To Chip or Not to Chip...That is the Question

[400Eric]

I can't believe I missed this thread!

4) If you add headers, port the heads or manifolds, etc, etc... anything to drastically change the airflow... the LH module will adapt to the change in airflow automatically, over time. You can view (and reset) the adaptation values with a digital scanner, for lower- and middle-RPM-range operation. The system doesn't display WOT adaptation. With a heavily modified engine, it's likely that the 93-94 LH module is more desireable, since it will stay in closed loop, and keep providing fuel to maintain 14.7 ratio at WOT. The 1992 module can't do that, it still sends the same fixed amount, even if there's more airflow. Note that RENNtech's 6.0L M119.97x engines use 1993-94 modules with a custom EPROM.

Regarding 92 ECUs, I think that "fixed" amount of fuel that it is providing in open loop is still based on what it is providing in closed loop. I don't believe it is a set in stone figure, but rather a figure that is based on a simple percentage increase over whatever the ECU was providing under closed loop conditions. After the ECU has adapted to one's breathing mods, it will now base it's new open loop WOT fuel enrichment on those new parameters.

Rather than replacing 93-94 ECUs with 92 ECUs, RENNtech probably just used what they already had, since they had to reprogram them anyways. (And since even 92 ECUs would also have had to been reprogramed too.)

5) I don't think we'll find any easy re-flashing, because someone would need to download the stock programming (and maybe the eBay, RENNtech, or Superchips programming) and compare them, then modify the program. The problem is, almost nobody knows how to do this for the LH systems used in our M119's. This is way, way beyond any DIY tweaking. And, I firmly believe that there would be minimal power gains anywhere in the powerband... and if there were, it could come at a significant penalty in fuel economy (or perhaps even damage the catalysts).

Stevo Devo needs to weigh in on this. I do believe his stock 92 ECU has been re-flashed.

Regards,
Eric

 

[gsxr]

It's been a while since I played with one of those. I didn't see any performance gain under the controled conditions of the dragstrip. But I still remain convinced that there is a gain to be had under certain conditions (like when the engine is hot). There has to be, right? I mean, why would MB even bother having a non-cat EZL trim plug if there wasn't something to be gained?

I've BT and DT. There is zero power gain, and about a 10% loss in fuel economy. It's been discussed at length in a different thread.

Regarding 92 ECUs, I think that "fixed" amount of fuel that it is providing in open loop is still based on what it is providing in closed loop. I don't believe it is a set in stone figure, but rather a figure that is based on a simple percentage increase over whatever the ECU was providing under closed loop conditions. After the ECU has adapted to one's breathing mods, it will now base it's new open loop WOT fuel enrichment on those new parameters.

Yes, I did dyno testing which confirms this. The difference is small, but measurable. By "small", I mean low single digits. The difference was more obvious in the A/F ratio.

Rather than replacing 93-94 ECUs with 92 ECUs, RENNtech probably just used what they already had, since they had to reprogram them anyways. (And since even 92 ECUs would also have had to been reprogramed too.)

Since the old post in 2009, I've been able to look at the program for a number of different chips. The difference is surprisingly small. None of them change fueling, only the rev limit, top speed limit, and possibly the cold upshift delay thingy.

 

[samiam44]

Yes, I did dyno testing which confirms this. The difference is small, but measurable. By "small", I mean low single digits. The difference was more obvious in the A/F ratio.

The time really to sweat getting a chip re-done would be if Ethanol content is mandated to increase, to where we approach a forced-lean condition b/c the computer can nolonger compensate. Then again, we might be able to just up the fuel pressure slightly.

I've look at the newer mustang 5.0 liter engines, and they keep incrementally varying timing to maximum, then it detonates and repeats. I'm sure their fuel map does the same and you do get a bit of return.

Jono just needs to build those rear mounted turbo kits and we'd all be happy with power.


Michael

 

[400Eric]

Thankfully, they are actually easing off and backing away from the ethanol content mandate. They are finally realizing that it is a foolish policy.

Good point though.

Regards,
Eric

 

[Ascension]

Anybody know anything about this chip?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1992-1995-M...ormance-Chip-Chips-Chipset-NEW-/261162994824?
I hit the guy with a message he responded and it was interesting>

Hi, from what I heard many folks who used the ECUs with WOT or the Wide Open Throttle see just about 5-7 hp increase. The chip we have can give you WOT affect plus it is programmed to better enhance the Fuel to Air ratio and we highly recommend using K&N air filters alongside of the chip as you will have real nice pickup. Also the chip removes the upshift delay when the car is cold. The chipset allows for better throttle response than with stock chip. You will notice better engine feel especially from 3000 RPM and up. With gas mileage being either the same or slightly better. This chip is 100% replacement for the OEM chipset that goes inside your LH fuel injection ECU. It is a performance enhanced chip that has a program made specifically for your 1995 E420 and is safe and has no negative side effects. Nas

Not promising gains over the 92 WOT swap BUT does promise gains in drivablity for the E-420. At much less than a 92 WOT swap would be it is interesting.
Dropping the speed limiter and that pesky cold start hold + what the 92 mod does at WOT enrichment would be worth the $ here if it's real. Remapping and improving throttle response in the middle of the power band with these gears and the M119 is where this car needs the most help IMO.
Remapping NA engines like the 4.2 and 5.0 is not going to give the dramatic increases in top end we saw with jerking the boost pressure up on turbo motors like the Volvos or my sons 6.0 Ford F-550 but you can see a very noticeable improvement in normal driving throttle response if it's done right many times.

 

[400Eric]

Please don't get Dave started on this again.

The 92 ECU also has no top speed limiter. Well, actually it does, but it's 155 MPH instead of your 127-133 MPH. So now you are down to just the cold start hold.

The ONLY way I'd do this is if I could do the following: I'd buy myself a 92 ECU (You could always sell it later for what you paid for it.) Then I'd install it in the car. Then I'd buy the chip with an at least 30 day warranty. If no warranty then no sale. I'd then run the chip in my 95 ECU for at least a week, maybe two, to give everything time to adapt. Then I'd go to the local dragstrip and baseline my car by running it at least three times with the 92 ECU. Then I'd run it at least three times with the chipped 95 ECU, then run another run or two with the 92 ECU back in again just to be sure. (A "control" run if you will.) If I didn't see at least a tenth improvement from the chipped ECU over the 92 ECU, I'd send the chip back within the 30 day period for not delievering on the performance increase promise.

I tried an Ebay chip that I got from the Sauceman in my 95's ECU and pitted it against a 92 ECU in my 93 at the track. The chipped 95 ECU's performance was miserable. Absolutely miserable. It's all documented in the drag racing thread. You should PM Saucer and ask him to weigh in here in this thread. Let him see the info on your Ebay chip and ask him if it's the same chip and/or chip seller that he got his/my chip from.

Later, I tried that same chip (installed in a 92 ECU) on the chassis dyno. Absolutely zero gain was seen vs a stock 92 ECU. (That's documented somewhere as well.)

I kept the chip anyways (installed in a 92 ECU), but only because it raised my rev limit to 6,500 from 6,250, which allows me to hold onto my lower gears a little longer, which with these tall 2.24 gears, is a neccessity. Very few people are hard core enough to consider that enough of a reason to keep the chip, but I was, and am, looking for every hundreth of a second in the quater mile.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still hopefull that there is somthing out there. You can see that by my earlier posts. I'm just gonna hold any chip to a tough test though before I buy into it.

 

[Ascension]

Please don't get Dave started on this again.

The 92 ECU also has no top speed limiter. Well, actually it does, but it's 155 MPH instead of your 127-133 MPH. So now you are down to just the cold start hold.

The ONLY way I'd do this is if I could do the following: I'd buy myself a 92 ECU (You could always sell it later for what you paid for it.) Then I'd install it in the car. Then I'd buy the chip with an at least 30 day warranty. If no warranty then no sale. I'd then run the chip in my 95 ECU for at least a week, maybe two, to give everything time to adapt. Then I'd go to the local dragstrip and baseline my car by running it at least three times with the 92 ECU. Then I'd run it at least three times with the chipped 95 ECU, then run another run or two with the 92 ECU back in again just to be sure. (A "control" run if you will.) If I didn't see at least a tenth improvement from the chipped ECU over the 92 ECU, I'd send the chip back within the 30 day period for not delievering on the performance increase promise.

I tried an Ebay chip that I got from the Sauceman in my 95's ECU and pitted it against a 92 ECU in my 93 at the track. The chipped 95 ECU's performance was miserable. Absolutely miserable. It's all documented in the drag racing thread. You should PM Saucer and ask him to weigh in here in this thread. Let him see the info on your Ebay chip and ask him if it's the same chip and/or chip seller that he got his/my chip from.

More interested in mid range throttle response improvements than pure WOT performance here. Not that a little more WOT performance wouldn't be nice but let's face it these cars with this tall gear and the power band of the 4.2 are not most responsive things in normal in town driving! Yep 7-12 hp or better up top would be nice but low end/ mid range torque and throttle response is what would REALLY wake these cars up in day to day driving. The 92 ECU only helps performance at WOT or on the top end so question for me is does the chip help in the low and middle without loosing anything or maybe giving me some gain on top is my?

 

[Klink]

Richard, save your money and pass on this nonsense already. Don't open and screw with an operating LH control unit.

Eric, your last post kind of points up something that I've said since about September '92 after driving the then new '93s. The WOT doesn't accomplish anything that anyone could feel and reliably pick out in repeated double blind tests. He'd have to run dyno pulls and/or do something like what you've described above. Other than for guys that drag race these things and want every tenth, what is in this for the OP? I'm saying nothing. It isn't going to feel a bit different except for placebo effect, and exposes him to the possibility of malfunctions, melted cats, etc.

Richard, you expressed the insight yourself: These aren't force aspirated engines with electronically controlled boost pressure, and they were already designed by people that know how to tune engines. The gains to be had in the LH box are absolutely minimal, so much so that dyno work, and/or a process like Eric described above would be necessary before you could even know if it existed.

 

[400Eric]

More interested in mid range throttle response improvements than pure WOT performance here. Not that a little more WOT performance wouldn't be nice but let's face it these cars with this tall gear and the power band of the 4.2 are not most responsive things in normal in town driving! Yep 7-12 hp or better up top would be nice but low end/ mid range torque and throttle response is what would REALLY wake these cars up in day to day driving. The 92 ECU only helps performance at WOT or on the top end so question for me is does the chip help in the low and middle without loosing anything or maybe giving me some gain on top is my?

I've got this bad habit where I keep adding to a post even after I have already posted it. Please note the additions to that above post.

The problem is that part throttle gains are difficult to quantify. I've read his message to you again and it sounds like he is promising increased WOT performance over even a 92 ECU. Why don't you send him another message and get him to come right out and say it. Then, if it doesn't measure up per my test mentioned above, send it back cause it will mean that we can't trust his part throttle claims either. That is unless you want to trust your butt dyno....

Lot's of folks think they have highly accurate butt dynos, but few actually do. I am one of those few. I've repeatedly felt as little as a tenth improvement at the track! My timeslip lady can attest to this! On more than one occasion, I've rolled up and told her "I just got my best E/T ever in this car" BEFORE she handed me my timesip. Now if you are sure that you truly have such a butt dyno, and can do back to back testing, as even the best butt dyno readings can be skewed with time, then go ahead and disregard everything I've said. Keep in mind though that skinny butts are more accurate than bigger ones are!

 

[Klink]

More interested in mid range throttle response improvements than pure WOT performance here. Not that a little more WOT performance wouldn't be nice but let's face it these cars with this tall gear and the power band of the 4.2 are not most responsive things in normal in town driving! Yep 7-12 hp or better up top would be nice but low end/ mid range torque and throttle response is what would REALLY wake these cars up in day to day driving. The 92 ECU only helps performance at WOT or on the top end so question for me is does the chip help in the low and middle without loosing anything or maybe giving me some gain on top is my?

That's just it, Richard! Unless these guys did EXTENSIVE tuning work doing things like putting in an acceleration enrichment onto any degree of throttle increase, tuning things like ignition timing, which they can't, as this LH box is fuel injection ONLY, this stuff will have no effect on subjective things like "throttle response" whatsoever. They may be able to give you a few extra HP at absolute WOT, which is not at all what you are hoping to get. And what are the chances that these people have the capability do the kind of tuning to effect a subjective improvement in "throttle response" while only having the fuel mixture as the variable at their disposal? About zero, that's how much. You know why they are insisting on the filters? The slight sound increase boosts the placebo effect...

 

[Klink]

Keep in mind though that skinny butts are more accurate than bigger ones are!

Is this another way that digestion adversely effects reaction times?

 

[Klink]

I've got this bad habit where I keep adding to a post even after I have already posted it.

That's not a bad habit. It's just making your post better. I do it almost every time, several times.

 

[400Eric]

Is this another way that digestion adversely effects reaction times?

LOL!
No, not at all. Digestion causes blood to go to your gut, leaving your brain with a little less blood, which is why you want to take a nap after a big meal. Loss of blood from the brain equals slower reaction times! Simple!

Honestly, people chuckle at this, but I've out R/Ted every one of those stuffing their faces doubters at the track!

 

[Klink]

Is this another way that digestion adversely effects reaction times?

LOL!
No, not at all. Digestion causes blood to go to your gut, leaving your brain with a little less blood, which is why you want to take a nap after a big meal. Loss of blood from the brain equals slower reaction times! Simple!

I just figured that it may have been someone doing a long term test, and the more one eats, the bigger the butt, the more one weighs, the lower the et's, that gets them pissed, they drink more beer and eat more wings after the race as a result, and the cycle just continues...

 

[gerryvz]

 

[Ascension]

That's just it, Richard! Unless these guys did EXTENSIVE tuning work doing things like putting in an acceleration enrichment onto any degree of throttle increase, tuning things like ignition timing, which they can't, as this LH box is fuel injection ONLY, this stuff will have no effect on subjective things like "throttle response" whatsoever. They may be able to give you a few extra HP at absolute WOT, which is not at all what you are hoping to get. And what are the chances that these people have the capability do the kind of tuning to effect a subjective improvement in "throttle response" while only having the fuel mixture as the variable at their disposal? About zero, that's how much. You know why they are insisting on the filters? The slight sound increase boosts the placebo effect...

Have some experience with the LH system but on my Volvo 740 turbo and know some programing there made a difference but as you said Klink it was a turbo and we are talking boost pressure changes. Where the 420 is lazy is in the mid range with this gear in normal driving. A gear would get the response back but sacrifice top end and mileage things I don't want. WOT HP was never a real goal but mid range real world drivabilty gains were. Old school tuning could do this with advance curves and carb tuning so my question was how well did MB tune these ( almost all manufacturers have compromise tunes in the ECU programing) and with in particular with this design having the ETC was there room for improvement in the drivability. What I'm looking for would be hard to measure on a Dyno unless you were looking specifically for it at part throttle in specific RPM ranges but easy to "'feel" in the real world drivability.

 

[gsxr]

More interested in mid range throttle response improvements ... so question for me is does the chip help in the low and middle without loosing anything or maybe giving me some gain on top is my?

The chips will provide ZERO gain at part throttle. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. This has been covered ad nauseam in the past.

The problem is that part throttle gains are difficult to quantify. I've read his message to you again and it sounds like he is promising increased WOT performance over even a 92 ECU. Why don't you send him another message and get him to come right out and say it. Then, if it doesn't measure up per my test mentioned above, send it back cause it will mean that we can't trust his part throttle claims either.

It will not provide any power gains over a 92 ECU at WOT, and nothing at part throttle either. The seller will say anything you want to hear, to get a sale. Which boost the placebo effect. The only thing you get from the chip is increased rev limit, verified to be right at 6600rpm via digital tach (not the dash tach).

Where the 420 is lazy is in the mid range with this gear in normal driving. A gear would get the response back but sacrifice top end and mileage things I don't want.

Install a 2.65 rear diff (plug & play, available for ~$200-$300 or so used). Your MPG will not change much at all, except due to your heavier right foot. I'd be surprised if you saw more than 1mpg difference, maybe 2 max on a long freeway trip.

Old school tuning could do this with advance curves and carb tuning so my question was how well did MB tune these ( almost all manufacturers have compromise tunes in the ECU programing) and with in particular with this design having the ETC was there room for improvement in the drivability.

Exactly. ADVANCE curves, for ignition. These are 100% non-adjustable on our cars. Which is why chips cannot make any part-throttle power gains on the M119 LH systems. If you want part throttle power gains, install a 5.0L engine. THAT will register on the ol' butt dyno.

 

[400Eric]

Uncle, is this post motivated by the talk about ECU chips or the talk about butt dynos? I know you are not a fan of either.

 

[Ascension]

The chips will provide ZERO gain at part throttle. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. This has been covered ad nauseam in the past.




It will not provide any power gains over a 92 ECU at WOT, and nothing at part throttle either. The seller will say anything you want to hear, to get a sale. Which boost the placebo effect. The only thing you get from the chip is increased rev limit, verified to be right at 6600rpm via digital tach (not the dash tach).




Install a 2.65 rear diff (plug & play, available for ~$200-$300 or so used). Your MPG will not change much at all, except due to your heavier right foot. I'd be surprised if you saw more than 1mpg difference, maybe 2 max on a long freeway trip.




Exactly. ADVANCE curves, for ignition. These are 100% non-adjustable on our cars. Which is why chips cannot make any part-throttle power gains on the M119 LH systems. If you want part throttle power gains, install a 5.0L engine. THAT will register on the ol' butt dyno.

Know a little about the old LH system but the effect with the ETC here was the big unknown. Don't buy that these are so well "tuned" by MB there is nothing left in them but also know that the LH is a quite limited system. Real tuned tube headers real duals and the right map would bring big increases but at what cost? Frankly it would be easier to just hang a hairdryer on the side of the big 6 on the Volvo than mess with one of these. Seen a couple of those motors make 700+ on the dyno without many mods with a hairdryer.
Like this one
http://jalopnik.com/5896181/amazing-788-horsepower-ferrari-slaying-volvo-wagon-seeks-new-owner

<a href="http://jalopnik.com/5896181/amazing-788-horsepower-ferrari-slaying-volvo-wagon-seeks-new-owner" target="_blank">[video=youtube;r8rBxG97SoQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8rBxG97SoQ[/video]

 

[400Eric]

The LH system on our M119s is quite a bit more advanced than the LH system on our old Redblocks was. For one thing, the injection on our Redblocks was batch fire (two at a time), while our M119s have a true sequential system.

The lack of mid-range is mostly due to the fact that our 4.2s are really a tiny engine. Only 256 cubes! Back in our day (yours and mine), we wouldn't have even bothered with an engine so tiny! And of course the tall gearing hurts us too but I'm not willing to sacrifice even one MPG, so the 2.24s must stay put!

 

[Ascension]

The LH system on our M119s is quite a bit more advanced than the LH system on our old Redblocks was. For one thing, the injection on our Redblocks was batch fire (two at a time), while our M119s have a true sequential system.

The lack of mid-range is mostly due to the fact that our 4.2s are really a tiny engine. Only 256 cubes! Back in our day (yours and mine), we wouldn't have even bothered with an engine so tiny! And of course the tall gearing hurts us too but I'm not willing to sacrifice even one MPG, so the 2.24s must stay put!

But that 11 to 1 compression ration helps a lot on the 4.2 in throttle response or at least it should. The 4.2 M-119 reminds me a little of the feel of the Yamaha 3.0 in my old SHO soft in the bottom but coming in with a rush as it comes up on the power band.
Actually it kinda drives like my old 1970 Boss 302 mustang soft on the bottom but a good rush when it hit the power band and at about the same HP per CI as the old 302 Cleveland was. What I was looking for was some help with that transition area between no torque and the power band coming in.
I ran mostly round port 455 ( both HO and SD motors) or bigger Pontiac's so lack of torque was not an issue with enough to pull hunks of asphalt out of the road just above idle if you could hook it with what I had.

 

[Klink]

Uncle, is this post motivated by the talk about ECU chips or the talk about butt dynos? I know you are not a fan of either.

I think it was only addressing my overly imaginative, pedantic, bizarre, overwrought, attempted humor. I share his overall disdain of "chipping" and verification via "Butt (head) dynos"...

 

[400Eric]

But that 11 to 1 compression ration helps a lot on the 4.2 in throttle response or at least it should. The 4.2 M-119 reminds me a little of the feel of the Yamaha 3.0 in my old SHO soft in the bottom but coming in with a rush as it comes up on the power band.
Actually it kinda drives like my old 1970 Boss 302 mustang soft on the bottom but a good rush when it hit the power band and at about the same HP per CI as the old 302 Cleveland was. What I was looking for was some help with that transition area between no torque and the power band coming in.
I ran mostly round port 455 ( both HO and SD motors) or bigger Pontiac's so lack of torque was not an issue with enough to pull hunks of asphalt out of the road just above idle if you could hook it with what I had.

Yes, the high compression ratio and other tricks help our 4.2s to do alright, but it's still a tiny enigne. At least displacement wise anyways. It's ironic too cause physical size wise, it takes up more underhood real estate than most big blocks do!

I had a SHO myself and I'd respectfully disagree. I don't think our 4.2s are anywhere near as "peaky" as those were.

I was a 440 Mopar man myself. Later I "downsized" to AMC 401s in the name of fuel economy and the environment! Your state troopers used to have 50 401 Javelins in their fleet, but you already knew that!

I always wanted to try my hand with a Stage 1 455 Buick, but was turned off by their relative fragileness compared to the 440s and yes, even the 401s.

 

[400Eric]

I think it was only addressing my overly imaginative, pedantic, bizarre, overwrought, attempted humor. I share his overall disdain of "chipping" and verification via "Butt (head) dynos"...

Again, very few people possess a butt dyno that is as razor sharp accurate as mine is.

 

[gerryvz]

I think it was only addressing my overly imaginative, pedantic, bizarre, overwrought, attempted humor. I share his overall disdain of "chipping" and verification via "Butt (head) dynos"...

 

[gsxr]

Don't buy that these are so well "tuned" by MB there is nothing left in them but also know that the LH is a quite limited system.

There is very little left, but what may be left, we cannot access because the EZL is non-adjustable. End of story. Believe me, if there was an easy magic way to extract more power, RENNtech, Bernard, and everyone else would have been hawking "stage XXX" kits for years. Never happened. There's a reason.

Real tuned tube headers real duals and the right map would bring big increases but at what cost?

No, they would not bring big increases. This has also been discussed ad nauseum. Full tubular headers have been shown to provide single digit power gains on SIX liter M119's. Probably would be invisible to anything except the dyno on a 4.2 displacement. And that would increase top-end power (maybe!) while sacrificing the bottom-end you are looking for.


Eric is correct... you want more torque, for that "part throttle" feeling, and you simply ain't gonna get it from a small displacement motor. Doesn't matter how many tweaks you attempt.

 

[Ascension]

Yes, the high compression ratio and other tricks help our 4.2s to do alright, but it's still a tiny enigne. At least displacement wise anyways. It's ironic too cause physical size wise, it takes up more underhood real estate than most big blocks do!

I had a SHO myself and I'd respectfully disagree. I don't think our 4.2s are anywhere near as "peaky" as those were.

I was a 440 Mopar man myself. Later I "downsized" to AMC 401s in the name of fuel economy and the environment! Your state troopers used to have 50 401 Javelins in their fleet, but you already knew that!

I always wanted to try my hand with a Stage 1 455 Buick, but was turned off by their relative fragileness compared to the 440s and yes, even the 401s.

My SHO was a 93 with the auto with the 3.2 not the 3.0 ( been a few years) and yes was a little more peaky than the M119 but not nearly as much as the 3.0 with the SS. The 3.2 had the same HP as the 3.0 but a lower power band and more torque so it didn't feel as much different from the little 4.2 M 119 as you may think.
That little 3.2 6 in the SHO was a BAD boy though and put out a LOT more HP per Cl then a M119! Had the SHO a 71 GTO and a 89 Cougar XR7 with the blown and intercooled all at 3.8 at the same time.

 

[gsxr]

SHO 3.0L = 220hp / 200tq = 73.3hp per liter

SHO 3.2L = 220hp / 215tq = 68.7hp per liter

M119 4.2L = 275hp / 295tw = 65.5hp per liter stock (69.0hp per liter on 93-95 with WOT LH module)


The M119 would happily produce 70-75hp per liter if it had more aggressive camshafts. In fact, I believe there was a Japanese AMG version which did produce 72-73hp per liter.

 

[gerryvz]

 

[400Eric]

My SHO was a 93 with the auto with the 3.2 not the 3.0 ( been a few years) and yes was a little more peaky than the M119 but not nearly as much as the 3.0 with the SS. The 3.2 had the same HP as the 3.0 but a lower power band and more torque so it didn't feel as much different from the little 4.2 M 119 as you may think.
That little 3.2 6 in the SHO was a BAD boy though and put out a LOT more HP per Cl then a M119! Had the SHO a 71 GTO and a 89 Cougar XR7 with the blown and intercooled all at 3.8 at the same time.

That's ironic cause I had a 90 Thunderbird SC automatic just before my SHO, which was a 92 with a stick. We loved the T-bird, my wife cause it was purdy, and me cause of the throttle response, but two door cars are hard to live with when you are struggling with a baby seat. Plus, neither car was nearly as reliable as the diesel Volvo was. That was my very first Volvo BTW and I STILL own it. Cars get to stick around when the are reliable. Cars that aren't don't.

I had both the T-bird and the Volvo going back to when my wife and I were still dating. Sometimes I'd bring the Bird, sometimes the Brick, but whenever I'd show up in the Brick, she'd whine: "I don't like the Volvo, why you cannot bring the Thunderbird?". "Well love it's because you live 80 miles away and I need to save on fuel sometimes".

 

[gerryvz]

SHO 3.0L = 220hp / 200tq = 73.3hp per liter

SHO 3.2L = 220hp / 215tq = 68.7hp per liter

M119 4.2L = 275hp / 295tw = 65.5hp per liter stock (69.0hp per liter on 93-95 with WOT LH module)


The M119 would happily produce 70-75hp per liter if it had more aggressive camshafts. In fact, I believe there was a Japanese AMG version which did produce 72-73hp per liter.

All of this comparison of Volvos and Taurus Yamaha SHO motors and Thunderbirds and such is not really a valid basis for comparison with the M119, IMHO.

 

[Ascension]

That's ironic cause I had a 90 Thunderbird SC automatic just before my SHO, which was a 92 with a stick. We loved the T-bird, my wife cause it was purdy, and me cause of the throttle response, but two door cars are hard to live with when you are struggling with a baby seat. Plus, neither car was nearly as reliable as the diesel Volvo was. That was my very first Volvo BTW and I STILL own it. Cars get to stick around when the are reliable. Cars that aren't don't.

I had both the T-bird and the Volvo going back to when my wife and I were still dating. Sometimes I'd bring the Bird, sometimes the Brick, but whenever I'd show up in the Brick, she'd whine: "I don't like the Volvo, why you cannot bring the Thunderbird?". "Well love it's because you live 80 miles away and I need to save on fuel sometimes".

Our SHO was the wife's car I wanted a pearl white last year 5 speed SC T-Bird she wanted the Emerald Green auto SHO so---. The 5 speed SHO's were big time underrated on the HP but the autos were while not nearly as fast more civilized. I drove the all Black Auto XR7 and loved all that bottom end response with the supercharger.
No kidding that the 420 with the M119 feels a lot like the old 3.2 SHO Taurus with the way it comes up on the power band with a rush but it's not as abrupt.

 

[Christian_K]

I own a C140 with the Later M119.98x engine with 11:1 compression ratio. The car, despite being MUCH heavier than my 500E, is soooo much more agile and sporty with its 722.6 than my 500E. I wish my 500E would have that behavior.
Its the same with the 4.2L. I had a E420 once for a few months and it was really powerfull engine wise, but obviously lower and somehow "different" in its behavior than the 500Es. Hard to describe but my butt dyno and my old brain want to tell me its because of the 11:1 compression ratio...

[Anti 500E mourn]
My 500E is just lazy on the pedal. To have the same kind of acceleration i have with my 55Kompressor, with just slightly touching the pedal and my Ultragauge showing me just 15% Throttlebody opening, i have to press the pedal of my 500E almost to the kickdown point from standstill. I hate that. I really need a 722.6 and a 6L in that car - everything else makes the car so boring for me currently... i even thought about selling it at one point because its so boring power wise. And btw my engine is not low on power. I reached the 250kph without any issues in 500E typical times, during my drive home from the big meet at Bottrop.
Only reason to keep it is the "style", its rareness and the vision to have a 6L soon and hopefully a 722.6 when that one guy finished his planned prototype conversion.
[\Anti 500E mourn]

 

[Ascension]

I own a C140 with the Later M119.98x engine with 11:1 compression ratio. The car, despite being MUCH heavier than my 500E, is soooo much more agile and sporty with its 722.6 than my 500E. I wish my 500E would have that behavior.
Its the same with the 4.2L. I had a E420 once for a few months and it was really powerfull engine wise, but obviously lower and somehow "different" in its behavior than the 500Es. Hard to describe but my butt dyno and my old brain want to tell me its because of the 11:1 compression ratio...

[Anti 500E mourn]
My 500E is just lazy on the pedal. To have the same kind of acceleration i have with my 55Kompressor, with just slightly touching the pedal and my Ultragauge showing me just 15% Throttlebody opening, i have to press the pedal of my 500E almost to the kickdown point from standstill. I hate that. I really need a 722.6 and a 6L in that car - everything else makes the car so boring for me currently... i even thought about selling it at one point because its so boring power wise. And btw my engine is not low on power. I reached the 250kph without any issues in 500E typical times, during my drive home from the big meet at Bottrop.
Only reason to keep it is the "style", its rareness and the vision to have a 6L soon and hopefully a 722.6 when that one guy finished his planned prototype conversion.
[\Anti 500E mourn]

You are describing to a T what made me look twice at the chip when I found it by accident. Full throttle acceleration was never something I considered a chip to improve but you are dead on that these cars feel big time lazy in throttle response about town in normal driving.
Yes they are super smooth and have punch when you hammer them but it takes way to much throttle to get normal traffic maneuvering done. Add that typical MB stiff throttle pedal break of the top that feels like it has a huge spring and it makes this much worse.
That's one of the things I love about the V-90 Volvo it's SO much sharper in every way around town in normal driving than the 420 is both in throttle response and handling. Now get them on the highway things reverse in a BIG way but around town the V90 is a LOT more fun to drive than the 420 is simply because the 420 feels SO blasted lazy around town.

 

[400Eric]

You guys all whine too much. Right now I'm driving an M103 powered W124 with 2.87 gears. Now THERE is a car with lazy throttle response!

Even worse are my other two M103 W124s. They have the lower 3.07 gears, but they also have that knappy second gear start. The perfect recipe for lazy throttle response!

 

[Klink]

You guys all whine too much.

X a whole bunch! They are cars, they weigh tons! They are not freaking bullets!!

 

[DerFuror]

Sorry, I faded out around 30 posts ago. So...does it get chipped or not?

 

[KarlC]

No real reason to chip / flash a car unless its super charged or a turbo, anything else the gains (if any) will be to small to notice much.

 

[DerFuror]

No real reason to chip / flash a car unless its super charged or a turbo, anything else the gains (if any) will be to small to notice.

I love a happy ending. Thanks for the update!

 

[gerryvz]

I love a happy ending. Thanks for the update!

Me too !!

 

[Klink]

Sorry, I faded out around 30 posts ago. So...does it get chipped or not?

No real reason to chip / flash a car unless its super charged or a turbo, anything else the gains (if any) will be to small to notice.

I love a happy ending. Thanks for the update!

Me too !!

Oh, don't get ahead of yourselves! I'm still sensing a lot of residual belief in this thread...

 

[400Eric]

And here I am to make sure you aren't disappointed Klink!

You guys whine too much about threads going off topic too!

See, the thing is, anytime you have a group of guys standing around and talking, the conversation naturally flows from topic to topic. You don't just stand there, talking about the same exact thing for three hours, it flows. And you also don't get some guy who starts whining "Hey, why did the subject change? We need to stay on topic!" Well, this thread is OVER FIVE YEARS OLD! It's alright! It's OK! It's cool! RELAX!

 

[Ascension]

X a whole bunch! They are cars, they weigh tons! They are not freaking bullets!!

Yep heavy and nope not bullets and for the most part respectable. However my beef is in the normal driving there are a couple bad dead spots where the car is an absolute pig just going BAWWOOOG and crawling till it picks up a few revs or you hit it hard enough for it to kick down ( then count to about 3 or so before it actually hits ). I was looking to see IF a chip would help things in that mid range torque normal driving realm and guess not. Frankly I find I am driving my Volvo around town more simply because the 190 horse 6 cylinder Volvo ( which weighs about the same as the 420 BTW) is a LOT more responsive in normal driving and more fun to drive in traffic. Like I said get the 420 on the highway and things reverse in a hurry but around town in normal driving say at about a 30MPH or so roll on the 420 is a real dog in response unless you hit it hard enough to kick it down.

 

[400Eric]

Maybe you should drive another 400E/E420 for a reference just to see if it feels different than your E420. These 034s aren't THAT bad. In some ways they are better than the 036s cause our cars have first gear start and 036s do not. That's why our valve bodies are a hot item in the For Sale section!

 

[Klink]

To Eric's point, I am wondering if your car may not have something wrong with it. Maybe you should run it by this area sometime, if not this weekend and let one of us with some experience on the model drive it and check it out? It's like Eric says, people never really complained about these cars being doggish.

 

[Hollybrook]

To Eric's point, I am wondering if your car may not have something wrong with it.

+1

 

[gsxr]

And try driving a bit with the AC switched OFF to see if that makes any difference.

 

[Ascension]

To Eric's point, I am wondering if your car may not have something wrong with it. Maybe you should run it by this area sometime, if not this weekend and let one of us with some experience on the model drive it and check it out? It's like Eric says, people never really complained about these cars being doggish.

It did see here.
http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6618&p=81879#post81879
Still no rocket ship but more drivable by far now.

 

[400Eric]

As a Volvo guy, you should remember that before mods are considered, the car needs to be brought up to "Stage Zero" status.

Regards,
Eric

 

[Ascension]

As a Volvo guy, you should remember that before mods are considered, the car needs to be brought up to "Stage Zero" status.

Regards,
Eric

Yep but if you don't know where stage 0 is -----.
At the time I found the vacuum leaks knew it could use a fresh set of plugs and maybe a fuel filter but nothing else of any consequence. Thought I was close to stage 0 at that point and no idea how far off I really was as I had no known point of reference on these cars.
These are pretty scarce around here so having no ability to just go out and drive another one didn't help matters.
Still would like to dump the limiter and the cold start gear hold + get the extra 10 to 15 from WOT enrichment so---.