Not Impressed: Superchips 3865
#21
08-10-2012, 09:52 AM
10 cents a litre not gallon. So 10 bucks a tank, for a little more butt dyno, and no marginal gain in MPG to offset the initial $10.
And if I want to feel fast I drive my bike, not an 8000lb truck.
4 quarts = gallon right ( i think) 948ml per quart
im paying 1.099 per litre
that turns to 4.167 a gallon. thats for 87, add another 35 - 40 cents or so for 91
Base Hemi- Automatic Tansmission
The standard or "base" Hemi engine has a slightly lower compression than the SRT8 performance version. When the Hemi is matched with an automatic transmission, Chrysler recommends 89 octane fuel for peak performance. 87 octane is the minimum octane rating listed for the base Hemi regardless of transmission
Minimum works fine for me.
your all making me wonder why Superchips would even put an 87 tune or a mileage tune on there programs, maybe there missing some information.... the hemi only does 9.6:1 ratio. My Bike on the other hand needs 91+ because of its 12:1 ratio.
Sorry just dont feel the hype with the 91 crowd.
And if I want to feel fast I drive my bike, not an 8000lb truck.
4 quarts = gallon right ( i think) 948ml per quart
im paying 1.099 per litre
that turns to 4.167 a gallon. thats for 87, add another 35 - 40 cents or so for 91
Base Hemi- Automatic Tansmission
The standard or "base" Hemi engine has a slightly lower compression than the SRT8 performance version. When the Hemi is matched with an automatic transmission, Chrysler recommends 89 octane fuel for peak performance. 87 octane is the minimum octane rating listed for the base Hemi regardless of transmission
Minimum works fine for me.
your all making me wonder why Superchips would even put an 87 tune or a mileage tune on there programs, maybe there missing some information.... the hemi only does 9.6:1 ratio. My Bike on the other hand needs 91+ because of its 12:1 ratio.
Sorry just dont feel the hype with the 91 crowd.
......And the trans option. Does it give you any noticable gains in MPG? or is it just a performance feature? I.E making the 1st 3 gears shorter so I can drive in higher gears at lower speeds, to gain some MPG or does the engine work harder to keep that gear, negating the MPG aspect?
I gained a solid 2mpg in the city. Highway driving there is obviously no gain. I consistently get 13/14 city and 16/17 highway with my transmission tuning schedule, not to mention the truck dowshifts on a dime, on command, without any delay or mashing the pedal. I used to get 11/12city before trans tune. Trans tune was best investment to rid the Ram of it's lousy stock shifting tune. I will NEVER go back to stock trans tune. It's garbage and too soft. Plus, the trans tune allows you to remove Torque Management. TM cuts 80% of HP/TQ in between shifts. Ever notice that major lag when at WOT. Yep, thats TM reducing your power to allow trans to shift. What a load of crap! Gonzo. Well, I reduced mine down to 10% as some is necessary for improved performance.
Last edited by dirtydog; 08-10-2012 at 09:58 AM.
#22
08-10-2012, 11:30 AM
#24
08-10-2012, 03:19 PM
#25
08-10-2012, 03:22 PM
Professional
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Red Deer, Alberta
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well im pretty much sold on the trans tune. I think Ill try it. BUT, do I have to do the rpm bands my self, or is there a SC tune prebuilt for the trans, if so how many?
p.s I know gearing is gearing, was trying to word towards shortenting the rpm band in which the lower gears are programmed to use.
as for the octane talks. I read the other thread, see both sides of it. some people swear coca cola is better some swear pepsi is better. But Ill try one of each over the next while. Ill do an 89 next with 87 tune. Then ill try a 93 with a 91 tune. Just to be fair. By no means am I cheap about the idea of gas. I just dont see the point in spending more then i need to on my transport vehicle, not my toy. But Ill try em , and tell you what numbers I come up with.
p.s I know gearing is gearing, was trying to word towards shortenting the rpm band in which the lower gears are programmed to use.
as for the octane talks. I read the other thread, see both sides of it. some people swear coca cola is better some swear pepsi is better. But Ill try one of each over the next while. Ill do an 89 next with 87 tune. Then ill try a 93 with a 91 tune. Just to be fair. By no means am I cheap about the idea of gas. I just dont see the point in spending more then i need to on my transport vehicle, not my toy. But Ill try em , and tell you what numbers I come up with.
#26
08-10-2012, 05:19 PM
Captain
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well im pretty much sold on the trans tune. I think Ill try it. BUT, do I have to do the rpm bands my self, or is there a SC tune prebuilt for the trans, if so how many?
p.s I know gearing is gearing, was trying to word towards shortenting the rpm band in which the lower gears are programmed to use.
as for the octane talks. I read the other thread, see both sides of it. some people swear coca cola is better some swear pepsi is better. But Ill try one of each over the next while. Ill do an 89 next with 87 tune. Then ill try a 93 with a 91 tune. Just to be fair. By no means am I cheap about the idea of gas. I just dont see the point in spending more then i need to on my transport vehicle, not my toy. But Ill try em , and tell you what numbers I come up with.
p.s I know gearing is gearing, was trying to word towards shortenting the rpm band in which the lower gears are programmed to use.
as for the octane talks. I read the other thread, see both sides of it. some people swear coca cola is better some swear pepsi is better. But Ill try one of each over the next while. Ill do an 89 next with 87 tune. Then ill try a 93 with a 91 tune. Just to be fair. By no means am I cheap about the idea of gas. I just dont see the point in spending more then i need to on my transport vehicle, not my toy. But Ill try em , and tell you what numbers I come up with.