ECU Upgrade Appreciation or Problems

[Sharkie]

This is not meant as a "chip war" section. So no comparisons between the different chips out there please.

In all parts of the forum we get questions about chips and what it will do to the car. Both the good and the bad .... In the future for any response to such a question maybe we could point here and say .... "this is what people have said" ....

So if you have had a bad experience with a chip please state it here. Cost does not count. What we want to know did it break anything on your car ? ... How many kms before you had a problem and what ws it?

ALSO ... if you have had a good experience, please state it here.

[Sharkie]

I have only had good experiences with "chips" so far. It has never broke anything .... I had it on these cars ....

Overseas
1995 VW VR6 - VW Motorsport ECU upgrade
1995 BMW M3 - AC Schnitzer ECU Upgrade
2000 BMW 328i - AC Schnitzer ECU Upgrade
2000 Isuzu (Holden) DC 320 V6 - Unichip
2001 BMW Z3M - AC Schnitzer ECU Upgrade
2002 BMW M3 - AC Schnitzer ECU Upgrade

In Australia
2005 RAV4 2.4 - Unichip
2006 VW Polo GTI - APR
2009 VW Tiguan - APR

Custom:
VW Golf Mk1 1800 16v Turbo - Haltech ECU

Problems experienced:
On the 1995 M3, my mechanic did not tighten a new oil cooler's piping properly and @ 8000rmin it popped off. (Stock 1995 M3 only revved to 7000rmin so as a result of the ECU upggrade?)
Mk1 broke many things during its life ... too be expected from a Mk1 when pushing the boundaries too far in search of ultimate performance.

[John Deere]

I have only ever had an APR chip on my MkV GTI (2007).

The good:

Goes like poo off a stick
Still decent economy
Goes like poo off a stick
Zero turbo lag
Goes like poo off a stick
Rounds up many "more expensive" cars on track days

The bad:

Done too many sets of tyres!
The DSG had to be replaced, but I am not certain this was from the chip, though I am sure it didn't help
Hard to drive within speed limits. (Goes like poo off a stick)

[Timbo]

2006 Polo GTI -- REVO technik chip -- no problems
2008 Audi S3 -- GIAC chip -- no problems

[logger]

Trying not to make this a comparison but just pointing out problem I struck. A selling point of some ECU remaps is switchable programs..."available at the touch of a button". However this feature can be problematic. What they don't tell you is that your car can take quite a while to adapt post program switch. This lead to my car having a spurious Engine Over Torque followed by an engine shutdown while driving leisurely at 80kmh. This occurred several days and >200km after switching programs. After coming to a halt the engine immediately restarted and has been fine since. But not a lot of fun if it occurred at an inopportune moment.
Of course the fix is not to switch programs, but this sort of negates having the feature in the first place.

[Guy_H]

Trying not to make this a comparison but just pointing out problem I struck. A selling point of some ECU remaps is switchable programs..."available at the touch of a button". However this feature can be problematic. What they don't tell you is that your car can take quite a while to adapt post program switch. This lead to my car having a spurious Engine Over Torque followed by an engine shutdown while driving leisurely at 80kmh. This occurred several days and >200km after switching programs. After coming to a halt the engine immediately restarted and has been fine since. But not a lot of fun if it occurred at an inopportune moment.
Of course the fix is not to switch programs, but this sort of negates having the feature in the first place.

Just a comment on this topic (probably best to start another topic) - The program switching (all program switching regardless of brand) switches a series of "Maps" or "tables" in the ECU - it does not switch learned values or learned load values (including fuel trims etc), so these are retained by the ECU until it relearns (a constant ongoing thing). By attempting back to back acceleration runs or dyno runs, the learned values will influence the maps.

You can clear them with separate steps with diagnostic tools if you require.

The "Over torque situation" can be seen in this influence, but in this case of after several days (since switching), it was more likely triggered my a Air mass sensor spurious signal or similar. Unless you are data logging at the time or can repeat the fault, they are tough to track down. If it was days & > 200km's it probably has nothing to do with switching all.

[sillygogo]

Just a comment on this topic (probably best to start another topic) - The program switching (all program switching regardless of brand) switches a series of "Maps" or "tables" in the ECU - it does not switch learned values or learned load values (including fuel trims etc), so these are retained by the ECU until it relearns (a constant ongoing thing). By attempting back to back acceleration runs or dyno runs, the learned values will influence the maps.

You can clear them with separate steps with diagnostic tools if you require.

The "Over torque situation" can be seen in this influence, but in this case of after several days (since switching), it was more likely triggered my a Air mass sensor spurious signal or similar. Unless you are data logging at the time or can repeat the fault, they are tough to track down. If it was days & > 200km's it probably has nothing to do with switching all.

Car stopping at 80Km/h crushing is serious and can be dangerous.


So is this mean that switching is not good? Does it need to relearn at every switch?

[logger]

Just a comment on this topic (probably best to start another topic) - The program switching (all program switching regardless of brand) switches a series of "Maps" or "tables" in the ECU - it does not switch learned values or learned load values (including fuel trims etc), so these are retained by the ECU until it relearns (a constant ongoing thing). By attempting back to back acceleration runs or dyno runs, the learned values will influence the maps.

You can clear them with separate steps with diagnostic tools if you require.

The "Over torque situation" can be seen in this influence, but in this case of after several days (since switching), it was more likely triggered my a Air mass sensor spurious signal or similar. Unless you are data logging at the time or can repeat the fault, they are tough to track down. If it was days & > 200km's it probably has nothing to do with switching all.

Fair enough, I based my assertion that switching was the cause on the tuner advising me to avoid switching to prevent the fault recurring. I had prior to the single event switched progs willy nilly while testing stuff, but then definitely remained in a single prog for ~ 2 days and >200km just prior to it happening. For what it is worth, a google search for the specific fault I got "Engine Torque Monitor 2: Control Limit Exceeded" invariably leads to tunes in general (no brand in particular) being the culprit.

[Guy_H]

Logger, Info I was passed (second hand) was different (time after switching)- so you had a different answer! - Anyway, drop me an email if it happens again

cheers

Guy

[noone]

I'm not very experienced in this area, but have chipped my current car and loved the results.

Biggest issue I've found is wanting to get the FWD to stick to the ground with the new found power.

[blutopless2]

have my 08 Jetta TSI done with APR.

Have not switched programs since having it done. Much improved response down at low speeds and improves the unnerving lag from a standstill.
Fuel consumption i now average about 8L/100k's mixture of freeway and suburban - pre chipping was about 9L/100k's. Freeway consumption can be down to 7.5L/100k's.
Even tho i dont flog the car to use all the extra power etc i think it just improves the whole driveability of the car. Its just nicer to drive.
I have not experienced any problems with the car since the chipping was done.

[G-rig]

I doubt a retune is more economical (certainly isn't when you put your foot down). It would come down to your driving style. I don't see how it can make more power using less fuel, unless more air generates it.

Good not to switch programs while driving (and it's advised against in the manual), could be a few of the problems the other chap is having?

[blutopless2]

I doubt a retune is more economical (certainly isn't when you put your foot down).

Have only put down here what i have experienced and explained why. If you doubt it then talk to someone like Guy H who can probably confirm what i put down. I'm sure this is stated on the APR website.
I was sus about their claim for better fuel economy also.

I don't see how it can make more power using less fuel, unless more air generates it.

you're right... more power means more fuel... but there is also the torque to consider here not just raw kW.
AFAIK the added economy that you can get comes from shifting the torque curve further down the rev range.

[G-rig]

Have only put down here what i have experienced and explained why. If you doubt it then talk to someone like Guy H who can probably confirm what i put down. I'm sure this is stated on the APR website.
I was sus about their claim for better fuel economy also.

Not saying you're wrong but will have to ask him. May help writing down the km and litres/distance as well as i'm not sure if its exactly the same as the MFD reading.

I know a lot of people including myself have noticed you don't have to press the pedal as hard for the same power & also know they are detuned from the factory but i'm willing to use more fuel for more power as are most people.

[John Deere]

My fuel economy when driving to and from work is slightly improved....from about 8.2L/100 average to 7.9L/100 average. This comes from not having to press the go pedal as much to go up small rises etc. as a result of more low end torque.

At the track its a different story, about 29L/100 with the chip (didn't track it without though)