I can't recall any "chip kit" from Porsche for any US 944 Turbo that was installed by US Porsche dealers and carried a warranty. Do you have a Porsche part number for any of them?

In any event, EPA and CARB regulations have changed since the Porsche 944 Turbo was available new and this thread is about a fully street-legal 50-state chip for a 2003 car.

P.S. Gee, I wonder why Mitsu engineers didn't think to hold full boost to redline and reduce the A/F enrichment in the first place? Maybe they had visions of half the Evo engines on the West Coast, who're running 91 AKI gas, ending up as boat anchors within a year.

 

You said:
I said:

You replied:

Chips can give incredible gains on turbo cars, it doesn't matter if the chip is aftermarket or provided by the mfgr. You said a chip can't do that, ever (See above). There is more than enough instances where chips do give greater than 25HP, like the 944T or since your so worried bout EPA, how about the Audi S4? From 250 to 320HP. Or even the 1.8T VW's or A4's which go from 150HP to 185HP. Don't be such an ***.
Nowhere in this thread did it say the Ralliart/Mitsu chip would be street legal, or warranty covered. The mfgr can release products for a car that are not street legal, AKA 'off-road use only'. Take a look at the Mopar, Ford Racing, and GM parts. While some of them are EPA/CARB/Warranty legal, most are not. That doesn't stop people from putting them in street cars and hoping they dont get caught with them. In most cases they reasons for not being street legal are just financial - the mfgrs dont' want to pay the certification money.



As far as why the EVO runs as it does now (drops boost and runs rich)- it's been answered a thousand times, go read some other threads...

 

Just in case it wasn't said before, there is no "300hp chip" coming our way from Ralliart, MMC, etc,. I'm not sure where the rumor started but don't expect to see a higher-hp EVO for quite some time. Big Japanese corporations don't move that fast. Maybe PVO (the small group of gearheads that brought us the SRT4) could, but not Mitsubishi (or Subaru or Mazda or.... )

Cheers,
shiv

 

I don't agree. The STi makes ~20% more wheel hp than the EVO, regardless of fuel octane. Elminating the boost taper in favor of a flat boost profile isn't going to come close to bridging that big of a HP gap, IMHO. And on 91 octane, it's going to make matters even worse as far as knock resistance and repeatibility is concerned.

Just my 2c,

Shiv

 

Lets us not forget that the STI is only running something like 15lbs of boost not 19 like the EVO, so that alone should make the EVO prayers think twice, let us just say we bump the boost up on the STI and give it a twin scroll turbo, don't you all think that then the STI would be just a bit more desireable than an EVO? It is same to compare them right now because they always have been similar, however Subaru has upped the Antty and Mitsubishi is not seeing the Raise they are folding. I really do hope that Mitsu?fuso gets a wake up call and brings over thier so called ralliart version soon. or a RS version, because I can say this, our current form of an STI should really be called a Spec C not just an STI, so in that sense it is not fair for Mitsu and suby is cheating a tad. wel enough of my rant just a thought again for the Undecided out there.

 

The idea that a chip can't give more then 20 to 30 hp is stupod and illinformed. I have a TT with the APR chip that bumps power at the crank from 225 to 264. There is a huge difference and that is just with a 1.8 liter engine. I can destroy an stock cars that want to race me. Also there have been no problems with reliability or anything, and I have driven my car hard plenty of times. It also has the flip switch option so I can change maps to go back to stock when I bring it into the dealer. Good stuff.

P.S. Does anyone ever get sick of hearing about California and how all performance options have to be cut back because of gas and Carb regulations. Grey Davis can suck my *****. He is screwing up my life even here in Texas. I went with the APR chip because they have a 91 and 93 octane map. I would suggest to to forget about California, who cares. There are 49 other states who can benefit from not dealing with California regulations. I hope the chip isn't even offered there. Sorry to get on a rant, but I hear the California excuse is the reason for everything bad, lower power figures, enviornmental concerns, etc. I saw SCREW 'EM!

 

Typically, for each PSI of boost you can expect 10HP under the best conditions. I really don't see why moving from 16PSI to 19 PSI all the way to redline with the right A/F ratio would not give back the 30 HP... I have an S-AFC and a MBC set to 19PSI and it is MUCH stronger than it was stock... Why again can't a chip from Mitsu do this?

I am not sure why some of you guys say a Mitsu provided chip can't do what many on this board say they are getting just from the S-AFC without messing with boost.

As to the EVO running 19 PSI stock, it only peaks that high briefly... Not enough to really say it "runs" that amount of boost in my opinion...

 

More geared toward the comments about the STi being tuned by Dan/Godspeed...

Dan has been known to, adjust, vehicles and not list certain things added to create power in efforts to sell his products. So much in fact, he was practically banned from the Honda world for doing so. Any doubts, pop over to honda-tech.com and hit the ITR (Integra Type R) forum and ask.

He mentions in his thread you listed that the turbo pretty much sucks up top. Almost refuses to hold boost. Just an observation.

Also, saying something like it makes more power on less boost is ridiculous. There are so many differences between just a boost number to claim that, its almost a waste of time to argue. Fact of the matter is that the EVO does produce more HP per Litre than that of the STi. (EVO is ~135HP / L, STi is ~120HP / L)

The STi is a nice car, and does produce more factory rated HP then the EVO, but IMO the differences between the 2 cars is more then just a HP number.

More on topic, I have to agree with Shiv about this. I do forget who else replied it was good marketing by Mitsu to wait until the STi came out to release a chip, but here are some thoughts. How good of a marketing technique is it to list a car with a lower rated number, to allow your competitor to come out the next day with a "Hey, we have more HP then you, Na-na-na-na.." - and then have them say, "Oh yeah, well we'll just sell our customers a 1500$ chip to equal your factory rated car." I sure as hell won't buy it.

sneaky, who's stepping down off the soap box before he gets hit with something.

 

Your statement is inaccurate, incomplete and typical of many who clearly do not understand what they are talking about. The STI has a small turbo and 15psi on the STI may be equivalent to 19 psi on a big 16g relative to efficiency, but then facts shouldn't get in the way... right?

speedlimit..

 

If WORKS is selling a reflashed ECU to boost performance (as of now, who knows how much) would it be right to think Ralliart will offer somwthing along the same lines?

 

For one, I said it would get the EVO into the STI range, not make them equivalent in power. I stand by my statement. Having worked on 4G63 motors for about 6 years now, I can safely say that the difference between 16psi and 19psi on a 16G is substantial. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts on this one.

Besides, who the hell cares about 91 octane 'cept the CA wussies. Just kidding.

Thomas Dorris

 

What makes your words better than f1mania's? Ralliart will come sooner or later.

 

Like I said before and I will say again... I love the Evo and am probably getting one very soon, all I am saying is facts. The Subaru has a smaller standard turbo, the EVO has a larger twin scroll turbo which makes a huge diffrence, but my whole point was exactly your point. It is not fare any more to compare the US based EVO and US based STI in any way except for the amount of cylinders and the amount of doors each car posses, This is the only commomnality now. that is like comparing a EVO Against the NEON SRT4, yeah they are in the same grouping but we all know that the lancers is a AWD Monster that lb. for lb. would kill the SRT4! so trust me I know what I am talking about I have been in the racing business for a quite a few years and have tuned many diffrent cars in my time from the frame up. I was just stressing the unbalanced articles that are croping up every where are not that fare anymore. I have no doubt that if the STI was a 2.0 Ltr. like in the rest of the world the US EVO would beat it. but that extra .5 ltr of volume goes a loooooooong way in the torque industry. so any ways enough is enough I will say it one more time the EVO is a monster and as much as I have been a subaru shop since the First release of the Legacy turbo, till current modelsI will most likely be getting a EVO.

 

My post was rude and I apologize for the terse statement. I confused you with an individual who has been leaving his/her troll droppings on this forum. I understand your point and recommend you drive both cars before you make a final decision. Have fun!

Speedlimit......

 

The STI only runs 15psi because that is how much boost the turbo can push out. The sucker is too small to push out any more.