[flash]

lol - i wish i had the time to "reinvent the wheel" like that

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

[netopyer]

the feeling when you reinvented wheel works like a charm or better than expected, is priceless and worth that time, at least for me ..

it was the same for me when i made my first 200, then 250, and finally 300 crank HP 1900 ccm diesel....

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

[quick968]

Flash, put me down for one of your chips when you get them dug out of the basement and ready to go.



Cheers

Mikey

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

[Bulti]

Yep, ditto.

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

[Eric_Oz_S2]

Back to exhausts. For a sc car, pushing out 50% more gas, one would think that a larger exhaust would help significantly. I discussed this with Michael Mount and his opinion is there is a lot to be gained with larger headers and reducing exhaust restrictions.

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

[flash]

not nearly as much as you would think. i actually found the limits to that, and had to reduce it. it's sort of relative to the amount of boost. it's also related to the kind of supercharger (roots, whipple, or centrifugal) a 30% increase in intake flow would theoretically require a 30% increase in exhaust flow, less factoring in the efficiency ratio. so, our car would want about a 20% increase in flow. that is not a lot when it comes to exhaust size. 3" was WAY too big. headers screwed everything up. even an open straight through muffler on 2.5" cost me a bunch. the numbers crunch down to a 2.75" tube. good luck finding it though. better to use a 2.5" for a street car, so as not to lose the torque. a race car (not to be confused with a DE car) might be able to use 3", assuming you tuned it for that, and had the valve train to handle the high revs that would be required to take advantage of the increase in flow (the stock valve train can't handle high revs under boost)



back to chips, and the subject of the thread, i'll be poking around later today, making a list, and posting it.

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

[MCL968]

Hi Flash, I have a question about chips.



I recall reading somewhere that the early 92's took a different chip. Mine is a very early 92 cab, I believe the 37th unit made. Does it take a 944S2 chip rather than a 968 chip? Please let me know if you find something that will work in my car when you are done with your cleaning.



Thanks!

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

[Bulti]

MCL, I've read something about that too, and I too worry about the 'normal' chips not working in our cars. Maybe there is a way to find out which chassisnumbers (or enginenumbers) should receive a different kind of chip?



My car was first registered in March 1992.

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

[netopyer]

[quote name='Bulti' timestamp='1392754999' post='155236']

MCL, I've read something about that too, and I too worry about the 'normal' chips not working in our cars. Maybe there is a way to find out which chassisnumbers (or enginenumbers) should receive a different kind of chip?



My car was first registered in March 1992.

[/quote]

guys, remove the ECU and take a photo of it / write down the numbers from ecu "0261 .... " and from the chip and you will know for 100 percent.

if you have 0261200474 on the ecu sticker, you have older Motronic m2.7 ecu not newer M2.10 type (0261203073)

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

[flash]

those are ROW ECU numbers.



i posted the various chip and ecu numbers for north american cars, though i'm not sure where i posted them at the moment. i have to dig for it every time i want it.

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

[netopyer]

are you sure that it does not only differ in chip number? (just asking)

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

[flash]

yup. 3 different ecus for US. at least 2 others for ROW. at least 2 different chips for ROW, and 3 for US. it took me a while to accumulate all of the numbers (almost 9 years) but i think i now have them all.

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

[bombfactory]

I purchased my car with the Racer-X chip already installed. I can report that it feels quite good paired with the airbox mod. Redline is raised to 7500 rpm (or was it 7800?). In any case, I never push it that far, generally shifting under <acronym title='wide open throttle'>WOT</acronym> around 73-7400 just for safety's sake. Wish we had higher octane gas here in socal.

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

[flash]

7800 on that one. the only issue with that is the timing is very advanced, and if it's really hot out, and you don't have perfect gas, or weak injectors, or something like that, you could run into a detonation situation. the good news is that the ECU has a pull-back map in it that will retard the timing a few degrees to keep things safe.



i've often thought about putting out a chip of my own, now that i have seen the maps of all of the other chips, and having spent so much time with this engine, that i might be able to put together the best of all worlds. but then, i look at the returns on that, and forget about the idea. a chip can only give you so much, and with the supercharger kit giving a whole lot more than that, it seems rather silly.

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

[Eric_Oz_S2]

[quote name='flash' timestamp='1392736668' post='155219']

not nearly as much as you would think. i actually found the limits to that, and had to reduce it. it's sort of relative to the amount of boost. it's also related to the kind of supercharger (roots, whipple, or centrifugal) a 30% increase in intake flow would theoretically require a 30% increase in exhaust flow, less factoring in the efficiency ratio. so, our car would want about a 20% increase in flow. that is not a lot when it comes to exhaust size. 3" was WAY too big. headers screwed everything up. even an open straight through muffler on 2.5" cost me a bunch. the numbers crunch down to a 2.75" tube. good luck finding it though. better to use a 2.5" for a street car, so as not to lose the torque. a race car (not to be confused with a DE car) might be able to use 3", assuming you tuned it for that, and had the valve train to handle the high revs that would be required to take advantage of the increase in flow (the stock valve train can't handle high revs under boost)



[/quote]



How can headers screw everything up? You install them and then you retune. Agree that 3" is too big - 2.5" is preferred.

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

[flash]

happy to discuss this, and i have done so recently in another thread, but let's stay on topic. this one is not about exhaust.

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

[Bulti]

I would be happy to trade in the extra rpm's Bomb's talking about for a extra torque, since my car doesn't get any tracktime and the commonrail diesels have ridicilous torque sometimes. Even the small ones. Still want to be ahead of the Ford Fiesta's in 2020. ;-)



I don't know if there's a chip out there that does that?

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

[flash]

the problem with developing a new chip is that the differences will be small, and since most people already have a chip of one type or another, the remaining market is very small. the testing i would have to do, so as to justify somebody buying yet another chip, would cost more than the margin. nothing wrong with any of them really, and the numbers vary a little from chip to chip, but there is no magic bullet. you'll get a lot more bang from lightening the car than you will by changing chips from one performance chip to another.



i just went down to check what i had, and to look at some of the maps again. i may get bored and fiddle with making a new chip. i learned a lot when i was doing the tip chip, and i could apply some of that to a new chip, and it would do better than the others out there. not sure how much though. i'd have to find a car that would be willing to go on the dyno first.

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

[netopyer]

i prepared some file based on my exact stock chip already and i ordered the AFR gauge with sensor, and also my friend is preparing some smart knock detection device and if the weather will be fine, i will start to measure stock AFR, measure it on the dyno with stock software and then finally tune it on road very soon



i definitly agree with flash , that there will be minor difference between any properly tuned file from multiple tuners



there are 2 timing maps which differs from the most found, one is imho for bad gas - it reduces timing by 3,75 degs, and some other one which seems only "moved to right " - not sure what is the purpose of that



also i am looking forward to the results from that high load dyno to see how much performance persisted in engine after that years

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

[flash]

there are something like 20 timing maps altogether (of the something like 142 maps). some are 2D. some are 3D. their locations vary, depending on which chip and ECU you have.

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