To chip or not to chip - and which is best?
ekellock at adelphia.net
Mon Feb 16 13:30:27 EST 2004
I have experience with IA ecu upgrades in both an '87 5kcstq and a '91 Avant (3B, 20-valve). The perceivable difference in the latter is definitely more subtle, but no less worthwhile.
I believe the underlying reason for this is the difference in turbos. The '87 with MC motor and K26 turbo produces power output far less progressively; even in stock form there is more lag followed by a much more obvious seat of the pants feeling.
It was my preception that the increase in power due to the ecu mod in each corresponded appropriately with the characteristics of the stock motors.
btw, my modded '87 was equal to my stock 3B Avant. Then when it was modded, it upped the ante a corresponding amount.
From: Kerry Griffith <i2k at xmission.com>
Date: 2004/02/16 Mon AM 08:37:22 MST
To: <tom at tomellisphoto.com>
CC: 200q20v at audifans.com
Subject: Re: To chip or not to chip - and which is best?
My car has been chipped for five years, with excellent results. The
difference in power is substantial. However, there is a subjective
component, so what feels like a worthwhile difference to me may seem a waste
of money to you. I remember when the discerning Henry Harper III drove my
car (which also has an RS2 exhaust manifold) he noticed a difference, but
didn't immediately remove both hands from the wheel to grab for his cell
phone with one and credit card with the other. If you've had experience with
modifying cars, you'll probably feel that it's very inexpensive power. If
not, you may be somewhat non-plussed.
200q20v mailing list
200q20v at audifans.com
More information about the 200q20v