Hypertech Power Programmer
#16
10-07-1999, 12:49 AM
Well, perhaps a bit of perspective is in order here, to help everyone understand just exactly why both Hypertech and Superchips are both developing the same basic type of product, this portable programming computer. First, it *isn't* new technology, these exact same products have been available for *years*, and from both companies, for GM vehicles. Nothing new. The only thing that is new, is that they are now developing it for the Fords, in anticipation of the edge connector going away on the Ford EEC computer, plain and simple. There is nothing new in the tuning, or the tuning techniques.
From the very first EEC-IV Ford ECU, they have always had to be programmed via the edge connector (J3) at the rear of the circuit board. This is due to Ford wanting their computer to be more tamper-proof than all other computers at that time. So they made the internal EPROM a surface mount, and hence non-replaceable, unlike GM, Bosch, and many of the computers at that time. So the *only* way to reprogram the Ford computer has been to attach to the J3 connector that was designed expressly for that purpose. This changed with the 1996 model year, with the introduction of OBD-II, and the debut of the Ford EEC-V computer in the 1996 model year. So since the 1996 model year, the Ford computer has been a flash design, and it can now be reprogrammed either via the edge connector as always, or now via the ADLD serial port under the dash, which is part of the OBD-II mandates. The catch is, it requires a much more sophisticated and much more expensive device to program the Ford computer via the ALDL port, and that is the reason why nobody has yet released this device for the Fords, because of this increase in cost to the consumer. So as long as the Ford computer can still be reprogrammed via the edge connector, the cheapest way to do it, there is no rush from *anyone* to get the more expensive programming computer to market.
We do suspect that at some point, Ford will stop using the edge connector, and when that happens, the only way to program it will be via the ALDL port, with the more expensive device. We discussed the merits of all this exact same info a few months ago here, some of you may recall.
So it's a matter of cost to the consumer. The more expensive device will do more functions, in that it will allow you to correct for speedometer error, etc., so you will get more functions for the higher cost (almost double!), but you won't get any more power, and that is the main thing people want when they buy a performance chip, is more power. Very few people want to pay almost double for something that won't get them any more power. Yes, of course we realize that being able to correct for speedometer error is important to those who install significantly larger tires, say, 32 and up or so, but that is not what drives the market. What drives the market and which products get released is *demand*. And the highest demands are always met first, as R&D costs have to be recouped. Hypertech has had problems with being able to correct for speedometer error in a number of their GM applications with the PPI, PPII, & PPIII units, we get calls almost every week from people who bought it (PPIII) counting on that function, and have complained that the PPIII unit has actually done the exact opposite, and increased speedo error. And yes, we have also heard from some people who are happy with their PPIII units, except they wish that it worked at all throttle positions like the Superchip, instead of adding power only at wide-open throttle.
It's also funny when you call Hypertech, as depending on who you talk to, you can be told completely differing information. For example, one of their people, whose name I won't mention, yesterday said that there will *never* be a PPIII unit for the 96 or 97 Fords, as those computers "are not flash units", which of course is in error. Hypertech is not the only company that gives differing info at times, as one or two people at Superchips were telling customers who posted right here that the Superchips Micro Tuner 2001 for the Fords would be out in 4-6 weeks, and that was months ago!
Sometimes manufacturers just flat don't want anyone to know what the exact status is of certain new products, and will release erroneous information designed at keeping the competition ill-informed. I have no doubt that just about everyone in the aftermarket programming business has done that at one time or another, so anyone reading this please don't feel that I'm trying to say that Superchips is immune to this, they aren't! One thing they won't do, however, is to advance advertise a product that doesn't even exist yet.
What I really wanted to say here was just the facts surrounding how the Ford computers can be programmed, and the cost differential between the two basic different types of devices, IE, the usual chip, vs. the much more expensive portable programming computer. While some people will pay almost twice as much for the ability to correct speedo error, so far, the vast majority won't pay more for a product that doesn't get them any more power than the less expensive product, and that is exactly what is controlling how fast these products come to market. So it's not *always* absolute technical skills and abilities that control what products get made when, marketplace acceptance potential plays a big part too.
Our bests to all,
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 10-07-1999).]
From the very first EEC-IV Ford ECU, they have always had to be programmed via the edge connector (J3) at the rear of the circuit board. This is due to Ford wanting their computer to be more tamper-proof than all other computers at that time. So they made the internal EPROM a surface mount, and hence non-replaceable, unlike GM, Bosch, and many of the computers at that time. So the *only* way to reprogram the Ford computer has been to attach to the J3 connector that was designed expressly for that purpose. This changed with the 1996 model year, with the introduction of OBD-II, and the debut of the Ford EEC-V computer in the 1996 model year. So since the 1996 model year, the Ford computer has been a flash design, and it can now be reprogrammed either via the edge connector as always, or now via the ADLD serial port under the dash, which is part of the OBD-II mandates. The catch is, it requires a much more sophisticated and much more expensive device to program the Ford computer via the ALDL port, and that is the reason why nobody has yet released this device for the Fords, because of this increase in cost to the consumer. So as long as the Ford computer can still be reprogrammed via the edge connector, the cheapest way to do it, there is no rush from *anyone* to get the more expensive programming computer to market.
We do suspect that at some point, Ford will stop using the edge connector, and when that happens, the only way to program it will be via the ALDL port, with the more expensive device. We discussed the merits of all this exact same info a few months ago here, some of you may recall.
So it's a matter of cost to the consumer. The more expensive device will do more functions, in that it will allow you to correct for speedometer error, etc., so you will get more functions for the higher cost (almost double!), but you won't get any more power, and that is the main thing people want when they buy a performance chip, is more power. Very few people want to pay almost double for something that won't get them any more power. Yes, of course we realize that being able to correct for speedometer error is important to those who install significantly larger tires, say, 32 and up or so, but that is not what drives the market. What drives the market and which products get released is *demand*. And the highest demands are always met first, as R&D costs have to be recouped. Hypertech has had problems with being able to correct for speedometer error in a number of their GM applications with the PPI, PPII, & PPIII units, we get calls almost every week from people who bought it (PPIII) counting on that function, and have complained that the PPIII unit has actually done the exact opposite, and increased speedo error. And yes, we have also heard from some people who are happy with their PPIII units, except they wish that it worked at all throttle positions like the Superchip, instead of adding power only at wide-open throttle.
It's also funny when you call Hypertech, as depending on who you talk to, you can be told completely differing information. For example, one of their people, whose name I won't mention, yesterday said that there will *never* be a PPIII unit for the 96 or 97 Fords, as those computers "are not flash units", which of course is in error. Hypertech is not the only company that gives differing info at times, as one or two people at Superchips were telling customers who posted right here that the Superchips Micro Tuner 2001 for the Fords would be out in 4-6 weeks, and that was months ago!
Sometimes manufacturers just flat don't want anyone to know what the exact status is of certain new products, and will release erroneous information designed at keeping the competition ill-informed. I have no doubt that just about everyone in the aftermarket programming business has done that at one time or another, so anyone reading this please don't feel that I'm trying to say that Superchips is immune to this, they aren't! One thing they won't do, however, is to advance advertise a product that doesn't even exist yet.
What I really wanted to say here was just the facts surrounding how the Ford computers can be programmed, and the cost differential between the two basic different types of devices, IE, the usual chip, vs. the much more expensive portable programming computer. While some people will pay almost twice as much for the ability to correct speedo error, so far, the vast majority won't pay more for a product that doesn't get them any more power than the less expensive product, and that is exactly what is controlling how fast these products come to market. So it's not *always* absolute technical skills and abilities that control what products get made when, marketplace acceptance potential plays a big part too.
Our bests to all,
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
[This message has been edited by Superchips_Distributor (edited 10-07-1999).]
#17
10-07-1999, 09:06 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Sugarland, TX USA
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beware with the Hypertech programers. I have one in my 98 Camaro with auto transmission and it has at least five problems. First, it gives no added horsepower. Infact, I ran a 12.506 with the programing and 12.44 without. Second, if you change diffrential gear ratios then your shift points change. You then have to go through a series of reprograming and testing the get back where you were. Each reprograming is 30 minutes. I have spents hours reprograming. Third, also when you change gear ratios the lock up speed stays the same which means your rpms go way up before the converter locks. Fourth, error with tire size change. When you adjust for a larger tire size the speedometer reads slower. This is backwards. Makes it very diffecult to get your speedometer correct with a tire change. And finally, there is no customer service. They refuse to answer emails and anyone who answers the phone seems to know almost nothing. The Hypertech does do a good job of turning on the cooling fans sooner so the engine does run cooler and you can get your shift points raised. If I knew the Superchip would eliiminate these problems I would buy one. Hypertech has turned me against programers.
------------------
97 4.6 F150, 1/8 = 10.885 @ 64.10 mph, 88 5.0 Mustang 1/8 = 7.409 @ 93.72 mph
------------------
97 4.6 F150, 1/8 = 10.885 @ 64.10 mph, 88 5.0 Mustang 1/8 = 7.409 @ 93.72 mph
#18
10-07-1999, 02:08 PM
Dear Spaceace,
It will be the same as it always has been, Superchips programs at all throttle positions, and Hypertech only at WOT. This will always be true of all Superchips, and has always been true of Hypertechs products, and there is no reason to think they will change. They are committed to doing only WOT programming as a business strategy to reduce R&D costs, and, it's all they know how to do. So I very seriously doubt that whenver their Ford unit does actually exist and start shipping, that there will be any change in their techniques.
I think that's about the best answer I can give you, Spaceace.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
It will be the same as it always has been, Superchips programs at all throttle positions, and Hypertech only at WOT. This will always be true of all Superchips, and has always been true of Hypertechs products, and there is no reason to think they will change. They are committed to doing only WOT programming as a business strategy to reduce R&D costs, and, it's all they know how to do. So I very seriously doubt that whenver their Ford unit does actually exist and start shipping, that there will be any change in their techniques.
I think that's about the best answer I can give you, Spaceace.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
#19
10-07-1999, 02:28 PM
Contrary to what the article said, Superchips didn't have *any* choice in what vehicle got tested. Superchips had absolutely *no* control over which vehicles got tested, they had to provide a product for the vehicle that C&D *specified*. I saw that myself, and immediately checked on this. Darn right Superchips would have loved to have had the F-150 tested with the Superchip, of course! They would have loved to have gone heads up against Hypertech any *anyone* else by having their products tested on each vehicle, and compared to everyone elses products for each vehicle. That way, the consumer might actually have gotten some benefit and real knowledge from that article, with regards to whose product did what *in direct comparison on the same vehicle*. Nothing else matters.
What *should* have been done is to take one or two vehicles, and then test *all* competitors products on those vehicles, so the consumer could get a direct comparison on a like vehicle. That wasn't done. As I said before, you can't assume that the results they got with Dinan's chip in a manual transmission BMW is an accurate indication of the state of the art of chipmaking in all manual tramnsmission vehicles, and anyone making that kind of assumption is off base. And that is the exact problem with that article, as it lends itself to just that kind of thinking.
The Superchip used in the Cougar was a new product for Superchips, in that it was a completely different code that they had never worked on before, had never been on the chassis dyno, and what got tested was basically a "beta". Even at that, it was one of only 2 products that showed decisive reductions in acceleration times in almost every single test that C&D put them through.
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
#20
10-07-1999, 02:57 PM
Dear Larrys,
I would like to thank you for your very informative post. Your comments on the problems you experienced with the PP unit echo exactly what we hear here all the time. We have had people complain of having to have their vehicles towed into the dealership because they could not get the computer to accept any program from the Hypertech unit, either the performance program or the factory program that it is supposed to store for you, to allow you to return to stock. Another point is, once a PP unit is used on one vehicle, it can never again be used on another vehicle, it is always locked to that one vehicle. So when you trade in your vehicle, you cannot sell the PP unit and recoup some of your investment.
Also, your comments about it throwing off the shift points, problems adjusting speedometer accuracy for tire size changes, and how long it takes and how many steps you have to go through over and over and over to get all these specific functions to agree with one another is also exactly the types of complaints that we get here from their owners. Now before anyone goes off the deep end, I want to make it clear that I am not saying that all Hypertech products are crap, that's not what I'm saying at all. But because of the different programming strategies of the two companies, which people have attested to the benefits of right here in this thread, so far every one posting here has preferred the Superchip over the Hypertech unit among those who have used both, and that is what tells the story.
I'm very sorry to hear that you have had these problems too, Larry. Frankly, it would do the whole chip industry good if Hypertech didn't have those kinds of problems, as when one chipmaker makes a great product, it tends to make the entire industry look better, so it doesn't make me happy that people are spending $335-$395 for these units and getting the kinds of results that you posted here, Larry. Also, just 6 weeks ago Hypertech stopped all custom programing, due to some internal problems, and they are advertizing on their web site and in trade publications for just about every one of their product development positions, I.E., automotive engineers, those capable of doing reverse-engineering of factory applications, etc. I don't know if they have resumed true custom programming again yet, but stopping all custom programming is about as drastic a step as you can take in this industry, and it sent minor shock waves throughout the industry. I'm hoping that this is/was just a temporary thing due to employee turnover, and that they will get back on track with that if they haven't already.
The bottom line is, the proof is in the pudding; talk to people who have used both, and the vast majority will say they prefer Superchips, just like we've seen here in this thread so far.
Our bests to all,
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com
I would like to thank you for your very informative post. Your comments on the problems you experienced with the PP unit echo exactly what we hear here all the time. We have had people complain of having to have their vehicles towed into the dealership because they could not get the computer to accept any program from the Hypertech unit, either the performance program or the factory program that it is supposed to store for you, to allow you to return to stock. Another point is, once a PP unit is used on one vehicle, it can never again be used on another vehicle, it is always locked to that one vehicle. So when you trade in your vehicle, you cannot sell the PP unit and recoup some of your investment.
Also, your comments about it throwing off the shift points, problems adjusting speedometer accuracy for tire size changes, and how long it takes and how many steps you have to go through over and over and over to get all these specific functions to agree with one another is also exactly the types of complaints that we get here from their owners. Now before anyone goes off the deep end, I want to make it clear that I am not saying that all Hypertech products are crap, that's not what I'm saying at all. But because of the different programming strategies of the two companies, which people have attested to the benefits of right here in this thread, so far every one posting here has preferred the Superchip over the Hypertech unit among those who have used both, and that is what tells the story.
I'm very sorry to hear that you have had these problems too, Larry. Frankly, it would do the whole chip industry good if Hypertech didn't have those kinds of problems, as when one chipmaker makes a great product, it tends to make the entire industry look better, so it doesn't make me happy that people are spending $335-$395 for these units and getting the kinds of results that you posted here, Larry. Also, just 6 weeks ago Hypertech stopped all custom programing, due to some internal problems, and they are advertizing on their web site and in trade publications for just about every one of their product development positions, I.E., automotive engineers, those capable of doing reverse-engineering of factory applications, etc. I don't know if they have resumed true custom programming again yet, but stopping all custom programming is about as drastic a step as you can take in this industry, and it sent minor shock waves throughout the industry. I'm hoping that this is/was just a temporary thing due to employee turnover, and that they will get back on track with that if they haven't already.
The bottom line is, the proof is in the pudding; talk to people who have used both, and the vast majority will say they prefer Superchips, just like we've seen here in this thread so far.
Our bests to all,
------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com