Downsides to Superchips?

One of the main problems is finding an insurer that will actually provide insurance for what they consider to be a modified car. If you don't tell them then you risk problems if you subsequently need to make a claim. I am now on my second Rover 75 diesel. The first one was a CDT with a bhp of 119. Rover then produced a nippier car with the engine tweaked to produce 131 bhp - this was the CDTi. Owners of CDT's can arrange for their dealer to 'chip' the engine to boost it up to a CDTi. I considered doing this but found great problems in finding an insurer willing to quote for the modified car. Even when I told them that it was only turning a CDT into a CDTi, and the upgrade was done by Rover dealers, they still didn't want to know. I now own a CDTi and the insurance is exactly the same as my old CDT. Ludicrous really - but motor insurers just don't like 'modified' cars.

Kev

IME it depends. My Golf's insured with Adrian Flux. They were considerably cheaper than everyone else I had quote me, and they don't seem much bothererd by modifications. I've rung them up regarding suspension mods and been told there would be no increase in premium. OTOH, a Rover 75 is something they're probably not geared up to insure...

Superchips (the company) tend not to be as good or as thorough as many of the specialists, check with your owners club / enthusiasts sites or whatever. Turbo cars benefit most, the price reflects what the perceived value is (and the fact that there is development time in making the new programs).

500 to 600 quid is a typical price, 20-50% a typical power hike on a turbo car. Nothing you can do for that money will get you that gain, other than a cheap nitrous kit - which would benefit from a custom ECU also.

That just confirms my theory they make it up as they go along. I was with flux (highway) and they wanted a considerable hike in premium just for lowered uprated suspension and better brakes. No engine mods at all, at that stage.

I would guess it depends on the engine - if all a manufacturer did to get extra poke was to chip it themselves (like the poster who mentions the CDT/CDTi comparison), WITHOUT modifying, say, main or bottom-end bearings, oil pump, cooling, brakes, suspension, drive shafts or other components the that is one thing.

But giving a huge boost without knowing what else to modify, is another.

If you use the extra poke then you will of course increase the wear on - well, pretty well everything I would think (transmission, tyres, brakes, CV joints etc etc etc)

The keyword there IMO is lowered. It's obvious to anyone else that it's been modded, making it more likely to be nicked, and more often than not, people lowering a car are doing so to look good blatting round the town centre at midnight.

The message from "JohnR" contains these words:

Seems reasonable. Experience and statistics almost certainly tell them that people with "improved" handling and brakes crash more often and more thoroughly than other drivers. Since they don't know that you're a shining example of cautious restrained driver, they tar you with the same brush.

Trouble is that's someone elses wild assumptions that I have to pay for. If you are the type to be out at midnight speeding round town centres then there is a reasonable chance you'll have convictions to prove it.

Most chipping mods work by increasing the fuelling so of course you'll probably see less mpg than standard. Also, if they do increase the power then the main and big end bearings will be under greater strain (as will the little end and gearbox bearings, CV joints and cooling system). Rover had this problem with the 1.4 K-series - it was fine in single cam carburettor form, but once they had made it a twin-cam 16V multi-point injected lump they quickly discovered the gearbox input-shaft bearings couldn't handle the extra load and failed prematurely. Of course, the later Rovers got an uprated gearbox to cope with the power, but that didn't comfort those with the earlier type which were now starting to disintegrate...

Darren

That's how insurance works. I suppose they could spy on you for a while and then give you a quote, but then it'd be even more expensive ;). The insurance business doesn't work on wild assumptions. More like very boring people doing stats. FWIW, stuff like that is dictated by their underwriter, and they might have picked a different one when they gave you the initial quote if it'd already been modded.

Its always a trade off when the manufacturer makes a car, between performance/ reliablility/ economy/ emmisions etc, so they tend in the main to go middle of the road and try to give a decent compromise. So far as gearbox/drivetrain etc and in fact engine reliability, if you're putting more power through them then in theory they will fail quicker.

Insurance, if you're looking at modding you're car then its definitly worth speaking to you're insurance company before you do anything, some companys dont like you doing anything, and others dont mind so much.

I had to get a new stainless steel exhaust made up for the 77 GT last year, told the co. at the time and this new on eim with now, they said ok after a fone call. I said i couldnt get a exhaust for a unusual nearly 30 year old car

I was going to try A Flux this year but they never called me back, so didnt want my business too much.

Would the increased fuelling lead to problems during MOT emissions tests?

No, from my experience, it's the idiots that don't get caught. Seriously, out of the worst drivers I've known, none of them have any convictions.

The message from petermcmillan snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com contains these words:

It would help if they had licences to take away in the first place!

Maybe if the engine wasn't in very good condition anyway, but otherwise I wouldn't suspect so.

Darren

Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure ;-)

The message from "DocDelete" contains these words:

How would that ensure they have licences?

It wouldn't - just removes them from the gene pool.