worth it you think
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/15BHP-Power-Mod- ... dZViewItem
COPYED FROM THE ADD
How does it work?
It will modify any standard ECU by telling the ECU that the incoming air in the intake system is cold and so advances the ignition by up to 2 degrees with more fuelling to compensate, therefore producing more power with more torque at lower revs. In many cases fuel economy is increased too. Power is increased by up to 15BHP and torque is increased significantly.
It will be more responsive and you WILL LIKE IT.
Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.
ebay 15HP chip mod for efi??
ebay 15HP chip mod for efi??
91 SWB Sierra. 16v 1.6efi, extractors, 6.1gears, SPOA, 32 BF muddys and 2inch bodylift
Sorry buddy but I have to call "Bullsh1t" on that one!!!MUD-PIGSIERRA wrote:No vehicle could get 15hp gain simply from a piggey back ECU or re done ECU....Okay maybe and possibly a LS1 but still that is still generally done with a exhaust system and bigger MAF pipes and what not....
I have a mate with an XR6 turbo that has dyno sheets to prove a 102RWhp GAIN from NOTHING MORE than a piggyback ECU.
The car and engine are TOTALLY stock except for the plug in....
He went from 198RWhp to just over 300rwhp.
It doesent look like a true "piggyback" ecu, just something that sits between the airflow meter and the ECU. If so then the same thing can be done with a 5 cent resistor from Tricky Dickies. Old school con with flashy connectors....
What they dont tell you is it changes the mixture to permanantly rich and contaminates the O2 sensor(s) and catalytic converters causing the ECU to eventually throw error codes after 5000-10000km.
Cat Conv = $150
O2 sensors x 2 = $120
...........not so cheap now...
What they dont tell you is it changes the mixture to permanantly rich and contaminates the O2 sensor(s) and catalytic converters causing the ECU to eventually throw error codes after 5000-10000km.
Cat Conv = $150
O2 sensors x 2 = $120
...........not so cheap now...
George Carlin, an American Comedian said; "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that".
This won't be a piggyback. Probably a CAPA Flash tuner. They allow the factory code to be manipulated without changing any hardware. So in essence its just a software upgrade tool. I have one for my XR6T ute. Similar gains to your mates.want33s wrote:Sorry buddy but I have to call "Bullsh1t" on that one!!!MUD-PIGSIERRA wrote:No vehicle could get 15hp gain simply from a piggey back ECU or re done ECU....
I have a mate with an XR6 turbo that has dyno sheets to prove a 102RWhp GAIN from NOTHING MORE than a piggyback ECU.
The car and engine are TOTALLY stock except for the plug in....
He went from 198RWhp to just over 300rwhp.
If you want real horses, then try Powerchip or Unichip, who have the recalibrated maps to suit our 91 octane (or up to 98 octane) fuels. Most vehicles are shipped to cover the "lowest common denominator" which is typically 87 octane in the US and about 89 in UK/Europe.
Not the right section, but I rechipped my Kia and noticed a big difference. Everyone in Melb would know "Riversdale Rd hill" on Warragul Rd...I went from starting at 60 kmh at the bottom of the hill and "dying" to 45-50 kmh in 5th gear (engine revs ~1900 rpm@60), to actually accelerating to 65 after the rechipping, a reasonable gain in performance at middling engine speeds considering I was wearing 31" tyres (real, measured), vs the 26" (real, measured) tyres the vehicle came with. The Powerchip site specified an extra 10 kw and 20 Nm, and I wouldn't doubt it one bit.
Not the right section, but I rechipped my Kia and noticed a big difference. Everyone in Melb would know "Riversdale Rd hill" on Warragul Rd...I went from starting at 60 kmh at the bottom of the hill and "dying" to 45-50 kmh in 5th gear (engine revs ~1900 rpm@60), to actually accelerating to 65 after the rechipping, a reasonable gain in performance at middling engine speeds considering I was wearing 31" tyres (real, measured), vs the 26" (real, measured) tyres the vehicle came with. The Powerchip site specified an extra 10 kw and 20 Nm, and I wouldn't doubt it one bit.
George Carlin, an American Comedian said; "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that".
Can you explain how on a closed loop system the O2 sensor is going to be contaminated ( perhaps you mean damaged ) by trimming the IAT sensor ?DAMKIA wrote: What they dont tell you is it changes the mixture to permanantly rich and contaminates the O2 sensor(s) and catalytic converters causing the ECU to eventually throw error codes after 5000-10000km.
This seems to go against everything I know about EFI systems.
( usual disclaimers )
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
Bwahahahahaha!want33s wrote:Sorry buddy but I have to call "Bullsh1t" on that one!!!MUD-PIGSIERRA wrote:No vehicle could get 15hp gain simply from a piggey back ECU or re done ECU....
I have a mate with an XR6 turbo that has dyno sheets to prove a 102RWhp GAIN from NOTHING MORE than a piggyback ECU.
The car and engine are TOTALLY stock except for the plug in....
He went from 198RWhp to just over 300rwhp.
Now you're definately comparing apples with oranges. An el cheapo ebay ripoff chip is hardly a flash tuner or the like of whatever I'm sure your mate has. And a turbo XR6 with greatly increased boost is vastly different to any gains from a little timing etc on a zook motor which has bugger all adjustment left in it due to decent factory compression, small carby and shitty aussie fuel to prevent pinging.
Me overly scarcastic reply before was supposed to bring light to the fact that these "15hp chip" mods are a bullshit waste of money mod built to lure in suckers, just like highclones. Do you ever wonder why they are available for shitloads of different engines but they all claim 15hp gain?
IMHO you would be better off just putting some BP ultimate in your tank and advancing the timing a touch (even your local revhead would do it for a beer).
if they do one - lots,brendan_h wrote:how much is a genuin performance chip woth for a 1.6efi?
prob better to redo whole engine mngment with new ecu. (1500 ish)
[url=http://www.outerlimits4x4.com/viewtopic.php?p=930942#930942&highlight=]Zook[/url]
U SUK Zook Built and Sold.
New rig is 97 80 DX. 2" list 33s
U SUK Zook Built and Sold.
New rig is 97 80 DX. 2" list 33s
But unless there have been other changes that radically effect the engines breathing - a cam, AND exhaust AND airbox changes (or boost) I can't see there is any point.
A piggyback ecu and careful phasing of the cam will be able to cover most modifications.
The factory has done thousands of hours of development work on the stock ECU to ensure it doesn't ping, starts when its cold, will run when its hot, has no flat spots, compensates for electrical load properly etcetcetc. Throwing this all in the bin is a brave move and the quality of the outcome is totally dependent on the skills of the installer/dyno operator. I would never go to aftermarket management unless I absolutely had to. I don't think I have deep enough pockets to pay the dyno time to get aftermarket management right.
I would certainly not go to an aftermarket ECU to try and get any more out of a stock motor - the improvements in power and torque will be defeated by almost guaranteed the loss of drivability.
Steve.
A piggyback ecu and careful phasing of the cam will be able to cover most modifications.
The factory has done thousands of hours of development work on the stock ECU to ensure it doesn't ping, starts when its cold, will run when its hot, has no flat spots, compensates for electrical load properly etcetcetc. Throwing this all in the bin is a brave move and the quality of the outcome is totally dependent on the skills of the installer/dyno operator. I would never go to aftermarket management unless I absolutely had to. I don't think I have deep enough pockets to pay the dyno time to get aftermarket management right.
I would certainly not go to an aftermarket ECU to try and get any more out of a stock motor - the improvements in power and torque will be defeated by almost guaranteed the loss of drivability.
Steve.
[quote="greg"] some say he is a man without happy dreams, or that he sees silver linings on clouds and wonders why they are not platinum... all we know, is he's called the stevie.[/quote]
Open loop "warm up" phase starts the rot, coats the o2 sensors and allows too much raw fuel into the cat conv, one o2 sensor usually dies, cat conv dies, second o2 sensor (if fitted) dies, engine goes into "limp home" (open loop) mode permanantly, throwing a code If a single O2 sensor is corrupted then some ECU programs may not throw a code ("check engine light") but simply go on what the second O2 sensor provides. They will however log it in their ecu memory as a problem (Bosch ECU's do this).MightyMouse wrote:Can you explain how on a closed loop system the O2 sensor is going to be contaminated ( perhaps you mean damaged ) by trimming the IAT sensor ?DAMKIA wrote: What they dont tell you is it changes the mixture to permanantly rich and contaminates the O2 sensor(s) and catalytic converters causing the ECU to eventually throw error codes after 5000-10000km.
This seems to go against everything I know about EFI systems.
The damage to the O2 sensors and cat conv is caused by carbon deposits from partially unburnt fuel forming on the glass surface of the sensor and the ceramic surface of the cat conv.
Obviously more prevalent in cold climates with longer warm up times. My info comes from the northern parts of USA (Washington DC area)...Forum member of another board makes his living fixing up ricers after they have had this particular trick done. Ethical enough not to sell these little boxes of nothing, but still makes a bit of money out of the dimwits
George Carlin, an American Comedian said; "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that".
Cold start ignores the inputs from the O2 sensors, and uses a seperate ignition and injection map to closed loop running. It's the equivalent of keeping it a bit spark retarded, and with the choke out in the good old days. It is guaranteed to work, just not fuel efficiently or at maximum performance. This is the same conditions as the limp home mode.MightyMouse wrote:Isn't cold start largely controlled by ECT ?
Further to the earlier posts, why it can take so long to make itself known is that the ECU is capable of learning how components "age", so in the initial stages before the first O2 sensor is actually cactus, the ECU has adapted to its more sluggish response as a part of "normal aging", and by this time the cat conv is pretty much on its way too.
George Carlin, an American Comedian said; "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that".
Perhaps its a case of being taken too far - "if a littles good then heaps must be better" which is likely to trigger sensor out of bounds detection and all the associated problems. So I am referring to trimming rather than wholesale butchery...
The IAT is virtually ignored during cold start so any IAT trim will make little or no difference to fuel mixture or Lambda sensor fouling during this phase.
At operating temp theres two options....
Closed loop - runs on the Lambda sensors so will adjust itself to a Lambda of 1 - optimal for economy and emissions - once again IAT trimming is irrelevant.
Open loop ( under power mostly ) its already designed to run rich ( 0.8 - 0.9 Lambda ) so trimming the sensor may well produce a more optimum mixture. EGT is also high so carbon deposits on the sensor arn't an issue
Automotive sensors, particularly thermistors are not very accurate - around 10% is fairly common so manufacturers have to design for worst case. Isn't it possible that sensible trimming could in fact produce a more accurate result and therefore a little more power ?
Given the conservative nature of EFI development its quite possible to gain a few %. However with out some dyno time its going to be hard to prove - its a mod that even at best isnt going to produce much change.
And its a dam expensive resistor......
The IAT is virtually ignored during cold start so any IAT trim will make little or no difference to fuel mixture or Lambda sensor fouling during this phase.
At operating temp theres two options....
Closed loop - runs on the Lambda sensors so will adjust itself to a Lambda of 1 - optimal for economy and emissions - once again IAT trimming is irrelevant.
Open loop ( under power mostly ) its already designed to run rich ( 0.8 - 0.9 Lambda ) so trimming the sensor may well produce a more optimum mixture. EGT is also high so carbon deposits on the sensor arn't an issue
Automotive sensors, particularly thermistors are not very accurate - around 10% is fairly common so manufacturers have to design for worst case. Isn't it possible that sensible trimming could in fact produce a more accurate result and therefore a little more power ?
Given the conservative nature of EFI development its quite possible to gain a few %. However with out some dyno time its going to be hard to prove - its a mod that even at best isnt going to produce much change.
And its a dam expensive resistor......
( usual disclaimers )
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
Whilst I'm not advocating this product or its BS power claims, there is some merit to its operating principle as discussed to death above.
For $20 - if you don't understand the electronics and can't experiment then the price isnt too bad.
My logic ....
Pure profit for the supplier $10 ( not an unreasonable mark up )
Assembly $5
Hardware ( case / plugs ) - $4.99
Resistor $0.01
Needless to say I would simply spend the 1 cent and use some heatshrink.
The problem is that with a small gain you would be hard pressed to spot the difference.
For $20 - if you don't understand the electronics and can't experiment then the price isnt too bad.
My logic ....
Pure profit for the supplier $10 ( not an unreasonable mark up )
Assembly $5
Hardware ( case / plugs ) - $4.99
Resistor $0.01
Needless to say I would simply spend the 1 cent and use some heatshrink.
The problem is that with a small gain you would be hard pressed to spot the difference.
( usual disclaimers )
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
Yes well maybe I should have been more specific.....want33s wrote:Grpabt1... You missed the point ...On a Suzi I think a 15hp gain would take some effort but other vehicles it is totally possible.MUD-PIGSIERRA wrote: No vehicle could get 15hp gain simply from a piggey back ECU or re done ECU....
But again XR6 turbo would have the boost wound up as well, the gain would not have been simply from a piggey back...wrench, wheel, wreck repeat..
check out the action @ http://www.darwin4x4.net
check out the action @ http://www.darwin4x4.net
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 116 guests