7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHFVD comes out with software upgrade
Leading reported evidence
Adjust 996 3.4 x51 code
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
Last time I talked to him he was running an adjusted 996 3.4 X51 code.
Leading evidence: 'Adjust 996 3.4 x51 code' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Adjust 996 3.4 x51 code' (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.
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
FWIW: I don't think that changing the SW code for your ECU tampers with the memory for codes/faults.
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.
7 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 · 2 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T084359Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Got this via email a couple days ago...looks interesting as it can be done without sending the ECU - and it can be reversed back to stock by yourself. Also interesting they say that "custom" make your program upgrade by you telling them the enhancements you've got on your car (ie intake, exhaust etc)
Another option to GIAC , Unichip, etc.....
http://shop.fvd.de/?VID=94604&VCD=66...Body=&CarYear=
Interesting and seasonable development; just the price of $1.295k is pretty steep. If there's a GIAC dealer close, why hassle with the self install and the price difference? I'm not sure if the "customizing" is more than a marketing gag. Sure is sounds logic that exhaust, CAI or headers change the set-up of the car but will a customized re-flash really perform better than an uncustomized one?
What is (any) software doing anyhow (quote from FVD)?
- Increasing throttle response
- Modifying Ignition Timing
- Optimising Air and fuel ratios
- Removal of top speed limiter
- Increasing rev limiter
For what of above makes customizing a difference? And how would a tuner program "throttle response" different when you have a CAI?
It doesn't sound like it....its the same process as GIAC where they give you a unique file to upload to your ECU. Doubt it can be used on multiple cars. As far as the "hassle" of loading it yourself, I would rather have that freedom in case something happens to the car and you want to bring it back to stock prior to the trip to the dealer (if its under warrantee) - just personal preference I guess!!!
That's a good argument with the independency of the upload and reset to factory in terms of warrenty but can't the dealer dedect that the car had a different software on it? Isn't the out reving for example something that can be dedected; I wonder how this works when the redline was increased for a certain time.
Good questions....I'm going on past experience with BMW Conforti software where you could do essentially the same thing - dealer could never tell that I was shifting the software back and forth on dealer visits. I assume this is doing something similar, but I guess I don't want to find out for sure either!!! ha!
A local friend of mine is running this on his Boxster with a 996 engine. I thought it was pretty cool. But not from FVD but the same thing. He can just talk to the tuner on the phone and they send him new file. Last time I talked to him he was running an adjusted 996 3.4 X51 code. (3.4 with x51 were only available in europe and later in the states for the 3.6 and now the 3.8)
FWIW: I don't think that changing the SW code for your ECU tampers with the memory for codes/faults.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
