Chips


#1

Due the chips for apoxx. 70.00 really work and will the harm your car? They claim to increase mileage, and power. I have an 2005 durango with the Hemi. john


#2

Those Hemis must be really weak to need a different chip. Trading for a car with a Hemi might give you a lot more performance and might be the safe option, but it doesn’t sound like you are looking for more safety. The smog system has enough trouble with the ethanol in the fuel. You have a better chance of damage to the engine and smog system than you have of increasing your power enough to impress anybody. Unless you are racing against other Durangos, you should consider saving the money.


#3

It’s impossible to increase horsepower and mileage at the same time. More power requires more fuel. The factory engineers have optimized the performance/economy/reliability combination. Change one and you change the others, too.

Save your money.


#4

I agree with pleasedodgevan and mcparadise that you will not get the combination of better gas mileage and increased power that this chip manufacturer claims. Overall, it will be a waste of your money.

A family-size bag of potato chips will give you more enjoyment than these over-hyped computer chips, and will cost you a whole lot less money. If you forgo that questionable computer chip, you can even afford some nice dips to go with the potato chips.

And, if you want a high-performance vehicle, buy one from the start, rather than trying to transmute lead into gold.


#5

unless you’re talking about those plug’n’play tuner devices, you aren’t gonna get any real increase in either area. However, the $70 makes me think the product being sold is a little 2 cent resistor that’s sold at Radio Shack at a hefty chunk of profit


#6

t’s impossible to increase horsepower and mileage at the same time. Except by proper maintenance, driving techniques and choice of fuel.


#7

It’s impossible to increase horsepower and mileage at the same time.

This statement may or may not be true with today’s computerized cars. It definitely wasn’t true earlier.

For years, up through around 1974, car manufactures ran with an air/fuel ratio that was 10% richer than the “chemically correct” stoichiometric 14.7:1 ratio. That’s where maximum fuel economy occurred. Maximum power occurred at around a 16% richer mixture.

The reason the richer mixture increased mpg and power was because with an exact 14.7:1 ratio there is so little time in the power stroke to properly mix the air and fuel. At 14.7:1, there were always precious oxygen molecules without adjacent fuel molecules Getting fuel to those precious oxygen molecules meant they could contribute to the pressure-building flame front - rather than just being burned as part of it.

Around 1975 the US government mandated a 14.7:1 mixture be used - causing a drop in power and MPG. I remember several car magazine articles explaining this, and they also described how to drill out your carburetor jets a few thousands of an inch to restore the lost mpg and power. I tried it on a couple of cars and it definitely worked.

I’m sure today’s engines do a much better job of getting the air and fuel to mix as much as possible in the short time available during the power stroke. Though I would imagine it’s still a small problem.

If this same “enriching opportunity” exists in today’s engines, any chip that would exploit it would not be street-legal.


#8

It depends on the vehicle. With some vehicles it might make a small difference. Usually programming changes along with some mechanical changes are better. Individualized programming with your particular modifications is probably necessary. I would not believe that adding some chip will help me unless I saw independent Dynamometer testing (or maybe 1/4 times).