SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
41 - 60 of 230 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
Of course it's not 77hp across the entire powerband. But even a 77hp increase at peak output seems unlikely.

I think the big risk here is that they aren't being forthcoming about HOW they're achieving their claims. And as someone else pointed out, the lack of dynosheets is really sort of a red flag.

The fact that they're claiming a power increase AND a fuel efficiency increase is a red flag...big time. The only way that's possible is that they're leaning out fuel mixture. In the old days manufacturers used to run forced induction cars a little on the rich side as a sort of safety net. Tuners would lean them out with various methods, some better/safer than others, to gain back some power.

Since Racechip doesn't seem to be claiming any sort of increased boost, but is claiming increased power and mileage, I think they're just leaning out the fuel somewhere, which is dangerous for the motor if they aren't addressing timing/ignition. The installation photos shown earlier in this thread make me more certain that that's all they're doing since it appears this just connects up to the MAP sensor, and is therefore tricking the main ECU into thinking there's less air going in than there really is, so the ECU provides less fuel. Leaner a/f mixture means more power, to a point, but it also means it's running hotter...and since the ECU thinks there's less air, the ignition map is probably off.

I bet when/if you get this on a dyno you're going to see a wavy powerband as the engine fights conflicting sensor inputs. Well, that and something far less than the touted power figures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
The fact that they're claiming a power increase AND a fuel efficiency increase is a red flag...big time.
Not to me per my experience with other tunes. When you're not on the gas constantly your engine is able to run more efficiently. My BMW wagon gives me 29 mpg under my MHD tune and CAI, it is factory rated at 26 on the highway.

You do bring a few other good points. I hope I can get it on a dyno to at least prove or disprove Race Chip's claims.

Sent from my XZ2 Compact using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
2018 Volvo V90CC T6
Joined
·
1,053 Posts
Members here who have purchased the Race Chip piggyback, could you, as official customers, request (before and after) dyno charts from Race Chip? I assume they are more obligated to provide you guys with such details which they might not to window shoppers. Just a thought!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
Members here who have purchased the Race Chip piggyback, could you, as official customers, request (before and after) dyno charts from Race Chip? I assume they are more obligated to provide you guys with such details which they might not to window shoppers. Just a thought!
In a conversation with Race Chip they said they were excited of an owner taking the car to the dyno as independent results have more credibility than theirs, as people tend to believe they're doctored, they asked me to share it with them as well. I'll contact them and ask them if they can send me theirs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
In a conversation with Race Chip they said they were excited of an owner taking the car to the dyno as independent results have more credibility than theirs, as people tend to believe they're doctored, they asked me to share it with them as well. I'll contact them and ask them if they can send me theirs.
I agree with their credibility claim, BUT...

Having no readily available dynosheets yet still posting claimed power increases is suspect.

I'm curious if they'll give you anything, or if they'll just push back on you to wait for your own results. Then when they don't result in their claimed increases there will be an avalanche of excuses from "it's the dyno you used" to "it's something wrong with your car".

It's like the Tornado Intake all over again!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
BTW,
asking racechip(Europe) for a possible tune/chip etc for T6 this is what they replied:

Thank you for contacting the RaceChip Customer Service.
Unfortunately we do not offer any chip tuning for your Volvo yet. However, we are constantly expanding our model range and will gladly inform you by e-mail as soon as a product is available for your vehicle.
The development process can take a few months before a RaceChip is released to assure you maximum performance and a safe drive.
We appreciate your understanding since we cannot provide an estimated release date.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 · (Edited)
BTW,
asking racechip(Europe) for a possible tune/chip etc for T6 this is what they replied:

Thank you for contacting the RaceChip Customer Service.
Unfortunately we do not offer any chip tuning for your Volvo yet. However, we are constantly expanding our model range and will gladly inform you by e-mail as soon as a product is available for your vehicle.
The development process can take a few months before a RaceChip is released to assure you maximum performance and a safe drive.
We appreciate your understanding since we cannot provide an estimated release date.
That is the same boiler-plate answer I got when I asked about the chip for the V90. Not surprised if you told them XC60 T6.

Considering the T6 engine is the same across their models I went ahead and ordered mine as if I had a S90, it worked...even they said it made sense when I "confessed" I had a V90.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
I’m not completely satisfied that going to map 7 on the RaceChip is giving me a check engine light with with a po23d map sensor error. I’m going to try to clear it and see if it returns while keeping it on map 7. If it comes back I’ll repeat the process at map 6 and so on to develop an understanding on how high it can be at without triggering a code. I’m not thrilled about having to settle for less performance.

Im surprised you haven’t triggered any codes? Did you get the RaceChip GTS?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
Have you checked your connections? I'd start there and reset the light. If it comes back then try map 6. I haven't had any errors but I've only driven about 100 miles in all this time.

Sent from my XZ2 Compact using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
The error is because the Racechip device is apparently just tricking the MAP sensor signal the ECU is seeing to change the fueling.

The ECU is rightly calling out an error with the MAP sensor because it's seeing it as out of spec with all the other inputs.

You both might not be getting the same error for any number of reasons, like air temp, altitude, or how hard you're revving it.

I'll stress again that this way of tweaking engine performance is not a good idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
I am skeptical; wouldn't Polestar and Heico tunes have gone to these levels earlier if sustainable?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
The former e-Drive Polestar tapped out at 360+tq with added hardware.
So software only on the same engine getting to 390+tq would be truly amazing.
I doubt component parts such as trans and turbo were they built to handle the extra load?
Probably also very hard to keep the supercharger and turbo in synch; much easier if only a turbo to deal with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
The former e-Drive Polestar tapped out at 360+tq with added hardware.
So software only on the same engine getting to 390+tq would be truly amazing.
I doubt component parts such as trans and turbo were they built to handle the extra load?
Probably also very hard to keep the supercharger and turbo in synch; much easier if only a turbo to deal with.
The Racechip thing isn't software in the same sense that P* is. The P* tune gives the ECU a completely revised set of fuel and ignition maps. It's a holistic approach. Racechip appears to be like the APEXi S-AFC of ol', in that it's just a piggy back system on the MAP sensor that sends an altered signal to the ECU.

The APEXi S-AFC was popular with the "tuner" crowd back in the early to mid 00s...and then people rightly threw them in the garbage because while they were great at leaning out fuel, by tricking the ECU, they (like the Racechip) didn't address other inputs (e.g. ignition maps) so cars were run lean with the wrong timing under load. That equals a popped motor, and there were LOTS of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Good insight; I will pass on RaceChip.
Leaning burning = Metal melting
Heico tune at 340hp is the safe limit for now on the T6...
I'll stay with my Polestar tune as is.
Good luck to all going for it; I really hope for the best.
Check engine lights are a nuance but a blown engine is really bad news.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
664 Posts
I’m sorry, I’ve never been a fan of piggyback controllers. Everyone I’ve seen people use always turns into a nightmare, for cars or power sports applications. My neighbor just dropped over $1,000.00 on two fuel injectors and a piggyback controller for his Polaris RZR Turbo. At least they gave him bigger injectors, that’s a step in the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
To be fair, there has been a lot of development of piggy back computers since Apexi S-AFC days (I had one as well as a Greddy e-manage which was somewhat more advanced and could control ignition). Up until recently, I had a BMW w/ a piggyback and it didn't just modify the MAP inputs, there was more. It's tricking the ECU but doing more than just modifying voltage like the stuff 20 years ago did.

I'm skeptical of the Racechip claims, but I do think that piggybacks can add value. At least on my BMW, the piggyback had some failsafes built in that an ECU flash tune would not.

The Racechip thing isn't software in the same sense that P* is. The P* tune gives the ECU a completely revised set of fuel and ignition maps. It's a holistic approach. Racechip appears to be like the APEXi S-AFC of ol', in that it's just a piggy back system on the MAP sensor that sends an altered signal to the ECU.

The APEXi S-AFC was popular with the "tuner" crowd back in the early to mid 00s...and then people rightly threw them in the garbage because while they were great at leaning out fuel, by tricking the ECU, they (like the Racechip) didn't address other inputs (e.g. ignition maps) so cars were run lean with the wrong timing under load. That equals a popped motor, and there were LOTS of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
To be fair, there has been a lot of development of piggy back computers since Apexi S-AFC days (I had one as well as a Greddy e-manage which was somewhat more advanced and could control ignition). Up until recently, I had a BMW w/ a piggyback and it didn't just modify the MAP inputs, there was more. It's tricking the ECU but doing more than just modifying voltage like the stuff 20 years ago did.

I'm skeptical of the Racechip claims, but I do think that piggybacks can add value. At least on my BMW, the piggyback had some failsafes built in that an ECU flash tune would not.
It's simply not physically possible for a piggyback system to adjust for other inputs. It only knows what it sees from the sensor(s) it's piggybacked to. The only thing I see that this RaceChip unit has over the old APEXi S-AFC is that it's pre-programmed. So maybe their pre-sets can't get you in as much trouble as the S-AFC did where people would just keep leaning it out until... pop goes the motor.

But there's nothing to indicate that the RaceChip unit is doing anything more than applying pre-set voltage changes between the MAP sensor and the ECU. What else could it possibly do, if it's only point of reference is the MAP sensor itself? It's not seeing injector duty cycles for example, and it has no control over those things.

I don't want to comment on the BMW piggy-back you had, but in general, a competent reflash or complete ECU replacement is leaps and bounds better than ANY single or combination of piggy-back systems, as it would take into account all inputs and be programmed to respond accordingly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter · #58 ·
It's simply not physically possible for a piggyback system to adjust for other inputs. It only knows what it sees from the sensor(s) it's piggybacked to. The only thing I see that this RaceChip unit has over the old APEXi S-AFC is that it's pre-programmed. So maybe their pre-sets can't get you in as much trouble as the S-AFC did where people would just keep leaning it out until... pop goes the motor.

But there's nothing to indicate that the RaceChip unit is doing anything more than applying pre-set voltage changes between the MAP sensor and the ECU. What else could it possibly do, if it's only point of reference is the MAP sensor itself? It's not seeing injector duty cycles for example, and it has no control over those things.

I don't want to comment on the BMW piggy-back you had, but in general, a competent reflash or complete ECU replacement is leaps and bounds better than ANY single or combination of piggy-back systems, as it would take into account all inputs and be programmed to respond accordingly.
BMW piggy-back is much more advanced than Racechip. For example, it knows your engine temperature so it won't realize full boost until optimal temp is achieved. I do agree with some of the comments that criticize Racechip, as it does seem a simple approach, for a given value seen in MAP, fake a lower MAP signal to trick your turbo boost sensor to send a higher boost signal...or something like that, but that's it, no further adjustments like BMW's that really plugs into the ECU in many ways.

T6 engine is a technological marvel, 316 HP from a 2.0L is exceptional but, because it is used on such a heavy car, it cannot give the car a defined driving character. Now that I put this piggy-back the car has the character is was lacking (already mentioned in my first post) and I'm happy with the results, even if it doesn't produce the advertised 77HP.

In my case, I'm not on the gas all the time, so it might work for me for the way I drive, but I'm sure it won't work for everyone.

The purpose of sharing real findings (and future experiences, good and bad) is to inform other enthusiast since there's hardly anything that can be done to our cars to improve/fine tune a few things here and there. For example, I still cannot find any information on FMICs or downpipes for T5 or T6 engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
"The T6 engine is a technological marvel, 316 HP from a 2.0L..."

To be precise, the engine size is 1,969cc, not 2,000. Mine supposedly puts out 329 hp, since I Polestarred.
 
41 - 60 of 230 Posts
Top