-
Hi Guest !
Welcome to the 500Eboard forum.
Since its founding in late 2008, 500Eboard has become the leading resource on the Internet for all things related to the Mercedes-Benz 500E and E500. In recent years, we have also expanded to include the 400E and E420 models, which are directly related to the 500E/E500.
We invite you to browse and take advantage of the information and resources here on the site. If you find helpful information, please register for full membership, and you'll find even more resources available. Feel free to ask questions, and make liberal use of the "Search" function to find answers.
We hope you will become an active contributor to the community!
Sincerely,
500Eboard Management
* Let's have a test and tune day in So. Cal.
- Thread starter 400Eric
- Start date
-
- Tags
- drag racing nitrous
It got squished by an idiot right after I finished restoring it. Sore subject. Already replaced with another one.
That was my thought too, but if it's a hacker, they're channeling Eric really, really well.
Yeah, I am a one of a kind, ain't I? (Can I hear a "Yeah, that's putting it mildly."?)
Sorry about your loss.
I have to go soon. (I'm already getting ready and just refreshing the page.) I'll check out the replacement that you linked later. (When I can devote the time that I'm sure it deserves.)
Sorry about your loss.
I have to go soon. (I'm already getting ready and just refreshing the page.) I'll check out the replacement that you linked later. (When I can devote the time that I'm sure it deserves.)
Assuming "slightly" is exactly that... not 3-4 seconds... and the shifts are perfect, yes, I would reseal. However you'll need to inspect the front pump closely, sometimes the pump bushing/bearing gets worn, and this takes out the seal. So it might need a new front pump, but you won't know until you get in there. If the front pump gets replaced you could pop in new reverse clutches, which are behind the front pump, but I still wouldn't tear down the whole tranny (or pay $$$$ for it).
Why are you surprised Steve? You said I'd be back didn't you?
Uncle Glen! Sorry I misspelled your name.
Vista, Oceanside, Fallbrook area. Going to stay North of the 78 and West of the 15.
Regards,
Eric
Uncle Glen! Sorry I misspelled your name.
Vista, Oceanside, Fallbrook area. Going to stay North of the 78 and West of the 15.
Regards,
Eric
Dave, the above post is from page 12. I stumbled upon it when I re-visited the page to re-learn how to properly post videos. I then re-read pages 12 and 13 to find the info but I don't think you ever posted it. Could you PLEEEEEASE just post it here so that everybody can share in the knowledge? I'm sure others here would benefit from this knowledge as well.
One more thing: HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYBODY!!! We will be spending ours with the Momster, who is still doing fine!
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
Dang, that's a blast from the past. This was from 2 years ago (Nov-2011). Um, short version is, the eBay seller (mbperformance) was selling the same 5.0L chip for all M119's. That's right, your 4.2L motor is running with a 5.0L chip. All they do is change the label on the chip to match your year/model, to try and make you think it's unique/special to your exact car. Nope. I was NOT happy. Seller skated around the issue, see below.
My initial message after receiving the chip:
"I just received the chip for my 1992 400E. The label on the chip
says it is for a 1992 400E 4.2L, but after I install it in my computer
module, my digital scanner is reporting that it's for a 5.0L engine! It
looks like I received a chip for a 1992 500E, mis-labeled as a 1992 400E
chip... how can I exchange this for the correct chip?"
says it is for a 1992 400E 4.2L, but after I install it in my computer
module, my digital scanner is reporting that it's for a 5.0L engine! It
looks like I received a chip for a 1992 500E, mis-labeled as a 1992 400E
chip... how can I exchange this for the correct chip?"
Seller reply #1:
"hi, both 4.2L and 5.0L use same ECU chip. Not sure what digital
scanner you use but the chip we sent you is for your car. If you still
want to return it for exchange just mail it back to our address on the
package and we'll mail you another one but it will be similar to what you
have."
scanner you use but the chip we sent you is for your car. If you still
want to return it for exchange just mail it back to our address on the
package and we'll mail you another one but it will be similar to what you
have."
Seller reply #2:
"Hello. Sorry I am have confused things a bit. I am not the expert here
as this person is gone for the holidays. What I meant the chips physically
identical.. I am assuming the programs are unique per vehicle but I would
leave that to our expert to answer. Unfortunately he is back in Europe for
the year. In any case return the chip you got back and we can send you
another one. If that doesn?t work for you we?ll just give you a refund."
as this person is gone for the holidays. What I meant the chips physically
identical.. I am assuming the programs are unique per vehicle but I would
leave that to our expert to answer. Unfortunately he is back in Europe for
the year. In any case return the chip you got back and we can send you
another one. If that doesn?t work for you we?ll just give you a refund."
I opted to return for refund. I checked with them months later to see what the "expert" had to say, there was no reply.
AFIAK, there are no true 4.2L chips currently on the market. (??) I'm pretty sure I can borrow the mods from the 5.0L eBay chip (top speed removal, etc) and mix that with correct 4.2L fuel mapping to create a custom 4.2L "pseudo-eBay" chip, but I haven't had much incentive to do this.
Dave, I thought you knew, this is the Sauceman's old chip from his 036! He sold it to me when he got the N2O. I know I documented it here somewhere. I originally figured that it would be perfect for a non-fuel enrichment 4.2 ECU but it wasn't. The original engineering study was to find out which is better: a stock non-enrichment ECU with a chip, or a stock enrichment ECU. In back to back testing at the track, with the chip installed in my 95 E420's ECU, and then installed in B3, B3 ran like he had with his original 93 ECU installed. That's why there is one video from that night where a 3.5 Altima SE is spanking us. We should have been the ones administering the spanking but it didn't happen because we were running the lame 95 4.2 ECU with the lame E-bay chip installed. After getting no gain in the 95 ECU, I tried the chip in the 92 ECU where I discovered the slightly higher rev limit. (It probably gave that in the 95 ECU as well but I didn't discover it until it was in the 92 ECU.)
At a later date, when we had our dyno day, in back to back testing with two identical part number LATE-92 M.Y. ECUs that had both had at least ten days of adaptation time each, the chipped ECU made the same hp and same tq as the non-chipped one. (A stock, non-chipped EARLY-92 M.Y. ECU showed no gains or losses either.)
These E-bay chips are outstanding values I'll tell ya what!
Maybe not all E-bay chips are the same? Did you ever document any changes with your chip?
I passed smog with the chip installed, so at least we know that things are "stoich" at cruise.
I remember that "Dernt" (Jerry) went from 12.5 to 11.5 to 1 on his A/F ratio at WOT when he E-bay chipped his 92 ECU equipped 92 400E which is why I figured the chip would be good for a non-enrichment ECU, Since 11.5 is too rich. Dernt's hp and tq results were badly skewered because the shop didn't correct for conditions, and conditions were vastly different between the two test days. (Something like 20 degrees!)
On my dyno sheet the A/F ratio chart is too flattened to be able to really glean any info from it. I called the shop to ask if they could please issue me a new chart with the power results portion reduced down in size and the ratio portion expanded in size but they said that all data from that day was all on a chip or disc that they had given to Justin. I asked Justin and I can't remember exactly what his response was but it was essentially "I'll get back to you when I find it.", and that was that.
What ever happened to ole Dernt, his 400E, and his 6.0 RennTech 400E anyways? After he blew his trans he disappeared. (Just like I did when my trans blew!)
Regards,
Eric
At a later date, when we had our dyno day, in back to back testing with two identical part number LATE-92 M.Y. ECUs that had both had at least ten days of adaptation time each, the chipped ECU made the same hp and same tq as the non-chipped one. (A stock, non-chipped EARLY-92 M.Y. ECU showed no gains or losses either.)
These E-bay chips are outstanding values I'll tell ya what!
Maybe not all E-bay chips are the same? Did you ever document any changes with your chip?
I passed smog with the chip installed, so at least we know that things are "stoich" at cruise.
I remember that "Dernt" (Jerry) went from 12.5 to 11.5 to 1 on his A/F ratio at WOT when he E-bay chipped his 92 ECU equipped 92 400E which is why I figured the chip would be good for a non-enrichment ECU, Since 11.5 is too rich. Dernt's hp and tq results were badly skewered because the shop didn't correct for conditions, and conditions were vastly different between the two test days. (Something like 20 degrees!)
On my dyno sheet the A/F ratio chart is too flattened to be able to really glean any info from it. I called the shop to ask if they could please issue me a new chart with the power results portion reduced down in size and the ratio portion expanded in size but they said that all data from that day was all on a chip or disc that they had given to Justin. I asked Justin and I can't remember exactly what his response was but it was essentially "I'll get back to you when I find it.", and that was that.
What ever happened to ole Dernt, his 400E, and his 6.0 RennTech 400E anyways? After he blew his trans he disappeared. (Just like I did when my trans blew!)
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
I knew it! I did post info about my E-bay chip in this thread!
From post number 5 of this thread:
In the end, it didn't really.
The "hiccup" did eventually go completely away on it's own though. Weird!
About those Altimas, earlier in the evening, the automatic SE spanked us when we were running the bunk 95 ECU/E-Bay chip combo, but later, after I had gone back to the 92 ECU, we spanked a 6 speed Altima SE-R!
OK, this is the one with the lame ECU/chip combo:
[youtube]A-rRZqFV-K4[/youtube]
This is the one after I switched back to the 92 ECU:
[youtube]PXINN9MpLvM[/youtube]
(This is the race I mentioned having a video of as well. Never did get my version posted.)
And this is a different modded SE-R 6 spd on a different day, actually spanked him twice, and there are videos of both races. This is the closer of the two races. ("Closer" being a relative term here.)
[youtube]BLpzaOVu0rU[/youtube]
Yes, that automatic SE is actually about a tenth quicker than the two SE-Rs are but it's 14.42 was still within range of my 14.562 that I got after I switched back to the 92 ECU. You combine that with my superior reaction times that I was already getting by that point in time and it would've been Benzer3: three, Altimas: zero. My damn experiments cost me one!
All of these videos have already been posted to this thread, but at different times, never together.
This is a new to here video showing the same Automatic Altima SE racing a V8 S4 Audi. He apparently likes trying to beat up on German cars. Too bad I was never able to find him at that track again, or anywhere else for that matter. I would have been glad to give him another opportunity to TRY to beat up on my German car! (The highlight of this video is at the end where we see B3 returning to the pits!)
[youtube]kAfCC3Ts6yg[/youtube]
It's like I always say gentlemen: Asian women! Not Asian cars!
Do you guys remember this story? I am genuinely surprised that none of you bothered to find and post the bunk video. (I figured SOMEBODY would make the effort since so many here like to embarrass me, or at least attempt to.) Well, I never looked for it either but I stumbled on it when I was re-locating the videos I posted above. (The owner of the second vanquished SE-R "liked" it on YouBoob.)
[youtube]uR5ouau4VoA[/youtube]
You can really hear the revs go up and down as I try to save the run, but it just wasn't going to happen. Once I realized that, I just said: "F it, I'll just burn down to some good, soft rubber." The two times that we've seen me burning B3 all the way down the track were motivated by the same thing: "The run is lost, just use this as a chance to burn down to some fresh, green rubber." It usually works BTW!
Now remember, Steve did indeed see the 2nd race and can vouch for the fact that we did indeed win the second time.
I wanted to go ahead and post that video so you all could see that the SC400 wasn't just some piece of crap that Benzer1 beat just BECAUSE it was a piece of crap. Now you can see for yourselves that it wasn't. The only car on that track at that time that could be mistaken for a piece of crap was Benzer1!
Re-reading the pages in this thread is a riot....... This is really quite a thread!
This post is one of my favorites:
One last never shown before video:
[youtube]X0Ek4iIZV10[/youtube]
I can't remember which model this is but it is one of those new GM SUVs with that trick new 3.6 engine and 6 speed automatic. It's being driven by a kid who works at the track. One who was honing his reaction skills and was quite frankly getting quite good at it in preparation for the brackets or that "Race a Pro" thing that Stevo and I eventually got invited to....... I don't remember which. I also don't remember if he out R/Ted me or if I was having traction issues again, and we can't tell from the video either because it starts too late. We actually raced a couple of times and my timeslips show that he red-lighted on me on one of those runs so that might explain his holeshot here as well. Either way, if you watch the end of the race closely, you can see that I clipped him at the end. (You can also see me get the win light.)
Regards,
Eric
From post number 5 of this thread:
In the end, it didn't really.
The "hiccup" did eventually go completely away on it's own though. Weird!
About those Altimas, earlier in the evening, the automatic SE spanked us when we were running the bunk 95 ECU/E-Bay chip combo, but later, after I had gone back to the 92 ECU, we spanked a 6 speed Altima SE-R!
OK, this is the one with the lame ECU/chip combo:
[youtube]A-rRZqFV-K4[/youtube]
This is the one after I switched back to the 92 ECU:
[youtube]PXINN9MpLvM[/youtube]
(This is the race I mentioned having a video of as well. Never did get my version posted.)
And this is a different modded SE-R 6 spd on a different day, actually spanked him twice, and there are videos of both races. This is the closer of the two races. ("Closer" being a relative term here.)
[youtube]BLpzaOVu0rU[/youtube]
Yes, that automatic SE is actually about a tenth quicker than the two SE-Rs are but it's 14.42 was still within range of my 14.562 that I got after I switched back to the 92 ECU. You combine that with my superior reaction times that I was already getting by that point in time and it would've been Benzer3: three, Altimas: zero. My damn experiments cost me one!
All of these videos have already been posted to this thread, but at different times, never together.
This is a new to here video showing the same Automatic Altima SE racing a V8 S4 Audi. He apparently likes trying to beat up on German cars. Too bad I was never able to find him at that track again, or anywhere else for that matter. I would have been glad to give him another opportunity to TRY to beat up on my German car! (The highlight of this video is at the end where we see B3 returning to the pits!)
[youtube]kAfCC3Ts6yg[/youtube]
It's like I always say gentlemen: Asian women! Not Asian cars!
Do you guys remember this story? I am genuinely surprised that none of you bothered to find and post the bunk video. (I figured SOMEBODY would make the effort since so many here like to embarrass me, or at least attempt to.) Well, I never looked for it either but I stumbled on it when I was re-locating the videos I posted above. (The owner of the second vanquished SE-R "liked" it on YouBoob.)
[youtube]uR5ouau4VoA[/youtube]
You can really hear the revs go up and down as I try to save the run, but it just wasn't going to happen. Once I realized that, I just said: "F it, I'll just burn down to some good, soft rubber." The two times that we've seen me burning B3 all the way down the track were motivated by the same thing: "The run is lost, just use this as a chance to burn down to some fresh, green rubber." It usually works BTW!
Now remember, Steve did indeed see the 2nd race and can vouch for the fact that we did indeed win the second time.
I wanted to go ahead and post that video so you all could see that the SC400 wasn't just some piece of crap that Benzer1 beat just BECAUSE it was a piece of crap. Now you can see for yourselves that it wasn't. The only car on that track at that time that could be mistaken for a piece of crap was Benzer1!
Re-reading the pages in this thread is a riot....... This is really quite a thread!
This post is one of my favorites:
The really funny thing is, when you watch B3's runs, that is EXACTLY what it looks like is happening! Perhaps that is what inspired jano to post the remark!Eric's dirty car
makes it to the end quickly
blending with the earth
One last never shown before video:
[youtube]X0Ek4iIZV10[/youtube]
I can't remember which model this is but it is one of those new GM SUVs with that trick new 3.6 engine and 6 speed automatic. It's being driven by a kid who works at the track. One who was honing his reaction skills and was quite frankly getting quite good at it in preparation for the brackets or that "Race a Pro" thing that Stevo and I eventually got invited to....... I don't remember which. I also don't remember if he out R/Ted me or if I was having traction issues again, and we can't tell from the video either because it starts too late. We actually raced a couple of times and my timeslips show that he red-lighted on me on one of those runs so that might explain his holeshot here as well. Either way, if you watch the end of the race closely, you can see that I clipped him at the end. (You can also see me get the win light.)
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
Yoda can be a motivating factor.....I'm still in shock that:
2) he figured out how to embed YouBoob videos!!!
Why not? There was a time when I would be at PIR every Friday or Saturday night during racing season with my 6.3, 6.9, 560SEC or E500......
Road racing is much funner, but costs 10x-20x as much, has fewer available tracks (closest to me is 5+ hours), and there is moderate to serious risk of wrecking your car (i.e. screwing up a corner and hitting a barrier, having some other muppet crash into you, etc), and slight risk of injury.
Drag racing is cheap, available to more people, has nearly zero risk of damage or injury, and still pretty fun.
I used to roadrace sportbikes (hence the "GSXR" moniker) but when I moved to Idaho there were no tracks nearby. I went to the local dragstrip just to find out what my new-to-me E500 would do, and well, it was the first hit off the crackpipe.
Drag racing is cheap, available to more people, has nearly zero risk of damage or injury, and still pretty fun.
I used to roadrace sportbikes (hence the "GSXR" moniker) but when I moved to Idaho there were no tracks nearby. I went to the local dragstrip just to find out what my new-to-me E500 would do, and well, it was the first hit off the crackpipe.
My wife and I have seven track championships between us over the past 5 years in the E500E's. Trust me... they can win bracket races.
(Heads-up is a different story of course!)
I was very successful campaigning my E500 at the PIR drag races ... they usually took care to match cars up in a general sense in staging. When I got nitrous-oxide installed, it opened up a whole new world though.
While drag racing probably wasn't on the MB/Porsche engineers' priority list, these cars can certainly hold their own. For me personally, other than a top fuel dragster, drag racing is kind of boring.
I thought the SAME thing until I actually tried it. I definitely recommend giving it a whirl sometime.
I thought the SAME thing until I actually tried it. I definitely recommend giving it a whirl sometime.
I know what you are saying but I think I'd rather go drag racing in an E55K or C63...
Drag racing is fun and for me, was fairly addicting. I didn't think it would be but I was pleasantly surprised. Eventually other priorities took over, so I didn't have the time. And I generally knew what my cars could do, so the amount of time and effort to eke out incremental reductions in time just got to be too great. I wouldn't mind doing a bit of racing here in Houston, but the closest strip is around an hour away (other side of the metro area) which honestly is just too far. I will try to get out there once or twice to do some observing and see what the crowds and scene are like. Perhaps when the weather gets a bit better.
There are several videos posted in this very thread were the 036 wins in heads-up racing. The turbo Volvo vs. Steve's 036 race was epic. That's why I'm always re-posting it. Just fricking epic!
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
Drag racing has its place, I look at it as the event to flex a little muscle in short bursts to briefly satisfy the need for speed. After all, we do drive the factory "hot rod" so why let flex it's given power once in a while. Plus, we get find out how much power our older cars can still put out when compared to new, if any of our mods work or not, what slight improvements at the track can yield a faster time, how fast of a RT one can get (Mr. Eric managed an .000 RT, which got him invited to the professional drag strip in Pomona - a freakin w124 was invited, that must have turned some heads) and more importantly - meet some cool peeps and see a lot of different cars (and bikes) in action. Road racing is still my preferred type of racing (that is where you really find out what you can do behind the wheel and if you got any balls to do it again and this time faster and harder) but as mentioned above, a lot is at stake so one has to be prepared for what "might" happen.
+1 with Eric. I have won all of my races against cars in the same power range as my 500E and I think most of those videos are in this thread.
Put another way, there are very few "family type" cars that have beat any of us at the track.
While we know that the 036 isn't a typical family car, it can stealthily and convincingly portray one without anybody being the wiser.
Thanks Steve for the R/T mention, but it was actually a .001, not a .000 (I think Dave is the only one here to get a .000, I think he said a few pages back that he has gotten a grand total of three of them).
Regards,
Eric
While we know that the 036 isn't a typical family car, it can stealthily and convincingly portray one without anybody being the wiser.
Thanks Steve for the R/T mention, but it was actually a .001, not a .000 (I think Dave is the only one here to get a .000, I think he said a few pages back that he has gotten a grand total of three of them).
Regards,
Eric
Dave, I didn't multi quote this time because sometimes it seems that when my posts are too long, you fall asleep before you finish them, and then forget to respond back. Could you please share your thoughts on the stuff shown above? There were/are still many unanswered questions regarding these E-bay chips!
As for the drag racing in general discussion, I want to elaborate a little more on where I am coming from. (I was in too big of a hurry to even fully read the responses earlier because it was just as we were leaving to go see G-ma!) For me, just SEEING a good close race is exciting, especially if it is real people racing real street cars. (No top fuel crap for me, give me REAL people, REAL cars!) That race between Steve's 036 and Casey's turbo Volvo was as exciting as ANY sports event you have ever seen! You guys have the video but you should have been there! There had already been a bit of a build-up for this for some time, with Steve and Casey gunning for each other and Casey even gunning for Justin (before he got N2O). Yes, Casey and Justin had tried each other out before on the streets and highways, but neither had come away fully convinced that the "question" had been adequately answered. So yeah, Casey had been gunning for a 500E for a while and then it all came down to this one race! It only took 14.5 seconds, but it seemed like it took forever: They were side by side ALL THE WAY DOWN THE TRACK! We were all just quiet and transfixed, waiting for someone to pull ahead, but no one did! "Who's gonna win? I can't tell! Who's ahead? I can't tell! Who's gonna win? Who's gonna win? WOW! Steve must've clipped him right at the very end!"
Now add to this the added excitement of YOU being one of the drivers! Can any of you now see why Uncle Gerry, Dave, Myself, Justin, and Stevo the Stevenator love this stuff so much?
[youtube]5vErfegRJEU[/youtube]
(In this video, the narrator is trying to sound detached and unimpressed. It's because he is young, and is trying to sound cool, clinical, and professional. You know how kids are, always mindful of how they look and sound, always being careful to not blow their "cool" cover! The truth is he was jumping out of his skin too!)
Uncle Gerry, Dave, Justin, and Stevo, I think I just figured out why we can't ever get anyone to show up at these street legal events...... it's cause they are afraid they'll like it!!!
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
There had only been one chip vendor on eBay, for many years.
UPDATE: The old vendor is still on eBay! They have a new user ID and changed the listing title so I didn't find it in my initial searches. Current user ID is "horsecountry67", click here to see their bogus claims (10-15% power gain, gimme a break).
Methinks you were quite lucky if you passed smog with a 5.0L chip installed in a 4.2L engine. It does affect emissions testing... I tried this, the numbers are quite different with the "wrong" chip.
Yeah, it went to 11.5 because it was a 5.0 fuel map on a 4.2 engine.
So now you see why I'm so confused. If my chip is honestly giving more fuel at WOT (like Dernt's did) then it should have given me a performance gain when I ran said chip at the track in my 95 ECU?!? That's why I'm thinking that this chip is different. It should have taken the 95 ECU's WOT A/F ratio from 14.7 to 1 down to at least 13.7 to one, which is close to the 92 ECU's 13.5 to 1, which is why I ran the original experiment pitting a chipped 95 ECU against a stock 92 ECU. It should have been a fascinating experiment. Instead, it was a blowout, with the chipped 95 ECU performing miserably. What gives?
Then you add in the fact that I passed smog with said chip, and now that leaves me thinking that it wasn't good luck at all, that it was instead BAD luck that helped me to pass smog. Bad luck cause I got a bunk chip! What do you think?
Now for more confusion: We also have to remember that the ECU's main function is to adapt the A/F ratio at cruise back to the "ideal" 14.7 ratio. With a minimum 15% up or down headroom to work with, it is able to accomplish that goal, even if it is for a 5.0 . After all, we did see my 5.0 ECU successfully do just exactly that back when I was running it. Remember? That's because the difference in displacement between the two engines is actually less than 15%, and when you add in the fact that my modded 4.2 is flowing more air than a stock 4.2, the difference in fuel demand between my 4.2 and a stock 5.0 becomes even less than 15%.
The long and the short of all this is that my chip clearly isn't richening the A/F ratios of either of the ECUs that I ran it in, which has me thinking that it is programed differently than Dernt's chip. What do you think?
You left two other questions un-answered:
Did you ever document any changes, good or bad, with your E-bay chip?
What ever happened to ole Dernt?
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
eBay chip increases rev limit to 6600rpm, and eliminates the top-speed governor.
Ole Dernt is alive and well, but not active on the forums. Think I last was in contact with him a few months ago.
OK, thanks.
Now, what about the three new questions in my most recent post? You used to love a good mechanical mystery Dave, what happened?
Two more questions: Is there a chip of any kind available from any source that is at least semi-effective?
WHY is Dern't no longer active on the forums?
Now, what about the three new questions in my most recent post? You used to love a good mechanical mystery Dave, what happened?
Two more questions: Is there a chip of any kind available from any source that is at least semi-effective?
WHY is Dern't no longer active on the forums?
Last edited:
Insufficient data (and time).
Not that I have ever seen. C'mon, Eric, we've been down this path. Higher rev limit and top speed governor removal is all you get.
Probably doesn't have time? I dunno, but you could always contact him yourself and ask...
I was just asking the folks who were closer to him, that's all. Since his chip came up in our conversation and all. PMing him wouldn't do any good if he hasn't been here for over a year.
The main thing that stumps me is that his chip gave a dyno documented full one point improvement in A/F ratio and mine apparently didn't. I was also wondering if Dave's chip had given him an A/F gain similar to what Dernt got. It's really a mystery why Dernt's chip seemed to deliver something worthwhile but nobody else's did/does. I want to know why! Maybe Dernt ran the chipped dyno run stone cold?
There was a time when Dave wouldn't have let such a mystery go unsolved. Me, I'm stumped!
Regards,
Eric
The main thing that stumps me is that his chip gave a dyno documented full one point improvement in A/F ratio and mine apparently didn't. I was also wondering if Dave's chip had given him an A/F gain similar to what Dernt got. It's really a mystery why Dernt's chip seemed to deliver something worthwhile but nobody else's did/does. I want to know why! Maybe Dernt ran the chipped dyno run stone cold?
There was a time when Dave wouldn't have let such a mystery go unsolved. Me, I'm stumped!
Regards,
Eric
Eric, when did you have your car on the dyno with a wideband to measure AFR? Or when did you install a wideband sensor? How do you know FOR SURE there was no AFR change on your car?
Why do you think it was worthwhile to have the mixture too rich and get a power loss? I don't consider a power loss "worthwhile".
There's no mystery. He tried the eBay chip which was 5.0 fuel mapping on a 4.2 engine which resulted in a power loss and 11.5 AFR ratio. I already said this in post #882...
As I already stated, at the dyno day we did get A/F ratio readouts, but they are hard to read because the chart is too small. I can tell that the chipped ECU gave approx. the same ratio as the non-chipped ECUs did, I just can't tell exactly what that ratio was. PLUS the hp and tq numbers were UNCHANGED between the chipped and non-chipped ECUs! It seems to me that there would be a least SOME change in power production if the chipped ECU had changed the ratio by a full point like Dernt's chip did.
I don't! That's why I originally tried the chip in an ECU that NEEDED to be made richer...... my 95 ECU. My point was/is that there are chips out there that do more than just ditch the limiters. There are some that add some fuel too and I want one. At some point, we are going to exceed even the 92 ECUs fuel enrichment and it's 15% compensation ability when we move to the next phase of mods. I can't say exactly WHEN it will happen, but it WILL happen. I want to have the needed extra fuel there and ready to go.
My chip was/is for a 5.0 as well! I still maintain the it doesn't matter. The ECU, chipped or not, compensates using it's 15% up or down capability if given enough adaptation time. That's it's job! Proof is B3, with the E-bay 5.0 chipped 92 4.2 ECU, passing California's stringent smog test, the most stringent in the nation, with loads of room to spare!
And Dernt DID NOT suffer a power loss. He got a power GAIN but the problem with the results was that they were obtained on a different, cooler day, and the shop didn't correct for conditions, so we don't know how much of the gain came from the chip and how much of it came from the cooler air. Also, while 11.5 to 1 is FAR from ideal, it isn't into the "losing power" territory yet either. Proof of that is the fact that Dernt's chip still delivered more power. (Albeit on a cooler day, 65 vs. 80.) Sometimes a too rich mixture will still make more power because a too rich mixtures staves off detonation, a concern on our 11.0 to 1 compression engines. No timing retard equals more power! Oh yeah, that reminds me, let's don't forget that Dernt's 400E was a only 10 to 1 compression 92!
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
I have Dernt's dyno graph. With stock 92 chip it was 12.5 AFR and made 228hp and 231hp. With the eBay chip the AFR dropped to 11.5-11.3 and power was 224hp and 225hp. The numbers were uncorrected, humidity was within a few percent, but yes the lower power numbers were at higher ambient temp. But even if corrected, the numbers would likely be the same. Either way, we're still talking minuscule changes here, possibly withing the dyno's margin of error.
Well, now you've gone and made me dig MY copy out! (I printed it ages ago.)
OK, runs three and four, which I assume were AFTER the switch to the E-bay chip, were on the 80+ degree day, and weren't corrected, which skews the results compared to runs one and two, which were on a 65 degree day. (What shop doesn't correct results?!? Stupid!!!)
Be that as it may, it still proves and shows that there ARE chips out there that DO MORE than just eliminate the speed limiter and raise the rev limit, which was and is my initial point. Here we have a chip that adds fuel! You repeatedly said that there weren't/aren't any that do anything other than raise the limiters.
I'd like to obtain such a chip. I don't have current contact info for Dernt. His dyno sheet does show his full name though. I seem to remember he lived in Florida. Maybe I could find him, but I'd rather not. It seems like an invasion of privacy. Could you PLEASE contact him and ask him for any and all info on that chip?
Another ray of hope we have is that fellow in Minn. who weighed in on that exhaust thread who thinks he can do something in this area.
Regards,
Eric
OK, runs three and four, which I assume were AFTER the switch to the E-bay chip, were on the 80+ degree day, and weren't corrected, which skews the results compared to runs one and two, which were on a 65 degree day. (What shop doesn't correct results?!? Stupid!!!)
Be that as it may, it still proves and shows that there ARE chips out there that DO MORE than just eliminate the speed limiter and raise the rev limit, which was and is my initial point. Here we have a chip that adds fuel! You repeatedly said that there weren't/aren't any that do anything other than raise the limiters.
I'd like to obtain such a chip. I don't have current contact info for Dernt. His dyno sheet does show his full name though. I seem to remember he lived in Florida. Maybe I could find him, but I'd rather not. It seems like an invasion of privacy. Could you PLEASE contact him and ask him for any and all info on that chip?
Another ray of hope we have is that fellow in Minn. who weighed in on that exhaust thread who thinks he can do something in this area.
Regards,
Eric
.... 
Let's don't tease GSXR too much....... We need his help finding Dernt!
It is worth mentioning though that the difference between 65 and 80 degrees at the track is about 2 tenths, which is about 20 horsepower, so for the chip to be able to make essentially the same power at 83 fricking degrees as the stock ECU made at 65 is a moral victory!
Regards,
Eric
It is worth mentioning though that the difference between 65 and 80 degrees at the track is about 2 tenths, which is about 20 horsepower, so for the chip to be able to make essentially the same power at 83 fricking degrees as the stock ECU made at 65 is a moral victory!
Regards,
Eric
Last edited:
Eric, I thought you were around when we discussed this, but maybe not. I compared the hex code of the eBay chip to the stock chip a year or two ago. There was no change in fuel delivery. Top speed removal, rev limit increase, and possible elimination of the cold-upshift delay to heat the cats. But no extra fuel. Again, he was comparing a 92 module with 4.2 chip, against a 92 module with 5.0 chip, that is why it appears to increase fueling.
Dernt moved from FL to CO and his 400E was totaled, btw. A tree fell on it during a snowstorm and flattened the car.
Dernt moved from FL to CO and his 400E was totaled, btw. A tree fell on it during a snowstorm and flattened the car.
aaaaargh. No, it doesn't. Not even close, and not even in Gerry's world. 15 degrees ambient temp may at MOST give a 1-2% correction factor, which would be ~5hp, not 20. And that would make all four runs within ~1% of each other, or within the dyno margin of error.
These engines are not drastically affected by ambient temp changes. I'm not going down this road again, no matter how much y'all yank my chain. I've got 1000+ dragstrip runs across multiple M119-powered cars that prove this is not accurate.
*sigh*
I've got the timeslips and results to prove that ambient temps DO make a difference. My general rule of thumb (and this is a bit subjective, but was borne out over multiple cars, in widely varying Portland ambient temps) was that each additional 10 degrees Fahrenheit cost me 0.08-0.1 second in ET. My best times on all cars (560SEC, E500, 6.3) were ALWAYS when the temps were in the 30s and 40s, as opposed to the 70s and 80s when there were measurable differences in ETs of several tenths of a second.
I am sure that there are other factors, including barometric pressure, humidity, and how much beans I had for lunch the day I drag raced (for extra "go" power), but ambients are the first or second most important environmental factor in ETs.
My E500 here in Houston is a bit happier in cold/crisp temps than it is when it's 100F outside, and it is a bit stronger at those colder temps. BTW when temps are below 50F this fall, I'm noticing it won't rise above 90C. Anything above 60-65F, it's at 90-95C, and anything above 80-85F outside and the temps are 95-105C. My SEC and SEL are very difficult to get above 90C no matter what the outside temp is. In 50F and below temps, both cars are either right on the 80C mark or just above it.
It's just how it is. No yoink intended.
Cheers,
Gerry
I am sure that there are other factors, including barometric pressure, humidity, and how much beans I had for lunch the day I drag raced (for extra "go" power), but ambients are the first or second most important environmental factor in ETs.
My E500 here in Houston is a bit happier in cold/crisp temps than it is when it's 100F outside, and it is a bit stronger at those colder temps. BTW when temps are below 50F this fall, I'm noticing it won't rise above 90C. Anything above 60-65F, it's at 90-95C, and anything above 80-85F outside and the temps are 95-105C. My SEC and SEL are very difficult to get above 90C no matter what the outside temp is. In 50F and below temps, both cars are either right on the 80C mark or just above it.
It's just how it is. No yoink intended.
Cheers,
Gerry
aaaaargh. No, it doesn't. Not even close, and not even in Gerry's world. 15 degrees ambient temp may at MOST give a 1-2% correction factor, which would be ~5hp, not 20. And that would make all four runs within ~1% of each other, or within the dyno margin of error.
These engines are not drastically affected by ambient temp changes. I'm not going down this road again, no matter how much y'all yank my chain. I've got 1000+ dragstrip runs across multiple M119-powered cars that prove this is not accurate.
*sigh*
Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot this is a touchy subject. But my experiences do more closely mirror Uncle Gerry's.
Eric, I thought you were around when we discussed this, but maybe not. I compared the hex code of the eBay chip to the stock chip a year or two ago. There was no change in fuel delivery. Top speed removal, rev limit increase, and possible elimination of the cold-upshift delay to heat the cats. But no extra fuel. Again, he was comparing a 92 module with 4.2 chip, against a 92 module with 5.0 chip, that is why it appears to increase fueling.
Dernt moved from FL to CO and his 400E was totaled, btw. A tree fell on it during a snowstorm and flattened the car.
The chip you were testing WASN'T Dernt's chip! I'd like to see some tests on HIS chip!
Again, one of my dyno runs was with a 92 ECU WITH A 5.0 CHIP! And it wasn't any richer than a same part number stock 92 ECU. Dernt's chip is different than the ones that we are stuck with! We need that chip or another one from the same outfit!
Dern't had TWO 400Es. his original stockish one (the one that he dynod the chip with), and the 6.0 RennTech one (the one that Justin tried to get). Which one got crushed? What happened to the other one? Is he into something else now? Maybe he doesn't want that chip anymore? Maybe he doesn't need his N2O system anymore either? Maybe he doesn't need is 6.0 anymore! We need to talk to him! Wait a minute...... Maybe you are already talking to him about his 6.0?!?
Last edited:
