> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net]On Behalf Of Kyle
> Vanditmars
>
> "Droo" <03dakotaCC4.7_4x4@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3ED56361.3000802@comcast.net...
> >
> > No it isn't. If you ran your stock 3.9 on 91 octane, you wouldn't see
> > better performance. And they need to run the high octane fuel because of
> > the new programming. All chips are like that. It would ping like a mofo
> > otherwise.
>
> That's not the point. They should be using the same grade of gasoline on
> each run regardless of the timing curve. Granted, it probably
> wouldn't make
> any difference if they both ran 91, but it should still be done
> to see what
> the TRUE benefits of the superchips box are. To compare, it would make no
> sense to test a Fastman 52mm tb on an otherwise stock vehicle,
> then test an
> F&B 52mm on a vehicle with headers. You are looking for the differences
> that the tb's make, and that alone. It's basic science, and one of the
> first things you were likely taught in your high school science class.
Have to agree with Kyle, in principle. :-) Regarding octane ratings... my
truck, with all my mods, performs better on 92 octane than on 94 octane.
More octane than you need can hurt performance. So....and this part is pure
speculation...Superchips chose to be honest and used the appropriate octane
in the stock motor for best performance, then used 91 with their mods and
charted the difference. Perhaps if they had used 91 in the stock motor
their numbers might have looked even better but wouldn't have been realistic
if the truck owner hadn't used 91 in their stock motor. Possibility??
RayB
http://www.dragtruk.com/ENTRIES/20KM1FD2KWBP.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:46:22 EST