41 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRevo software trial impressions
Leading reported evidence
Run ecu stock
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
I ran the ECU stock for a little bit last year and I did noticed not a single difference from the flash setting.
Leading evidence: 'Run ecu stock' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'significant part of it' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Disconnect cars' batteries long enough' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
The VW 1.8T and now the 2.0T engine (good example btw) is used for endless models, especially in Europe
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause
I'm not saying it's entirely responsible for the price difference, but it's likely a significant part of it.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
As for the bet, I'd say this: Disconnect both cars' batteries long enough for the control car's DME to reset to default.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
1) what happens after 5 hours...........does the program "self destruct" or do you voluntarily have your car plugged back in to his computer to reset your computer to normal.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Revo has files for 91 and 100 octane or the access to the Select Plus (handheld data switch which selects which program that has been previously loaded into the computer will run 91, 93, 100 and assorted other features).
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
41 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T192637Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Recently completed a 5 hour trial of Revo software in my MY01 C4 cab. My indie offered the free trial while I was having some work done and I wasn't planning on buying it. Just did it for ****s & giggles and wasn't expecting much besides the higher redline & power band but I was really impressed by the results
I guess since I already did the RSS plenum, K&N CAI & gemballa exhaust for the audible enjoyment that the flash really woke the car up. Much improved throttle response & reved much faster throughout the power band with no noticeable loss in the low end. I have no proof of power gains or ties to REVO but (FWIW) on some 1st to 3rd runs my back end was breaking lose on stretches of road where it's never happened before.
Not trying to spark the age old debate about pros & cons of bolt on mods because it's been beaten to death. Just saying I was surprised by the results & it made my car even more enjoyable to drive.
Since I'm now in the market for software - any opinions floating around on REVO vs some of the other programs on the market?
ok, 2 silly questions!
1) what happens after 5 hours...........does the program "self destruct" or do you voluntarily have your car plugged back in to his computer to reset your computer to normal.
2) since the computer is adaptive to our driving habits, what happens when you store the car for the winter. Do you have to drive like a demon in the spring to "wake it up", or is the chip programming automatically starting the car at a higher level of responsiveness.
That's the point. I try to avoid the 'horsepower' discussions, since nobody can really feel horsepower anyway, certainly not 10 or 15 of them. Car manufacturers write OEM software to please most of the people most of the time, and run on the worst commonly available fuel. I think sometimes people don't realize a) how many other factors go into this than just power output, and b) how subjective it really is in a lot of ways.
I'm doing the GIAC in the spring. Thanks for your timely post.
I've been poking around other forums and founds that softronic as a popular ECU upgrade on the cayman and turbo boards....its looks interesting, customized for the mods you have...can switch back to stock by yourself...and its price is cheaper than the Giac with the same claimed hp gains.
http://www.softronic.us/buynow.php
In my opinion, the prices for Porsche chips (normally aspirated) are outrageous.
If you've got a TT okay, but otherwise $1,000 for what?
I've chipped two 1.8Ts and the bang for the buck is phenomenal.
$400-$500 for 40-50hp.
The chip tuners see Porsche owners coming a mile away....
wlee69 - have you seen any reviews on softronic by 996 owners? I'd be interested in what caymen owners have to say for comparison with the 996, as opposed to the turbo cars which always get good results from flashes. Thanks for the heads up.
That would be great. I remember reading one comparing the Dinan chip to the Conforti Shark chip on a pair of BMW E36s, and it was very clarifying... not about which was best but about how they were different. The quote was, "Conforti for the street, Dinan for the track." I'd love to know that for the 996 options.
I looked into s/w upgrades for my 2004 996 X51 C2 last year, but nothing was available for the X51 variant. Softronic offers upgrades for 996 3.6 standard, 996 GT3, 996 turbo, and 996 turbo X50, but not for the X51. Maybe there are too few of them.
Regarding the price of the s/w for Porsches vs other makes, I think it's necessary to consider a couple of things before concluding it's a ripoff. It is true that flash upgrades realize higher hp and torque gains in turbos than in NA engines, so if one isn't satisfied with, say, the 20 hp gain Softronic claims for the 996 3.6 engine, I suppose one shouldn't buy it. As for the absolute price of the s/w, the supplier's business model should affect it. In the s/w business, the cost structure is heavily weighted toward development, and production is cheap. Therefore, product volume is a key factor in determining what price the supplier can charge. Let's suppose it costs the same for the company to develop a flash upgrade for a Porsche 996 and for an Audi A4 1.8T. And let's suppose that there is competition in the market (as there is here...GIAC, Softronic, etc.) so that the company cannot charge "monopolistic" prices. Logic then dictates that the supplier can charge less for the higher volume seller. Since there are more A4 1.8Ts in the world than 996s, the supplier could charge less for 1.8T flash than for 996 flash. I'm not saying it's entirely responsible for the price difference, but it's likely a significant part of it. So maybe the suppliers see Porsche owners coming from only "a kilometer away."
There are usually a lot of factors that determine the price of a product so it's a little too simple to say it's always cost + fixed margin. And to expect a perfect competitive environment is also not realistic. The handful of ECU tuners out there act more like being in an oligopoly. No one is interested in a price war and they know that Porsche guys are less price sensitive than Volkswagen guys so they all silently agree to keep the price high where it optimizes their margin.
However, I agree that there a tons of 1.8T Volkswagen/Audi engines out there and owners that want them flashed; much more than 996 3.4 or 996 3.6 engines and upgrade willing owners. The VW 1.8T and now the 2.0T engine (good example btw) is used for endless models, especially in Europe
VW: Golf, Passat, Turan, Tiguan, Sharan
Audi: A3, A4, A6, TT
Skoda
Seat
I've always wondered, how much of the "performance enhancement" of an ECU flash is real increases in HP or torque vs. remapping the throttle to make it seem sportier. Especially with NA cars.
I'm told that Farnbacher Loles in CT has an ECU upgrade also. Does anyone know if they've made the modifications themselves or if they are using the GIAC flash?
It's hard for one's **** to notice a 20hp diff let alone the 5hp that may come from an ECU upgrade on an N/A engine.
Sure, my car is what they call Evo stage 2 meaning it combines the EVMOS intake with the GIAC flash, but guys, you guys are really desperate, soul searching for HP if you think these things actually make any sort of real difference in power.
I would not have spent the $1500 on the GIAC flash. I would go so far as to claim that it's done nothing for real world gains meaning if I raced someone who was once equal to me in a straight line, it'd be the same ol' story w/ flash.
I'm not looking for real performance gains when I do these kind of mods. I got the GIAC flash some weeks ago and the main difference I feel in day to day driving is that I gained throttle response at low RPM. When I e.g. pushed the pedal at 2.5k - 3k RPM in 5th gear, my car was pretty lame prior to the GIAC flash. Now it's really sharp on the point and when I start without fully accelerating, the dead point when letting the clutch out is fully gone. These are the things I like about performance mods; they change the characteristics of the car (ECU flash, Plenum), the sound (CAI, exhaust, headers), the feel (LWFW) ... The ultimate performance change is marginal; but again that's not the point - at least not for me. BTW, the GIAC is $995 for the n/a 996 not $1,500.
Throttle response is like **** on the bottom of the foot with all due respect hwk.
I've never come across a car (S2000, M3, 911) where throttle response ever felt like **** or the car did not go when I wanted it to go.
Do you know what I'm saying? I ran the ECU stock for a little bit last year and I did noticed not a single difference from the flash setting.
Dude, don't even. I've seen this debate a million times on all kinds of forums, and there's never any objective proof that ever satisfies everybody, including wheel to wheel racing and dyno results. There's always some extenuating "yeah, but...".
Some basic truths:
A product like the GIAC flash does make a difference.
The difference in most driving is more 'felt' than measurable. (These things are supposed to do a lot more than add horsepower, which you can't feel anyway).
If you don't feel it, it's not worth the money. If you do feel it, it is worth the money.
Dass it, dass all.
These products don't make the car 'better' than OEM, they make it different. The tuner might have different priorities about fuel economy, emissions, throttle response, low speed driveability, fuel tolerance, on and on, and a lot of them will be subjective. Think of it like tailoring. To me, this is as legitimately personal as wheel choice is.
no way. wheels you can see. a flash... i bet you that you could not tell the diff in a blind test.
it comes down to a feel good expense. again, i have the giac flash but would never spend $1500 to get it flashed again as i did not feel any sort of difference in this enigma called "throttle response" and butt power gains feel.
I just meant that the value is subjective, just the way taste in wheels is.
As for the bet, I'd say this: Disconnect both cars' batteries long enough for the control car's DME to reset to default. THEN flash the test car, and drive both of them right away... washes out the variability that the adaptive DME brings to this kind of thing... and I bet I could tell the difference just fine. I bet you could, too. I'm not saying you'd change your mind about the value, but I'm sure you aren't such a brick-*** that you couldn't sense the change in the car's character.
I'm getting the GIAC in the spring. I had Dinan do my last car. I never claimed that it was faster or better, but I personally enjoyed the difference. It felt stronger on the fuel I used, and it felt more lively because the program didn't have to provide lowest-common-denominator driveability.
Just one of those different strokes things.
bruce, my **** is tight and sensitive WHAHAHAH and i would be able to tell pls believe. i am in tune with my cars and i'm telling you i'd be the biggest fan of this thing and tell everyone go for it... but alas i have it and i don't think it's doing anything for my car.
maybe my car is a fluke, but i just would never recommend someone spend $1500 for the giac which is one of the more respected brands out there along this front.
Meh... well, I haven't driven the GIAC yet, so who knows. I'm going to do the free trial, so if my experience is the same as yours, then we'll have to conclude that Porsche engineers were once again supreme.
I've already run with stock and modded '02' coups. I'm certainly not going to record such events let alone take my mods of for some useless baseline. lol! The nay sayers are the ones who have absolutely no proof. I've run and dyno'd. Find a stock 996 with a dyno set to SAE with HP and Torque higher than mine while you're at it.
bruce,
if you have the GIAC done, i'll grab either the softronic or the revo and we can do pulls or i can let you boot around on my car if you'd like.
we both have 3.4 RWD's so it should be pretty comparable.
I'm almost certain they don't offer 100. I only ran 91 for the five hour trial but have to think 100 would have made the program even more effective.
GL
do you seriously get any sort of satisfaction making such statements? if so, you need to stop spending so much time with the car and go feed the homeless for a month or something to slap you into reality.
ain't nobody gives a flying fuq about your hp/tq ratings being supposedly higher than anyone else's 911. you gotta be kidding me WHAHHAHAHAHHAHA
You're taking my statement out of context. The correct context is, "if you don't believe bolt on's work show proof such as a dyno of a stock 996 that is higher than a modded 996. It seems that around here that seat of pants and making alot of internet post is more accurate than dynometers and real life head to head situations."
You're also, misquoting the GIAC Software price. I didn't pay $1500 for mine, but even if that were the case what is $1500 compared to the lavish vacations you take, and the $80,000 car you drive. You **** that kind of money away on drinks alone.
Chasen,
Revo has files for 91 and 100 octane or the access to the Select Plus (handheld data switch which selects which program that has been previously loaded into the computer will run 91, 93, 100 and assorted other features).
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
