Hey guys, looking to buy a performance chip for my 1985 2m4. Has anyone bought a chip and have any suggestions on what to buy or where to look for one? I cant seem to find any the the 2m4 only the 6.
From what I have read on here performance chips are useless. Do you have something done to the car that requires tuning? Just going with a chip is not going to do anything for you but set your wallet back some.
Oy, I hesitate to get involved in this discussion because it usually ends badly but I'll give it a go in the hope that the discussion remains civil.
The common wisdom here is that the chips don't do anything. That may be the case if they're the only thing you do. However, I added the Hypertech chip at the END of my modifications and I can say with documented confidence that there is an improvement to be had.
I have an '88 automatic Formula.
Over a four year period I did all of the breathing mods that have been recommended here including the 1.6 rockers. Installing the rockers was the best mod, by far, especially in the mid to upper RPM's.
The info obtained on this forum is that all the chips do is bump the timing and add more fuel. My thought was that since all my improvement involved adding more air then just maybe the chip would be just the thing to add more fuel.
Turns out that I did indeed pick up a bit of HP with the chip. Not a lot, and again, not something to do first but certainly something to consider at the end of your modifications.
Ray, that would make total sense because you did modifications that allowed the car to take advantage of the increased timing. I would not argue that at all.
I actually had another thought about why some might have an improvement using one of these chips, while other don't, I was reading the March/April Fiero Focus magazine which covered the 135hp vs 140hp difference in the 2.8 between the 85-86 vs the 87-88 and one of the reasons mentioned for the difference in horsepower was different fuel mapping and EGR settings in the eprom while another was a different model number for the muffler assembly. I have no experience myself but it was a interesting read either way.
Ray, that would make total sense because you did modifications that allowed the car to take advantage of the increased timing. I would not argue that at all.
Wait, what? If you improve the engine's breathing, then that means the cylinders are packed with more air/fuel mixture.
A denser charge burns faster, so less timing advance is prescribed in this situation.
If you think the factory tune is now off due to modifications, then wouldn't any generic tune be off as well? Hypertech does not specify how their test engine was modified when they developed their tune. So, if we can't duplicate the Hypertech test engine, then we probably can't duplicate their results.
Most of the time, modified cars need a tune that is made-to-measure.
With a Fiero, with the unscrewable access door on the ECM, it looks like the chip can be easily changed between dyno runs. Back-to-back dyno runs within a short time interval is more or less the only way to demonstrate any kind of gain from a chip.
I'm reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work but not a hint of a question about what my actual, real world data says which could lead to a fruitful discussion of WHY IT DID WORK.
Like I said, these discussions never end well. Anyone wants to talk about my experience can PM me. I'm not going to continue the discussion here.
pmbrunelle, I understand the point you make, I however am just speaking in generalities here. Each individual car is going to perform different. Increased timing in most cars adds power because most cars come out of the factory with a safe tune, I am sure we all agree on that. To tune a car the right way it would need to be done on a dyno or street with some logging software to get the full picture. To steer this thread back into what the OP asked, I am sure on a stock car an off the shelf chip will not do much of anything.
I'm reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work but not a hint of a question about what my actual, real world data says which could lead to a fruitful discussion of WHY IT DID WORK.
Like I said, these discussions never end well. Anyone wants to talk about my experience can PM me. I'm not going to continue the discussion here.
Jeeeze.
You haven't provided any evidence that the chip did anything (dyno roller before/after). Or even a dragstrip trap speed before/after.
Butt dyno is subject to placebo.
Why don't you share your data instead of keeping it to yourself?
[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 05-17-2017).]
Well, why didn't you ask for the data before commenting on how the chip wouldn't work?
Because that's exactly what you did.
See, this is why I hesitate to get involved in these discussions. Some of you are quick to jump to conclusions and also assume that the other guy doesn't know what he's talking about.
FWIW, this has ruined a perfectly reasonable discussion. I've seen it over and over again since I joined 5 years ago.
As I said, anyone who wants to continue, including discussing my non-Butt data, just PM me.
Ray it would be really cool if you just posted your info. There are always going to be questions and opinions and some will of course be wrong. No big deal. A forum isn't really a forum if its just PMs. Just my 2 cents.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 05-17-2017).]
Well, why didn't you ask for the data before commenting on how the chip wouldn't work?
Because that's exactly what you did.
See, this is why I hesitate to get involved in these discussions. Some of you are quick to jump to conclusions and also assume that the other guy doesn't know what he's talking about.
FWIW, this has ruined a perfectly reasonable discussion. I've seen it over and over again since I joined 5 years ago.
As I said, anyone who wants to continue, including discussing my non-Butt data, just PM me.
These chips have a reputation for being snake oil. This is the status quo.
The burden of proof lies on the person whose point of view is contrary to the status quo. In this case, you're going against the prevailing opinion. Evidence is needed to make us change our minds.
If you can show experimental data, combined with answering my questions/comments from my previous post, then that would go a long way in us concluding that the Hypertech chips are effective.
For example, when I suggested that timing should be retarded for an engine with breathing mods, you could have instead explained to everyone why I was wrong...
Being able to explain the causes behind why something works is far more convincing than simply saying "it works".
[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 05-17-2017).]
My problem is that you immediately started in with why they don't work without even asking about my data.
And then you made the assumption that I was talking about the infamous "butt dyno" even though I wrote that I had documented data. You should know I do not respond well to criticism based on assumptions. Especially when I quite clearly commented that it ISN'T "butt dyno" data.
In addition to that I will say that I'm not an engineer so asking me to provide proof of the engineering concepts is useless. I don't know enough about engine design to properly engage in that type of discussion.
I am an old school shade tree mechanic. What I do have is a set of data points from pure stock up to and including the addition of the chip. NOT dyno data, just over the road data taken with a digital stopwatch and a GPS unit. If that isn't up to snuff for the Tech guys then I will simply stop posting.
I have a flat, straight, SAFE spot near my rural home where I can do some drag testing. It's about 3/4 of a mile long with a fire hydrant at the 1/8 mile mark as measured by my GPS. Of course it's not an actual drag strip but I can use it to compare engine mods and also from car to car for my own edification. Relative vs absolute, if you will.
For instance I had a Chevy Tracker that barely hit 60MPH at the 1/8 mile mark, an '89 Mustang 5.0 that hit 88 MPH, an '06 Civic that hits 77MPH and an 06' Lincoln LS that reached 94 MPH over that same distance.
The Fiero hit 67 MPH when I first brought it home.
Then I started fiddling.
All of these runs were made at least three times with 1/2 tank of 93 octane fuel, power braked to 1800 RPM and auto shifts.
At this point I tried manually shifting because it felt like the automatic was leaving something on the table. I shifted at 5500 RPM ( as per the stock tach ).
That's when I hit 80 MPH.
The rockers made the biggest difference and if this means anything to the engineering guys, I think there was some bottom end degradation as per the butt dyno. Which was more than made up for by a big increase in the mid and upper ranges.
Sorry but I only have the 0 to 60 times from stock to completed project.
When stock the 0 to 60 times were 9.8 to 10 seconds. It's a little hard to get more accurate watching the road and the timer but again I'm looking for relative changes, not absolute.
Once all the mods were done the times were 7.9 to 8.3 seconds.
When I've done tuning at a dyno shop, adding timing leaned the a/f ratio so I would always have to compensate with a bit more fuel to get the a/f ratio to where I wanted it. So I can see where 1.6 rockers improved top-end airflow and hence more timing (and fuel) improved the performance. By itself, if you don't have more air actually going into your motor, the extra timing and fuel are kinda pointless if the car is already well-tuned.
Originally posted by RayOtton: 1.6 rockers. - 77 MPH Hypertech chip - 78 MPH
At least the MPH went up. With 3 tries each, that cuts down on some of the fluke factor.
I'm assuming the car doesn't have enough torque to spin the tires, which is a good thing for these tests.
0-60 times are not a good metric for comparing engine power. Trap speed really is better, because it is not so much influenced by the launch.
I'm not sure a 1 MPH gain is sufficient to conclude that the Hypertech chip performs differently than the stock chip. Isn't that near the margin of error of the test (even with 3 trials each time)? Based strictly on this test, I consider the evidence insufficient to conclude that Hypertech chip increases hp. The chip doesn't seem to hurt anything though.
This is my opinion, and that's why it's important to post test data. Because different people looking at the same test data may draw different conclusions.
In the case of the 80 lb weight reduction, we know that losing weight increases trap speed; that's physics. So even though there's just a 1 MPH gain, we are certain it's a real gain, and not just a fluke. But if we didn't know beforehand that weight reduction increases acceleration, it would be hard to say that it improved anything based on the 1 MPH change.
Ray, you brought up timing and fuel, so I thought it was appropriate to continue on that topic. I apologize for the butt dyno callout.
In the case of the 80 lb weight reduction, we know that losing weight increases trap speed; that's physics. So even though there's just a 1 MPH gain, we are certain it's a real gain, and not just a fluke.
But if we didn't know beforehand that weight reduction increases acceleration, it would be hard to say that it improved anything based on the 1 MPH change.
Ray, you brought up timing and fuel, so I thought it was appropriate to continue on that topic. I apologize for the butt dyno callout.
PMB, that's fine, no need for an apology. I'm very wary of getting involved in these discussions because I've seen some pretty nasty fights over rather trivial issues. Not unlike the O/T section in that regard.
You are correct that I cannot get the wheels to spin from a standing start although it's pretty close.
But I'm confused. You state that the 1 MPH gain due to weight reduction is valid but the 1 MPH gain due to the chip is "iffy".
Before you answer remember that all of the drag data points come from at least three runs and the 0-60 runs were done five times. Don't think I'm touting these numbers as absolutes, I realize I can only get just so accurate however, the car and the driver show pretty consistent numbers.
Really what needs to be done is a dyno comparison all along the line for this entire mod process but who's got the time, patience and money for such an endeavor?
In the end, I think we can agree that if anything, the chip should be added LAST to the mod process. Sort of a cherry on top.
Really what needs to be done is a dyno comparison all along the line for this entire mod process but who's got the time, patience and money for such an endeavor? .
Also could do cars without the mods vs cars with the mods.
How did these mods affect mpg if I may ask?
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 05-18-2017).]
I'm not sure a 1 MPH gain is sufficient to conclude that the Hypertech chip performs differently than the stock chip. Isn't that near the margin of error of the test (even with 3 trials each time)? Based strictly on this test, I consider the evidence insufficient to conclude that Hypertech chip increases hp. The chip doesn't seem to hurt anything though.
It would be pretty easy for Ray to "undo" and "redo" this one mod to see which way the numbers go.
Yeah, that's not gonna happen. The chip is in there and contrary to some opinions, it isn't that easy to swap in and out.
Honestly, the mileage has gone down a bit. Before the rocker installation I was running 24-26 MPG, after it's 23-24. I can't say if the chip hurt though because I installed it not too long after the rockers.
When all is said and done, the rockers made a big difference. in fact, they're the only mod that I could actually feel with the proverbial butt dyno.
The chip? I could take it or leave it but since I did everything else on the mod list short of a transplant it was an easy choice to include it and I don't regret it.
Originally posted by RayOtton: Honestly, the mileage has gone down a bit. Before the rocker installation I was running 24-26 MPG, after it's 23-24. I can't say if the chip hurt though because I installed it not too long after the rockers.
When all is said and done, the rockers made a big difference. in fact, they're the only mod that I could actually feel with the proverbial butt dyno.
Yeah, that's not gonna happen. The chip is in there and contrary to some opinions, it isn't that easy to swap in and out.
Well... undoing that mod would be a whole lot easier than putting the 1.5 rockers back in.
quote
Originally posted by 2.5:
What else must be changed with the 1.6 rockers?
I put them in my Formula. I'd say the least that should be done is porting the exhaust manifolds. I never did remove the restriction in my exhaust Y-pipe though, mostly because there's a molded insulated heat shield all around the '88 Y-pipe and I didn't want to mess with it.
I can tell you from personal experience that with the Comp 260H cam you need to change the stock springs for performance springs to stay out of coil bind. And check your installed height. So to answer your question one would need to know the cam.
