests. I own the same G-Tech that you have and those instructions always state that they are wheel HP, not engine HP. Just trying to understand why a stock reading would be 236 HP at the wheels and if that means that all of the other HP readings are at the wheels or if adjustments were made to make them engine HP readings by adjusting the weight input.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

not sure what the deal is there - i have been using the published numbers for weight, and then accounting for the changes i have made, to enter the weight number - perhaps the published numbers are off, as jim child says, and real weights are actually lower, which would make the g-tech readings higher



i only know that the increases of power, where i did have both g-tech and dyno runs, were extremely similar mod by mod, on both the dyno and the g-tech, indicating that the unit is accurate



i suppose the right thing to do is weigh the car, so as to have an accurate input number, and then run it again - the point of the runs for me though, was not to find a number, but show the increases - that part works regardless of the weight number - i knew what it said before - i knew what the inputs were - i repeated everything and did it all the same eaaach time, and got the increase numbers



this is the thing i have been harping on forever with people who continually try to compare dyno charts and such - it's not about the final numbers, but rather the measured gains - the stuff works, makes very real gains, and works better than the competition



good enough for me to feel good about the purchase



maybe someday i'll get the time to actually do some more runs - won't be any time soon though - just too darned busy



lol - of course, the hidden bonus may turn out to be that i actually have even more power than i thought - if i'm already getting these kinds of readings, and it's only a weight correction, i may well find out that the results are even higher - who knows?



the flywheel may well be affecting the numbers too though - the important thing is the mod by mod increase

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Darth Coupe]

Thats all I was after. I was not after final numbers here, I only use a G-Tech for gains as well. Though having the wheel HP that high on stock makes me think the weight numbers are off. Though with the flywheel that will effect numbers and thus it must not have been a "completely" stock run. I agree, there are great increases to be had, no question there. When I want actual numbers, I go to the dyno sheets and put my engineering analyst hat on.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[RS Barn]

My chip and airbox mod work great with stock exhaust or my cat back system. I have tested and driven several cars with B&B and several other mods. The B&B loses both HP and especially torque. The stock system is way better. I"m working on a fix for those who have B&B.

Pete

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[333pg333]

Hi Bob,

Just re-reading this post and noticed you were saying something about a lighter, better, cheaper alternative re brakes. Anything happen there?

Patrick

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='RS Barn' date='Sep 26 2006, 06:13 PM']The B&B loses both HP and especially torque.

I"m working on a fix for those who have B&B.

Pete

[right][post="26441"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



Pete,



Is this theoretical, or have you actually done before and after tests on the BB 2.5" catback system ( with all else being equal- stock or modded car ) and were these results charted ? Can you either post any dyno graphs, or PM me the findings ?



If that's truly the case count me as the first in line for your fix to the BB thing.



It's just that so far, other than theories ( as scientifically sound as such may be..) I have not seen a single independent test which disproves BB's assertion of significant hp and torque gains at every level of the rpm band. They did say torque loss would only be the case with the 3" catback system, definitely not the 2.5 version.



I can't tell one way or another - my butt-o-meter is simply not calibrated enough to detect either a small gain or a small loss, so I have given BB the benefit of the doubt, but if the results are indisputable, even if I can't feel the difference, I'll gladly spend whatever it takes to remedy any drop in power, no matter how small.. short of changing the BB - LOVE the quality, the fit and especially the sound.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

I'm still running stock at the moment. The G-Tech is just what I was looking for. I'll be doing the airbox mod as soon as I get my car back from IMA and that will be closely followed by chiping the car. I would like to record the gains at each upgrade on my own and the G-tech sounds like the perfect solution.



Flash- you mentioned $25 on Ebay. Man have things changed.



http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/GTECH-Pro-c...031987869QQrdZ1



Or is there a simplified version that I I'm missing?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

yeah - there is a smaller unit - brand new from the manufacturer it was only 140 - online they were being blown out for 25 bucks - pretty simple unit, but very effective - may not be available anymore - it was the g-tech pro (no suffixes in the model name)



that one you show is a better unit, and has a lot more features though

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Pete, I found the BB email - still looking for the two charts ( the 968 and 944 S2 ), but for whatever it's worth, here's their assertion :



From: Mike Ryan

To: sandru@comcast.net

Cc: Bill Boat

Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 8:08 AM

Subject: RE: BB catback for Porsche 968





Dan we have a dyno chart that was done many years ago-before we owned our own dyno. I can fax it to you if you will provide a fax number. The test was done on a 1995 968 using a Clayton dyno running the car at full-throttle in third gear, It shows HP increases of 2 @3500, 4@ 4000, 5@ 4500, 11@ 5000, 12@5500 and 10@6000.





There are no torque numbers on this particular chart. For what it’s worth we also have a 944S chart that shows positive torque gains throughout the entire RPM range. Send me a fax number and I’ll provide you with all that we have. Thanks Mike Ryan, Billy Boat Performance Exhaust

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

send that one to me for sure, but it had better have a before and after run on the same car with the same measured conditions - it's pretty easy to tweak numbers on a dyno if you know what you are doing, and the only way to insure a real test is to have the same measured conditions



the absence of torque numbers is troubling though

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i found the fax - it shows some VERY odd numbers - it shows the stock 968 having a peak of 160hp at 6k and the b&b having 170, and the max difference of 12 being where the stock 968 is at 148 at 5.5k and the b&b at 160 - the rest of the numbers follow suit



there is no chart, no graph, no mention of any of the conditions, nothing, but just a list of numbers, at the above mentioned intervals



this is HIGHLY suspect

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

that's one of the 944 chart ( hp only ) you're looking at.. they also had a 944S2 chart with both hp and torque ( the only one that matters actually ) -the 944S2 chart to which he refers is actually the one with the 968 test results and vice versa - they misprinted the model at the top of the respective pages they faxed.

I contacted them to send me another copy but they have not gotten back to me.. not sure they even sell 968 stuff anymore, so they probably could not care less about this topic..

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

well, that is at the very least confusing, and not being a chart, pretty much useless anyway - i think there are about to be some new tests done shortly that will finally put this to rest anyway

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.