The Hypertech Update Post

[Dominic]

Just letting everyone know I called Hypertech today and the unit is now in engineering. He couldn't tell me anything other than that, and told me to phone back next week. Its been there for one week now total, so I will keep everyone updated if I get any additional information concerning the unit's deficiencies with redline alteration or any other problems I brought up about it. Hopefully it will come back to me in better condition than it went to them.

[ June 11, 2003: Message edited by: Dominic ]</p>

[JAM]

What was the problems you had with it?

[Dominic]

Here is the letter I wrote Hypertech, for reference:

To Hypertech-Inc. Engineers:

I would like to thank you for creating a power programmer for the 2000-2002 Fbody V6 platform before I go into my evaluation of this device. As a moderator and long standing member of the camarov6.com message-board, I know how much the v6 community has enjoyed having this product around. I am sending this product back though because it did not deliver what was promised. Here is a list of the four problems in order of priority that I have discovered in the months I’ve owned it:
• On my manual transmission equipped 2002 Camaro, the rev limiter function does not change the actual response of the engine. If I set it for a 6500RPM redline, it still has a rev limiter at 5900RPM in all gears, and the neutral rev limiter of 4500RPM remains the same.
• The “power programming” for both 87 octane and 93 octane are worthless at the drag strip. After running about 7 passes each with stock, 87, and 93 octane programming, I continuously run 15.2 @ 91.4MPH with my relatively stock 2002 Camaro. I can’t feel or scientifically prove a difference among the programming options. I did these drag tests on the same day running only 93 octane Shell gasoline.
• The 160°F fan settings are set too high to be useful. While I know that the fans shouldn’t run continuously, I am still forced to use my manual fan switch to keep the car around 180°F in traffic with the 160°F thermostat. I recommend, if its possible to add to my programmer, an even lower setting which turns the high-speed fans on at a lower temperature than 195°F.
• The gearing choices are limited to 3.42 as the shortest setting. With 4.10’s being the lowest popular gears available on the market for the GM 7.5” 10-bolt axle, this is an unacceptable setting for anyone who wants to run 3.73s or numerically higher gearing. Also, due to the limitations you have in the tire size setting for speedometer recalibration, it’s impossible to compensate enough to make up for 3.73 or 4.10 gears.

I purchased this unit from Thunderracing.com for $350.00, and the only thing it has been useful for is removing the top speed limiter! All of the things I hoped to gain for the money I spent, I didn’t. There are several other accounts of manual equipped 2000-2002 Camaro and Firebird drivers who also agree with me on all four accounts listed above, so its not just my unit. I have yet to put my Camaro on the dynamometer, however I feel that’s unnecessary when I haven’t seen a noticeable track performance difference in 21 passes using all three programming choices.

I am currently at a loss for what to do with this programmer since it is so useless to me with all these broken features, so I am hoping you will revise the code and fix these problems, or simply refund my money. You’re welcome to call me at (xxx)-xxx-xxxx, or email me at dgo@cox.net for any additional information about myself or my car that I didn’t include in this letter.

[JAM]

Wow, no difference at all huh? So pretty much good for tire size changes. LOL!

Did you do a before and after dyno run? It would be neat to see if you get the same rear 12hp that hypertech shows on their dyno sheet for the 3.8L [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

Keep us posted. I was checking into one of these but I also have a 5spd... may hold off if there is no noticible gains from it... ;)

[Dominic]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JAM:
Wow, no difference at all huh? So pretty much good for tire size changes. LOL!

Did you do a before and after dyno run? It would be neat to see if you get the same rear 12hp that hypertech shows on their dyno sheet for the 3.8L [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

Keep us posted. I was checking into one of these but I also have a 5spd... may hold off if there is no noticible gains from it... ;) <hr></blockquote>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> I have yet to put my Camaro on the dynamometer, however I feel that’s unnecessary when I haven’t seen a noticeable track performance difference in 21 passes using all three programming choices.
<hr></blockquote>

[Jason McCallister]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JAM:
Did you do a before and after dyno run? It would be neat to see if you get the same rear 12hp that hypertech shows on their dyno sheet for the 3.8L [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

Keep us posted. I was checking into one of these but I also have a 5spd... may hold off if there is no noticible gains from it... ;) <hr></blockquote>

I have a 5 speed and LOVE my HPP3. Check my post out for links to my dyno sheets. YMMV.

http://www.camarov6.com/cgi-bin/ulti...c&f=1&t=009691

[Dominic]

But Jason, did it actually allow you to alter the rev limiter? I can set mine all day and it still bangs at 5900!

Also, if it does increase horsepower as much as you say, wouldnt that show up at the track? I know dyno data is good, but still.

[ June 12, 2003: Message edited by: Dominic ]</p>

[JAM]

Well, based on what hypertech advertises & based on Jason's Dyno results. It seems this 93 programming adds some extra kick. It is small though and I wouldn't suspect to see any difference in track times with only maybe 10hp gain. Right?

Are you sure it saved the settings Dom? Seems strange the rev limiter didn't work?

At any rate keep us posted as to hypertechs respnose. Will be interesting. ;)

[Jason McCallister]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>But Jason, did it actually allow you to alter the rev limiter? <hr></blockquote>

I can alter it down... I tried 5700 RPM's and it hits the limiter at 5700 RPMs. I'm not brave enough to try and raise it above 5900 RPMs without the proper valvetrain modifications! ;)

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Also, if it does increase horsepower as much as you say, wouldnt that show up at the track? <hr></blockquote>

I'm sure it would but I'm not the most consistent person when it comes to launching an M5. [img]tongue.gif[/img] Kumho's suck on the track! ;) Nor does my clutch like the WOT shifts! :(

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>It seems this 93 programming adds some extra kick. It is small though and I wouldn't suspect to see any difference in track times with only maybe 10hp gain. Right? <hr></blockquote>

It's hard to tell the programming is in there (SOTP meter) until you program it back to stock... then it feels like a dog (stock) in comparison to 93 octane tuned. I wouldn't expect miracles in track times with only 10 HP gain... maybe a tenth or two.

The HPP3 is a valuable tool in adjusting fan temps, gear ratios (although, there's a limit as Dominic pointed out), speed limiter, and tire sizes; not just engine tuning. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] Automatic folks get even more benefits from this tool! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[ June 12, 2003: Message edited by: Jason McCallister ]</p>

[nikon]

lol just picked one up for the A4...love the way it shifts now, seems much faster, the shifts that is....I havent toyed with my shift points really, nor raised the rev limiter...but I know for a fact the govenor was lifted :D

[Dominic]

I should be getting a call back from them within 10 minutes, I will post to everyone what they tell me... good or bad.

[ June 18, 2003: Message edited by: Dominic ]</p>

[Dominic]

It's being sent back, he told me that what I requested has been fixed.

We shall see.

[JAM]

So there was something wrong with your programmer?

[Camarorulz]

I should try using the 93 octane tuning instead of the 87 then? If I do use the 93 tuning, should I run 93 octane gas?

Keep us updated Dominic. I didn't see any noticeable reduction in track times either.

[ June 18, 2003: Message edited by: Camarorulz ]</p>

[Dominic]

Actually, with 93 octane fuel, would you believe I ran my best track time on the 87 programming??

Yes, my programmer did indeed have those problems I listed above. They can't fix the gearing, thats just how it is gonna be... But they did fix the rev limiter they said and edited a few other values for me. Hopefully it'll be worth the $11 S/H fee I paid eh?