Pro-M 77 mm vs Chip ?
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: WI USA
Pro-M 77 mm vs Chip ?
OK Boys and Girls the June issue of Super Ford has an interesting article about mods and the Triton 4.6L V8 done by the modular master Sean Hyland Motorsport.
1) Underdrive Pulleys netted a +6.1hp at the rear wheels, but more at the higher RPM's.
2) Stillen FIPK intake netted a +6.8 hp gain, but had to be removed due to the Pro-M wouldn't fit on the Stillen intake tube.
3) The Pro-M 77MM Mass Air kit landed a whopping +15 hp at the rear wheels.
4) SHM custom burnt chip for premium fuel and better tranny shift lost -0.8hp
So, my question is why don't more people use the better calibrated MAF's on the 4.6L and how did the chip do so poorly. Especially based on what SuperChips claims for gains at the fly wheel?
This is not a flame towards Mike or Superchip, I have one and enjoy it's seat of the pants performance.
------------------
99' F-150 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP LS
- K&N Air Filter
- Custom air intake from fender to TB
- Superchip
- PowerAid TB Spacer
- ASP Underdrive Pulleys
- Accel Coil Packs
- Rapidflow 3" single CatBack exhaust
- Fluidyne Trany cooler
- A.R.E. Hard Tonue Cover
- Duraliner bed liner
- Mobil1 5W-30
1) Underdrive Pulleys netted a +6.1hp at the rear wheels, but more at the higher RPM's.
2) Stillen FIPK intake netted a +6.8 hp gain, but had to be removed due to the Pro-M wouldn't fit on the Stillen intake tube.
3) The Pro-M 77MM Mass Air kit landed a whopping +15 hp at the rear wheels.
4) SHM custom burnt chip for premium fuel and better tranny shift lost -0.8hp
So, my question is why don't more people use the better calibrated MAF's on the 4.6L and how did the chip do so poorly. Especially based on what SuperChips claims for gains at the fly wheel?
This is not a flame towards Mike or Superchip, I have one and enjoy it's seat of the pants performance.
------------------
99' F-150 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP LS
- K&N Air Filter
- Custom air intake from fender to TB
- Superchip
- PowerAid TB Spacer
- ASP Underdrive Pulleys
- Accel Coil Packs
- Rapidflow 3" single CatBack exhaust
- Fluidyne Trany cooler
- A.R.E. Hard Tonue Cover
- Duraliner bed liner
- Mobil1 5W-30
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Dear BigRed2,
This has come up time and time again here, and will most likely continue to from time to time.
I think it's mostly because we don't see those kinds of gains at all from those MAF's on stock engines. The only time we see more power from increasing the size of MAF or throttle bodies on the F-150, and the vast majority of other vehicles, is when the engine has been modified to the point that it can actually out-strip the flow capacity of the stock components.
Now there is one situation to this that does come to mind, and that is in the 1996 & newer 4.6 DOHC Mustang Cobra. All you have to do is extend it's rev limiter, and then you *can* make more power by installing that larger MAF, so this leads to the question, just exactly what vehicle were these tests done on? If it was an F-150, I have an extremely hard time believing these results. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that you posted what you read, I don't doubt that at all. But what I do question is if this was seen on an F-150. Superchips has had countless 1997 & newer F-150's (as well as older F-150's) on the chassis dyno, and a larger mass airflow meter has not shown any power gains on a relatively stock engine in the vast majority of vehicles, including the F-150. The only time they see power gains from larger aftermarket MAF's on F-150's is when the engine has had substantial internal mechanical modifications that increase it's rpm range and shift the power band up to higher rpms.
As you can see from your stated seat-of-the-pants improvement in performance from your own Superchip, as well as countless others here, it cannot possibly cost horsepower and still feel noticeably stronger from a seat-of-the-pants view.
Sean Hyland offers a package that includes a custom Superchip calibrated for that specific MAF unit for the 4.6 DOHC and SOHC engines in the Mustangs, and claims gains of the same amount, 15 hp. So I wonder if perhaps this is the chip that was tested? And if it was tested without the MAF unit it is matched to, then no wonder it showed a loss like that, that would be easy to believe.
I will attempt to obtain a copy of that magazine so I can read that article and see just what's what. Mustangs do respond differently, especially the DOHC CObra engines. The DOHC's are in fact deliberately strangled a bit from the factory to keep power and definitely rpm's down. It has been known for some years now that you can take just about any DOHC Cobra, extend the rev limniter and throw a larger MAF & custom chip on it, and pick up nice power gains. The Cobra's engine is limited primarily to keep the alternator from turning into a grenade at the 7500 rpm level.
The point being, those Mustang 4.6's have little in common with the F-150 4.6's other than displacement. They get different camshaft profiles along with numerous other differences, and consequently they respond differently. The DOHC 4.6 Cobra is a *FAR* different engine, which has 6-bolt mains and is capable of turning 7800 rpm and more, using 4-valve heads and a completely different configuration.
Last, I'd want to know what kind of chassis dyno was used for this test; if it was a Dynojet or any other inertia dyno, I'd reject it out of hand most likely, due to their inability to properly do load factoring. Major engine builders use numerous different dyno's in-house because of this, dyno runs on one dyno cannot be directly compared to dyno runs made on a different dyno. They can at best be accurate enough to show obvious power gains, but they are nowhere near accurate enough to do repeatable back-to-back measurements of incremental gains. This is why the automakers and the big engine builders and tuners, and even Superchips uses only eddy-current chassis dynos. As a matter of fact, we have had a number of phone calls from powertrain engineers at various automakers thanking us for making that distinctions and describing (very briefly, of course) here on F150online about the differences between inertia-style chassis dynos, and eddy-current chassis dynos, and the fact of the basic inaccuracy of the inertia-style dyno for measuring incremental gains.
So there are many questions to be answered here...as Paul Harvey would say, we need to know "the rest of the story". Quick, somebody hand me a hat, I may have to eat it!
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 05-09-2000).]
This has come up time and time again here, and will most likely continue to from time to time.
I think it's mostly because we don't see those kinds of gains at all from those MAF's on stock engines. The only time we see more power from increasing the size of MAF or throttle bodies on the F-150, and the vast majority of other vehicles, is when the engine has been modified to the point that it can actually out-strip the flow capacity of the stock components.
Now there is one situation to this that does come to mind, and that is in the 1996 & newer 4.6 DOHC Mustang Cobra. All you have to do is extend it's rev limiter, and then you *can* make more power by installing that larger MAF, so this leads to the question, just exactly what vehicle were these tests done on? If it was an F-150, I have an extremely hard time believing these results. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that you posted what you read, I don't doubt that at all. But what I do question is if this was seen on an F-150. Superchips has had countless 1997 & newer F-150's (as well as older F-150's) on the chassis dyno, and a larger mass airflow meter has not shown any power gains on a relatively stock engine in the vast majority of vehicles, including the F-150. The only time they see power gains from larger aftermarket MAF's on F-150's is when the engine has had substantial internal mechanical modifications that increase it's rpm range and shift the power band up to higher rpms.
As you can see from your stated seat-of-the-pants improvement in performance from your own Superchip, as well as countless others here, it cannot possibly cost horsepower and still feel noticeably stronger from a seat-of-the-pants view.
Sean Hyland offers a package that includes a custom Superchip calibrated for that specific MAF unit for the 4.6 DOHC and SOHC engines in the Mustangs, and claims gains of the same amount, 15 hp. So I wonder if perhaps this is the chip that was tested? And if it was tested without the MAF unit it is matched to, then no wonder it showed a loss like that, that would be easy to believe.
I will attempt to obtain a copy of that magazine so I can read that article and see just what's what. Mustangs do respond differently, especially the DOHC CObra engines. The DOHC's are in fact deliberately strangled a bit from the factory to keep power and definitely rpm's down. It has been known for some years now that you can take just about any DOHC Cobra, extend the rev limniter and throw a larger MAF & custom chip on it, and pick up nice power gains. The Cobra's engine is limited primarily to keep the alternator from turning into a grenade at the 7500 rpm level.
The point being, those Mustang 4.6's have little in common with the F-150 4.6's other than displacement. They get different camshaft profiles along with numerous other differences, and consequently they respond differently. The DOHC 4.6 Cobra is a *FAR* different engine, which has 6-bolt mains and is capable of turning 7800 rpm and more, using 4-valve heads and a completely different configuration.
Last, I'd want to know what kind of chassis dyno was used for this test; if it was a Dynojet or any other inertia dyno, I'd reject it out of hand most likely, due to their inability to properly do load factoring. Major engine builders use numerous different dyno's in-house because of this, dyno runs on one dyno cannot be directly compared to dyno runs made on a different dyno. They can at best be accurate enough to show obvious power gains, but they are nowhere near accurate enough to do repeatable back-to-back measurements of incremental gains. This is why the automakers and the big engine builders and tuners, and even Superchips uses only eddy-current chassis dynos. As a matter of fact, we have had a number of phone calls from powertrain engineers at various automakers thanking us for making that distinctions and describing (very briefly, of course) here on F150online about the differences between inertia-style chassis dynos, and eddy-current chassis dynos, and the fact of the basic inaccuracy of the inertia-style dyno for measuring incremental gains.
So there are many questions to be answered here...as Paul Harvey would say, we need to know "the rest of the story". Quick, somebody hand me a hat, I may have to eat it!
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 05-09-2000).]
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 11
From: Windsor,Ontario,Canada
I read the article. It can be misleading. The chip was burned in "STOCK" configuration to remove the speed limiter. It didn't alter spark or fuel programming.
They were testing the hp in 3rd gear above the KickDown speed. They let the truck shift up to 3rd and then gradually roll into the throttle , nailing it, and sampling it only once past the point where it will gear down.
BTW it was done on a DYNOJET. They spent a total of $644.00 US for 21 hp and 27 lb-ft of torque. Mike T sells the chip for a hell of a lot less than that and you get more Hp and torque. Guss what one I got...
Kindest regards
Jean Marc Chartier
PS. Mike, If you want I can fax you the article.
------------------
00 F-150 XLT SC Flairside 4x4 4.6 w/5spd 3.55LSD
Warn XD9000i, skid plates, Draw tite class III,
Rancho RSX Reflex shocks,
Borla Cat Back
Modified Air Cleaner Outlet Tube
and air box, K&N air filter,
Superchips
They were testing the hp in 3rd gear above the KickDown speed. They let the truck shift up to 3rd and then gradually roll into the throttle , nailing it, and sampling it only once past the point where it will gear down.
BTW it was done on a DYNOJET. They spent a total of $644.00 US for 21 hp and 27 lb-ft of torque. Mike T sells the chip for a hell of a lot less than that and you get more Hp and torque. Guss what one I got...
Kindest regards
Jean Marc Chartier
PS. Mike, If you want I can fax you the article.
------------------
00 F-150 XLT SC Flairside 4x4 4.6 w/5spd 3.55LSD
Warn XD9000i, skid plates, Draw tite class III,
Rancho RSX Reflex shocks,
Borla Cat Back
Modified Air Cleaner Outlet Tube
and air box, K&N air filter,
Superchips
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 11
From: Windsor,Ontario,Canada
I did many times so I guess I'll stick to answering your questions.
"So, my question is why don't more people use the better calibrated MAF's on the 4.6L and how did the chip do so poorly. Especially based on what SuperChips claims for gains at the fly wheel?"
The chip was burned to "only remove the speed limiter". Superchips is a different company and their chip adds power. The Superchips chip is still the best bang for your buck.
IMHO all a "calibrated" MAF is, is a larger dia. MAF that modifies the signel to the PCM to allow for increased flow of air into the cylinders. The PCM will then increase the pulse width adding more fuel. Bore out your OEM MAF and the PCM will see a lean condition via the O2 sensors and attempt do the same thing. Superchips can most probably reprogram your chip to correct for this if the mix stays too lean.
Regards
JMC
------------------
00 F-150 XLT SC Flairside 4x4 4.6 w/5spd 3.55LSD
Warn XD9000i, skid plates, Draw tite class III,
Rancho RSX Reflex shocks,
Borla Cat Back
Modified Air Cleaner Outlet Tube
and air box, K&N air filter,
Superchips
"So, my question is why don't more people use the better calibrated MAF's on the 4.6L and how did the chip do so poorly. Especially based on what SuperChips claims for gains at the fly wheel?"
The chip was burned to "only remove the speed limiter". Superchips is a different company and their chip adds power. The Superchips chip is still the best bang for your buck.
IMHO all a "calibrated" MAF is, is a larger dia. MAF that modifies the signel to the PCM to allow for increased flow of air into the cylinders. The PCM will then increase the pulse width adding more fuel. Bore out your OEM MAF and the PCM will see a lean condition via the O2 sensors and attempt do the same thing. Superchips can most probably reprogram your chip to correct for this if the mix stays too lean.
Regards
JMC
------------------
00 F-150 XLT SC Flairside 4x4 4.6 w/5spd 3.55LSD
Warn XD9000i, skid plates, Draw tite class III,
Rancho RSX Reflex shocks,
Borla Cat Back
Modified Air Cleaner Outlet Tube
and air box, K&N air filter,
Superchips
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: WI USA
Mike, tests where done on a 1998 F-150 4.6L super cab. As, JMC indicated they used a dyno jet but they where testing gains over the stock configuration. So, they established the base and tried different mods on the dyno one at a time. One thing that I thought of after this post is they first did the Stillen intake and gained 6.8 hp. Then they had to remove the Stillen to use the Pro-M and gained 15 hp. In that case they really only picked up a net of 8.2 hp from the MAF itself. Because, the Pro-M kit comes with an open filter configuration much like the Sillen FIPK.
JMC, read the article again carefully. They used a chip with the speed limiter removed to run tests on the other mods, because the engine would shut off when it hit its RMP limit in third gear. Then they did a run with a custom built chip that netted a loss in HP, go figure.
JMC, read the article again carefully. They used a chip with the speed limiter removed to run tests on the other mods, because the engine would shut off when it hit its RMP limit in third gear. Then they did a run with a custom built chip that netted a loss in HP, go figure.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Dear JMC,
Yes, by all means please do fax us that article, if you don't mind. We're ina very rural area, and the closest newsstands that carry the magazine are a couple hours round trip, part of the price you pay for living in the country, I guess. No pizza delivery either!!
Your post does explain a lot, I'll understand better once I read the article of course.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
Yes, by all means please do fax us that article, if you don't mind. We're ina very rural area, and the closest newsstands that carry the magazine are a couple hours round trip, part of the price you pay for living in the country, I guess. No pizza delivery either!!
Your post does explain a lot, I'll understand better once I read the article of course.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
Anybody get a Pro-M 77MM to work with a K&N FIPK?? It sounds like a really cool addition to a FIPK. Especially since I discovered that my MAF sensor housing is PLASTIC on my truck! All of the photo's of the K&N I've ever seen showed a metal unit.
I would really like to replace it with something better!
------------------
2000 F-150 XLT, Styleside, White, Dark Graphite Int., 4x4, 4.6L, 3.55 L/S, Off-Road pkg (Skid Plates, Cab Steps, Heavy Duty Shock Absorbers, LT265/70R17SL), Class III Towing pkg with Heavy Duty Cooling pkg, 4 wheel disk ABS, Overhead Console, Factory In-Dash CD, Remote Keyless Entry, and Sliding Rear Window.
Added: K&N FIPK, Cabin Air Filtration, Ventvisors, Ford Bug Deflector
I would really like to replace it with something better!
------------------
2000 F-150 XLT, Styleside, White, Dark Graphite Int., 4x4, 4.6L, 3.55 L/S, Off-Road pkg (Skid Plates, Cab Steps, Heavy Duty Shock Absorbers, LT265/70R17SL), Class III Towing pkg with Heavy Duty Cooling pkg, 4 wheel disk ABS, Overhead Console, Factory In-Dash CD, Remote Keyless Entry, and Sliding Rear Window.
Added: K&N FIPK, Cabin Air Filtration, Ventvisors, Ford Bug Deflector
Trending Topics
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Dear BigRed2,
Just from JMC's description, I wouldn't accept those numbers, and here's why: On an automatic, you have to temporarily program them to stay in 3rd gear, which is actually a 1:1 effective ratio so you don't get any torque multiplication other than from the differential. You have to stabilize the vehicle at as low an rpm figure as possible, which is usually no lower than 2000 rpm in most situations, though the Superchips dyno can stabilize considerably lower than that.
You have to program out TQ lockup & stall variation, and make the vehicle stay in 1:1 for the entire test. If you just test from the considerably higher rpm figure above which the vehicle will no longer downshift, you don't get a good hard consistent pull across the rpm range, and the dyno has a very hard time getting good stabile readings so you can get a really good picture of what's actually happening.
There are so many things that have to be taken into consideration that it seems like you almost have to be a dyno & programming expert just to be able to properly interpret the results, and that is one thing you just don't have in these magazine "tests". Not because of anything they are deliberately trying to do to skew results, I'm not saying that at all, but just because they are writers, and not experienced dyno operators that know the real capabilities, limitations, and quirks of the various chassis dynos on the market. Nor are they aware of the programming issues on the automatics as a general rule. Even most shjop owners with Dynojets have no idea of teh limitations of the inertia-style dyno, which can sometimes even cause heated arguments when someone tells them exactly what the deal is. Nobody who just signed a $30K lease wants to hear their dyno just isn't up to the specific task of measuring incremental gains, as that is exactly why a lot of them got the dyno in the first place.
I would want to see these tests done not on an inertia style dyno, but on a proper eddy-current chassis dyno, and I would have to see it with the vehicle properly locked into 1:1 from a minimum of 2000 rpm on up, with TQ stall variations & lockup taken out of the picture.
I do not mean to "slam" Dynojet in any way, as a matter of fact I *like* them, from the standpoint that they are very affordable, costing usually only $30K for openers. This has created the situation we see today, where just about any shop owner can easily afford to lease them for a few hundred dollars a month, and make great profits charging only $50 a pull. And people get to see *approximately* what their vehicle is doing, which is the part I like, it makes them much more accessible to many more people just due to the relatively low cost.
However, they are simply nowhere near accurate enough to do repeatable, back-to-back measurements of incremental gains.
Unless the vehicle being tested just happens to weigh exactly what the combined weight of the dyno rollers are, any inertia-type chassis dyno cannot do proper load factoring, and that is absolutely critical for doing this type of testing.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
Just from JMC's description, I wouldn't accept those numbers, and here's why: On an automatic, you have to temporarily program them to stay in 3rd gear, which is actually a 1:1 effective ratio so you don't get any torque multiplication other than from the differential. You have to stabilize the vehicle at as low an rpm figure as possible, which is usually no lower than 2000 rpm in most situations, though the Superchips dyno can stabilize considerably lower than that.
You have to program out TQ lockup & stall variation, and make the vehicle stay in 1:1 for the entire test. If you just test from the considerably higher rpm figure above which the vehicle will no longer downshift, you don't get a good hard consistent pull across the rpm range, and the dyno has a very hard time getting good stabile readings so you can get a really good picture of what's actually happening.
There are so many things that have to be taken into consideration that it seems like you almost have to be a dyno & programming expert just to be able to properly interpret the results, and that is one thing you just don't have in these magazine "tests". Not because of anything they are deliberately trying to do to skew results, I'm not saying that at all, but just because they are writers, and not experienced dyno operators that know the real capabilities, limitations, and quirks of the various chassis dynos on the market. Nor are they aware of the programming issues on the automatics as a general rule. Even most shjop owners with Dynojets have no idea of teh limitations of the inertia-style dyno, which can sometimes even cause heated arguments when someone tells them exactly what the deal is. Nobody who just signed a $30K lease wants to hear their dyno just isn't up to the specific task of measuring incremental gains, as that is exactly why a lot of them got the dyno in the first place.
I would want to see these tests done not on an inertia style dyno, but on a proper eddy-current chassis dyno, and I would have to see it with the vehicle properly locked into 1:1 from a minimum of 2000 rpm on up, with TQ stall variations & lockup taken out of the picture.
I do not mean to "slam" Dynojet in any way, as a matter of fact I *like* them, from the standpoint that they are very affordable, costing usually only $30K for openers. This has created the situation we see today, where just about any shop owner can easily afford to lease them for a few hundred dollars a month, and make great profits charging only $50 a pull. And people get to see *approximately* what their vehicle is doing, which is the part I like, it makes them much more accessible to many more people just due to the relatively low cost.
However, they are simply nowhere near accurate enough to do repeatable, back-to-back measurements of incremental gains.
Unless the vehicle being tested just happens to weigh exactly what the combined weight of the dyno rollers are, any inertia-type chassis dyno cannot do proper load factoring, and that is absolutely critical for doing this type of testing.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Friendswood, TX, US
This sounds like a good safe mod. However, I will have to agree with Frank Ryan's comments in the engine forum on the Superchip. The Superchip has caused problems with my truck, from erratic shifting behavior to power surging at 4000 plus RPM. I think the Superchip is nothing but highly greased up lubed snake oil sold by highly crafted 100% salesman trying to make a buck at the expense of our engines, I Will not be taken again. I was warned by my Ford dealer friends about putting one on but did not listen. They have seen it all with what the Superchips can do to an engine.. <<not good>> I think one of the best modifications is a supercharger if you can afford it. And if mine does not sell it is going back on my truck.. <<Without the Custom Superchip>> I miss the extra power.
<<<Flame Proof Suit On, Shields UP, Warp Factor Nine Mister Scott>>
------------------
97 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP Gibson Catback
JBA Headers.. Hot Coated
Ford Motorsport 9MM wires
Superchip. Not is use
EX supercharged. For Sale
JLL Stealthbox
Rockford Fosgate punch 45 to drive stealthbox
<<<Flame Proof Suit On, Shields UP, Warp Factor Nine Mister Scott>>
------------------
97 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP Gibson Catback
JBA Headers.. Hot Coated
Ford Motorsport 9MM wires
Superchip. Not is use
EX supercharged. For Sale
JLL Stealthbox
Rockford Fosgate punch 45 to drive stealthbox
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
From: HOUSTON,TEXAS,HARRIS
Hey Gorp, what is up with this. Last month you were slamming K&N with some info about a TSB which said using a K&N would void your waranty. Nobody else ever heard of it and your were going to post info but never did. Now your saying your "friends at the Ford dealership have seen what the Superchip can do to the engine". In the year or so that I have been reading the boards, I have never seen a post about any engine dammage caused by the chip. Also, I have never met nor talked to Mike Troyer and I didn't buy my chip from him, but he has been nothing but honest and helpful to anyone who has ever asked him a question. Your "100% greased snakeoil salesman" remark is way out of line.
------------------
98 Nascar Edition, Superchip, Airaid, Flowmaster 70 series, bedliner, in bed tool box, Profile bug deflector and window vents, Class III receiver hitch.
------------------
98 Nascar Edition, Superchip, Airaid, Flowmaster 70 series, bedliner, in bed tool box, Profile bug deflector and window vents, Class III receiver hitch.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Gorp,
You sound like a truly enlighted individual who is well informed, thoughtfully mature, and most of all, credibly erudite. Congratulations!
There's one in every crowd...........
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 05-10-2000).]
You sound like a truly enlighted individual who is well informed, thoughtfully mature, and most of all, credibly erudite. Congratulations!
There's one in every crowd...........
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
Online Superchip ordering system:https://www.f150online.com/scpp/index.html
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 05-10-2000).]
Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Friendswood, TX, US
I know what I read and if you don’t believe it I don’t care. Screw up you engine its not mine, and when you go into the dealer and try to get warranty work on it.. Well you will see. When I feel like posting the TSA's I will. I was going to post them but then you would say I made it up. I just call it like I see it. Of all my friends that have had Superchip's, all but one have taken them out. Also one just sent his back for a refund and found out about the restocking fee.. Talk about satisfaction guaranteed... <<Right>>
As for Chips or Superchips in general I am sure they would help you pay for a new engine
Or processor if their product trashed ether of them. I'm sure at least the box would be there.
------------------
97 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP Gibson Catback
JBA Headers.. Hot Coated
Ford Motorsport 9MM wires
Superchip. Not is use
EX supercharged. For Sale
JLL Stealthbox
Rockford Fosgate punch 45 to drive stealthbox
As for Chips or Superchips in general I am sure they would help you pay for a new engine
Or processor if their product trashed ether of them. I'm sure at least the box would be there.
------------------
97 XLT 4.6L SC 4X4 ORP Gibson Catback
JBA Headers.. Hot Coated
Ford Motorsport 9MM wires
Superchip. Not is use
EX supercharged. For Sale
JLL Stealthbox
Rockford Fosgate punch 45 to drive stealthbox
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 7,030
Likes: 3
From: WINDSOR, ONTARIO, CANADA
HI!... GORP : I think you better start getting your "WORD OF MOUTH" information somewhere else! I have had my SUPERCHIP now for more than a year now, and never had ONE single problem with it or my truck after installing it. The chip it's self dropped off more than 6 tenths of a second in my 1/4 mile times! Thats more than half a second, for only $315.00 (CAN)!! As for MIKE T. I have spoken to him on the phone SEVERAL times. He is a VERY honest guy and will help you out if he can and sometimes even at the cost of him! So don't be bad mouthing MIKE. As for my SUPERCHIP I am very pleased with it and will suggest it to anyone!
P.S - Could the SUPERCHIPS you are hearing about be the ADS superchip and not the SUPERCHIPS INC, superchip?
------------------
NEAL [ the horsepower freak ] NEWMAN
'99' F-150 XLT SPORT, oxford white, reg cab shortbox stepside,5.4, auto, 4.10L.S, captain's chairs, bedliner, GTS carbon fiber headlight covers, ***** CEPECK clear halogen driving lights, GTS slotted tailight covers (painted oxford white), FORD locking lug nuts, tinted windows,true duel exhaust with 2.5 inch mandrel bent pipes and FLOWMASTER 3 chamber mufflers with 3' tailpipes exiting before the rear wheel like the LIGHTNING, HELLWIG rear stabalizer bar, AUTOMETER guage pod and tranny temp guage, custom fabricated air intake trac and huge K/N filter, TPS mod, BELLTECH 2-inch rear drop, custom programed SUPERCHIP, modified POWERAID spacer, BAUMANN ENGINEERING shift kit/BYPASS CLUTCH CONTROL VALVE/PREASURE REGULATOR VALVE, ASP POWER PULLEYS.
FUTURE MODS : JBA headers, twin electric fans, traction bars, AUTO METER oil preasure/ engine temp PHANTOM GUAGES and a KENNE BELL BLOWZILLA supercharger.
ESTIMATED H.P TO DATE : 320H.P / 415ft/lbs of torque.
OTHER TOYS : "83" PRO STREET FORD RANGER : 351-w stroked to 408c.i 625H.P (natural), 875H.P with 250H.P "BIG SHOT" N.O.S kit, tubbed (crome moly tubing), 12 point chrome moly roll cage, 4-link with coil overs, MUSTANG II front suspension, c-4 tranny (race prepped), 4000rpm stall converter(8 INCH), 3" chrome moly driveshaft,AUTOMETER guages, 15.50 MICKEY THOMPSON rear tires, 4" M/T front tires, CENTERLINE CON-VO PRO rims, fiberglass hood - bumper - prostock hood scoop, wishbone trac-link, two chrome moly driveshaft loops, 16 gallon RCI fuel cell,etc
P.S - Could the SUPERCHIPS you are hearing about be the ADS superchip and not the SUPERCHIPS INC, superchip?
------------------
NEAL [ the horsepower freak ] NEWMAN
'99' F-150 XLT SPORT, oxford white, reg cab shortbox stepside,5.4, auto, 4.10L.S, captain's chairs, bedliner, GTS carbon fiber headlight covers, ***** CEPECK clear halogen driving lights, GTS slotted tailight covers (painted oxford white), FORD locking lug nuts, tinted windows,true duel exhaust with 2.5 inch mandrel bent pipes and FLOWMASTER 3 chamber mufflers with 3' tailpipes exiting before the rear wheel like the LIGHTNING, HELLWIG rear stabalizer bar, AUTOMETER guage pod and tranny temp guage, custom fabricated air intake trac and huge K/N filter, TPS mod, BELLTECH 2-inch rear drop, custom programed SUPERCHIP, modified POWERAID spacer, BAUMANN ENGINEERING shift kit/BYPASS CLUTCH CONTROL VALVE/PREASURE REGULATOR VALVE, ASP POWER PULLEYS.
FUTURE MODS : JBA headers, twin electric fans, traction bars, AUTO METER oil preasure/ engine temp PHANTOM GUAGES and a KENNE BELL BLOWZILLA supercharger.
ESTIMATED H.P TO DATE : 320H.P / 415ft/lbs of torque.
OTHER TOYS : "83" PRO STREET FORD RANGER : 351-w stroked to 408c.i 625H.P (natural), 875H.P with 250H.P "BIG SHOT" N.O.S kit, tubbed (crome moly tubing), 12 point chrome moly roll cage, 4-link with coil overs, MUSTANG II front suspension, c-4 tranny (race prepped), 4000rpm stall converter(8 INCH), 3" chrome moly driveshaft,AUTOMETER guages, 15.50 MICKEY THOMPSON rear tires, 4" M/T front tires, CENTERLINE CON-VO PRO rims, fiberglass hood - bumper - prostock hood scoop, wishbone trac-link, two chrome moly driveshaft loops, 16 gallon RCI fuel cell,etc
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,961
Likes: 1
I have not yet, but do plan to superchip. My reasons? For one, the way Ford has decided that my transmission should shift, poorly to say the least. The second reason is that the computer in your Ford will "RESET ITSELF" based on the way you drive. This process takes a little while but will happen. That means if you drive softly to conserve fuel most of the time, then forget the next time you pull up next to a bowtie or ram head. You will continue to "SOFTLY" watch them pull away!!!
------------------
Black 1997 F-150 Supercab Flairside. 4.6L with Jocobs DIS, K&N Generation II, Cat back Exhaust (nice rumble). 17" Off Road wheel pkg. Lots of body mods. 4 yrs old and still turns heads...
------------------
Black 1997 F-150 Supercab Flairside. 4.6L with Jocobs DIS, K&N Generation II, Cat back Exhaust (nice rumble). 17" Off Road wheel pkg. Lots of body mods. 4 yrs old and still turns heads...
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,961
Likes: 1
Hay GORP,
You are afraid of a superchip damaging your engine and in the same text talk about supercharging. Ever hear of something called HEAT. Not that there is anything wrong with supercharging, but lets really talk about safety and cost... As soon as I can afford, I PLAN TO SUPERCHIP...
------------------
Black 1997 F-150 Supercab Flairside. 4.6L with Jocobs DIS, K&N Generation II, Cat back Exhaust (nice rumble). 17" Off Road wheel pkg. Lots of body mods. 4 yrs old and still turns heads...
You are afraid of a superchip damaging your engine and in the same text talk about supercharging. Ever hear of something called HEAT. Not that there is anything wrong with supercharging, but lets really talk about safety and cost... As soon as I can afford, I PLAN TO SUPERCHIP...
------------------
Black 1997 F-150 Supercab Flairside. 4.6L with Jocobs DIS, K&N Generation II, Cat back Exhaust (nice rumble). 17" Off Road wheel pkg. Lots of body mods. 4 yrs old and still turns heads...