Go Back   986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners > Porsche Boxster & Cayman Forums > Performance and Technical Chat

Post Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-15-2007, 10:48 PM   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 874
Congrats Bav, glad you're happy with it. Butt-dyno issues aside, the fuel economy increase is impressive. The figures would be more questionable if the math wasn't so dramatic, but your 20.1 median over 7K and my own observations regarding differences in 987 fuel economy under different conditions (or lack thereof) would certainly indicate that you're seeing a marked improvement there.

Bottom-line, people believe what they want to believe. I do find it a bit amusing that a few days ago we had board members ripping their snorkles out with abandon over a reported 1.9% hp gain from removal of a tube but others are singing the skeptic serenade over the remapping of the DME by professional tuners.
__________________
http://i7.tinypic.com/24ovngk.jpghttp://i7.tinypic.com/24ow0id.jpg

06 987S- Sold
Carrara White / Black / Black/Stone Grey Two-tone

05 987 5-speed - Sold
Midnight Blue Metallic / Metropol Blue / Sand Beige

06 MB SLK350- Lease escapee
Iridium Silver Metallic / Black

We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true. - Robert Wilensky
SD987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2007, 11:18 PM   #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD987
Congrats Bav, glad you're happy with it. Butt-dyno issues aside, the fuel economy increase is impressive. The figures would be more questionable if the math wasn't so dramatic, but your 20.1 median over 7K and my own observations regarding differences in 987 fuel economy under different conditions (or lack thereof) would certainly indicate that you're seeing a marked improvement there.

Bottom-line, people believe what they want to believe. I do find it a bit amusing that a few days ago we had board members ripping their snorkles out with abandon over a reported 1.9% hp gain from removal of a tube but others are singing the skeptic serenade over the remapping of the DME by professional tuners.
Hi,

Say what you will (and you will), but the majority of people doing a remap have stated that it's effects are minimal without intake/exhaust mods as well - just peruse the archives.

Again, impressions mean nothing and I'm doubting even the MPG improvements. More Power and more Torque, combined with increased MPG, all the while beating the Snot out of it? - it's all too good to be true...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99
MNBoxster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 05:55 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC area
Posts: 681
It's day 3/12 (12 because I want to allow a day to send it back if necessary) now, Jim. I will be reporting every day to see if I can get you guys the most info I can.


I have heard all of the things you say so many times. That a tune by itself will not yield much benefit..that you need to remove air restrictions...that my type of engine can't be improved that much.


That's why I am so surprised myself!




Well, I asked them what exactly they DO. They told me, and I'm not sure if this is what all ecu tuners do, but bear w/ me... that the majority of what they do is just making sure the fuel injection and spark plug ignition take place as close together in time as possible...might improve MPG? Certainly is more fuel efficient.



Do you think the dramatic temperature change made a substantial difference? Like I said, the majority of the time I've had my car it's been in the 30s and 40s...and then the day I get the ECU back, it's 65 and I am not impressed w/ the results. The very next day, it's 40 out and I am suddenly impressed.



Let it be known that I want this to be real. I don't just want to think it's real or pretend it's real. So let's hope
__________________
Miss my Boxster
Bavarian Motorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 06:21 AM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist
Yes I completely understand and knew this before hand, which is why I was so skeptical at first. If it was a placebo effect, don't you think I would have jumped out of the gate screaming about how great it was? Read my response to Jim :P
Placebo effect is/was never an issue.
Not necessarily. Your first suspicions that the car is not faster or maybe even slower could very well be correct. However, to justify the money spent you might have tricked yourself into thinking something more is there when it's not.

P.S. it was really hard to read your response to Jim. It was super long and I couldn't really tell where his quote ended and your response began so I skipped over it last night. You might want to clean that up a bit.
__________________
'03 3.2L GuardsRed/Blk/Blk---6Spd
Options: Litronics, 18" Carrera lights, Bose sound, Painted to match roll bars.
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m...Mautocross.jpg
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 08:34 AM   #5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC area
Posts: 681
I apologize. It's the way the forum settings are. If you quote someone and leave the name blank, it uses their actual statement as the quotee's name, so you see doubles of everything quoted.


But please don't forget I have a 2 week guarantee on this product.


I still may return it...I'd lose $80 for shipping is all.
__________________
Miss my Boxster
Bavarian Motorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 12:43 PM   #6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
... Your first suspicions that the car is not faster or maybe even slower could very well be correct...
Hi,

That is so true, especially since Memory is fading, his original impressions are likely to be the most accurate...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99
MNBoxster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 02:46 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC area
Posts: 681
- Bragging rights...mean nothing to me.


- I have an eidetic memory. I have a specific timing in my head of how long it takes me to redline 1st and 2nd gear and what points of the powerband feel like what. This is why I was reporting a possible loss around 4-5k rpm range. I noticed a difference RIGHT THERE. A bad one at that, but then, it may have been due to the temperature increase. Time will tell. I need more days behind the wheel, though I've literally driven ALL DAY both days.


- If I was trying to convince myself that I spent the money well, why didn't I do it in the beginning? The answer to that is simply because I wasn't. I was very skeptical and in fact, I still am unsure. My reports yesterday were good but that doesn't mean they're conclusive and I believe I made that clear.


-

I can't drive my car today (tried to...drove home sideways basically) so I cannot report.



Anyhow...I might drive down to D.C. where it is warmer just to drive my car (family lives there)



I definitely understand the skepticism from you all, however.



Hey, does anyone know if that power v flow intake for the 987 is any good? It looks much smaller than the factory air filter.

__________________
Miss my Boxster

Last edited by Bavarian Motorist; 03-16-2007 at 02:54 PM.
Bavarian Motorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 03:34 PM   #8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 116
I'm running to your defense Bavarian. I think as long as you are happy with the results, then you got your money's worth on the mod. You can check the thread on the bashing I got when I posted my dyno results.

It doesn't matter if you have hard results or not, there will be people on this forum who will still be skeptical about mods.

Keep us updated if you ever dyno it.
__________________
2000 Silver Boxster S
GPS Nav + 6 cd changer and rear speakers
Large leather package
Factory side skirts
18" turbo look wheels
Painted roll bars and centre console
Alumimum shifter and handbrakes
Litronic lights
B&M short shifter
Evo air intake
Turbo look bumper with C4S lip
Borla muffler
2nd Cat bypass pipes
nastyboxster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2007, 12:41 PM   #9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist
It's day 3/12 (12 because I want to allow a day to send it back if necessary) now, Jim. I will be reporting every day to see if I can get you guys the most info I can.


I have heard all of the things you say so many times. That a tune by itself will not yield much benefit..that you need to remove air restrictions...that my type of engine can't be improved that much.


That's why I am so surprised myself!




Well, I asked them what exactly they DO. They told me, and I'm not sure if this is what all ecu tuners do, but bear w/ me... that the majority of what they do is just making sure the fuel injection and spark plug ignition take place as close together in time as possible...might improve MPG? Certainly is more fuel efficient.



Do you think the dramatic temperature change made a substantial difference? Like I said, the majority of the time I've had my car it's been in the 30s and 40s...and then the day I get the ECU back, it's 65 and I am not impressed w/ the results. The very next day, it's 40 out and I am suddenly impressed.



Let it be known that I want this to be real. I don't just want to think it's real or pretend it's real. So let's hope
Hi,

I think you're trying to convince yourself. What they told you they do to the Fuel Timing Maps is a very broad statement - all Maps involve syncronizing the Injector Pulse Width with the ignition (spark), but so far as taking place as close together as possible, this isn't true. And how they do what they do is just as important as the end result. Do they produce new Maps? Or (most Likely) do they introduce software to fool the DME into selecting different Maps than it otherwise would for a given set of operating parameters?

The Fuel Timing (when the Injector is pulsed) is dependent upon the engine's Duty Cycle. That is, when the Intake Valve is closed and the Piston is on it's Compression Stroke. This allows the Fuel and Air to emulsify (mix) and compress to achieve the best combustion. The length of this Injector Pulse (called the Pulse Width or Duration) determines how much Fuel is introduced into the cylinder.

Now the time interval of this Duty Cycle changes in response to how fast the engine is turning (RPMs). The Compression Stroke on an engine revving at 6k RPM is half as long in duration than one for the same engine revving at 3k RPM and the Injector Pulses (not the Pulse Width, or Duration) are twice as far apart for the 3k RPM mode than the 6k RPM one.

As far as Spark is concerned, the Duty Cycle is also important, but for different reasons. The Ignition of the Fuel/Air Mix starts at the Spark and travels (or propagates) outward to the Cylinder Walls. This takes Time (although it is measured in nanoseconds, it still takes Time nonetheless). In order to capture the maximum energy the A/F Mix contains, all the mix must be combusted just as the Piston reaches it's uppermost position - Top Dead Center (TDC). This makes the most energy available to push the Piston back down. If this doesn't occur, either some fuel is left unburned or the energy from that fuel isn't available to do Work (push the Piston). So, the Spark must occur at a precise optimal point in the Duty Cycle. But, since the Duty Cycle duration is variable (depending upon engine RPMs), this optimal point for the Spark to occur also changes. In the 6k vs 3k RPM scenario, in order for the A/F mix to properly combust, the Spark must be introduced sooner at 6k RPMs than at 3k RPMs, this is known as being Advanced (or sooner before TDC is reached).

These Optimal Points for Fuel Timing and Spark differ throughout both the RPM and Load Range and are independent of each other. This means you don't always want them as close together as possible, contrary to what you've been told. They have been determined experimentally in the Lab and are programmed as code into the ECU (DME in Porsche Parlance) and are called Maps. Using the signals from various sensors in the engine and car, the DME compares actual conditions to a set of known conditions and selects the correct Map programmed for those conditions and energizes the Fuel Injector and Spark Plug accordingly.

This is the very basic function of the DME. But, the Maps also incorporate other considerations such as Intake Valve cooling, Detonation Thresholds, Emissions, MPG (Lean Fuel Metering - Cruising), Fuel Quality, Engine Service Life, etc. which may set the Fuel and Spark introduction at other than Optimal Points (less than Optimal specifically for Performance that is).

A typical re-chip does not find some new Magical points at which to fire the Injectors or Plugs, it most often uses software to mask or alter the signals the DME receives from it's various sensors to fool it (the DME) into ignoring many of the non-performance related parameters and adjusts the firing points accordingly by selecting different Maps than those called for by the actual operating conditions. This will increase Performance, only very mildly for an NA engine - greater gains are to be had on Forced engines (such as Open Exhaust Valve combustion to maintain Turbo RPMs, etc.).

But these re-chips are dependent upon the DME's Memory Capacity. The file size for Bosch Motronic 5.2 (2.5L engines) is 16 Kb, 512Kb (or 32X more) for Motronic 7.2.2 and 720Kb for Motronic 7.8. This means that there is more to work with on the ver. 7.8 than the ver. 5.2.

Temperature has little to do with it as it is already compensated for in Air Mass determination and Engine Temp. - the DME adjusts accordingly.

Also, just as important as achieving a gain, you have to look at where those gains take place in the Power bands. If they're all at 6k RPM and above, you're rarely gonna tap into them anyway. The greatest gains to be had from a usability standpoint are in the mid-ranges and most of what you report is at the extreme.

The amount of gain really depends upon how poorly the original Software was written. These Gains are not Made, rather they are found within defficiencies of the original software.

One has to assume that Bosch/Porsche did a pretty poor job, leaving a lot on the Table, in the initial programming to assume that a re-chip can produce substantial gains.

I'm not willing to make that assumption, especially since the engine, in stock form, has such a high Horsepower/Displacement ratio as compared to many, many other Performance cars, including the famed 550 Spyder.

You may find trading $600 for a couple HP and/or Ft.lbs. of Torque (at best, if at all) as a good trade, I do not. And, I think there are many here who feel the same way. I mean that's 3/4 the cost of a new set of tires, or shocks, and such and I think most people with limited funds to spend on a fun car have to look at it this way.

Anything less than a 15HP gain leaves the car essentially as it began. You can say you have 3 more HP, Hooray for you! But that doesn't mean squat in the real world...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

Last edited by MNBoxster; 03-16-2007 at 08:07 PM.
MNBoxster is offline   Reply With Quote
Post Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page