RICA 280 vs. 304

[pyaap]

>That is why I feel that Don's comments about
>ourselves, our customers, and RICA, implying that all are
>stupid, gullible and dishonest, is completely out of order and
>a very unprofessional comment to have made, let alone
>unsubstantiated.

I suggest you re-read the text. Don has not made reference to RICA in this case and I will re-state that his comments are very fair and should apply to all within the tuning community. You will find that it is "Shestica" who has implied and made direct reference to RICA in this context. I do think you need to stop mis-quoting what others have said and using it to your advantage.

>Adam,
>
>When I first brought my car to you for it to be chipped you
>stated verbally to me that I WOULD SEE 300bhp, no mention of
>underlying problems with the car effecting this etc etc.

As with any service offered, we had to improve as it became apparent that knackered cars like yours were not able to produce such power. Therefore rather than ask people to spend money on getting the car into shape, we introduced a product which would give them more realistic gains for the condition of the car.

>
>I believe that I was misled by your website and verbal
>comments made by you.
>

But you never offered us an opportunity to address this.

>As for Rica being able to test on a T5R in 1995-96 when did
>the company start trading? And do you have proof that the
>upgrade WAS tested on a NEW car.
>

RICA has been trading for over 20 years, although not initially as RICA.

>As for your website maybe a small line of text in bright RED
>and 20inchs tall saying "full 304bhp only on brand new
>car!!!!!" might help with your marketing and stop people
>questing your figures.
>

Perhaps! It seems to work here on this forum.

Adam.

[SaffronC70]

>Matt,
>
>Chris's map was done when we didn't have the dyno, and also
>when we did experience a few technical problems with his car.
>Now that we have the new dyno, such problems are easily and
>quickly rectified. Hence why our custom mapping now gives much
>better results, especially with the new fan installed.
>
>Adam.

I had a new ETM and boost control solenoid fitted. The RICA software hasn't changed since I had the 19T fitted. I also returned to VT for on the road diagnostics and got the all clear - I was offered a custom map on the road, which I declined as I had little petty cash left at the time !

I was happy at the time, without being on a rolling road - the car felt fast, slow off the line, but fast !

This is the dyno printout from the VT dyno day:

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.c...yno/VTdyno.jpg

On that day I got quoted a wheel power of 280bhp.

I don't know about you, but I see a peak, an odd peak in power ?

Surely I should of been told 250bhp at the wheels ?

I got told that my problem was heat soak and cone filter.

I left happy that day ! People probably mostly remember the noise the my car makes on the rollers :)

If I hadn't of gone to PE, I'd probably still be running RICA, not knowing what power I was putting out.

Having the offer for MTE software and having the option not to keep it was given at the PE rolling day - I took the option just out of curiousity and 'it'd be rude not to show' locality to PE. To keep the story short, I stumped up my money and kept MTE.

Chris
________________________________________________

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sava.jpg with a few go faster modifications . .

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

[adieu]

"As for Rica being able to test on a T5R in 1995-96 do you have proof that the upgrade WAS tested on a NEW car."

Do do you have proof?

"As with any service offered, we had to improve as it became apparent that knackered cars like yours were not able to produce such power."

My car is far from Knackered as you so put it!

Do you not think your site is misleading then? 304BHP for a T5R....But only if it's brand new!

No where on your site does it state only if new!

Regards

Iain

That was the dyno day. I'm sorry Chris, but what you get on a dyno day is far from what you get for a proper dyno session. It's also why we invested in the huge fan, which we didn't have on the dyno day. Heat soak was a big issue.

Adam.

[SaffronC70]

So that means my PE figures are a good comparison then ?

I'm in no way knocking RICA, I must state. What you get is good.

MTE just seems to give more power without the big claims.

Chris
________________________________________________

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sava.jpg with a few go faster modifications . .

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

>"As for Rica being able to test on a T5R in 1995-96 do you
>have proof that the upgrade WAS tested on a NEW car."
>
>Do do you have proof?

Well, the car came out in 1995 and the upgrade was available in 1995. Therfore I cannot see how it's possible to develop this on anything other than a new car. Look, take the new 185 bhp D5. RICA is the ONLY Volvo tuner to have developed software for this even before the car was available in the UK!!!! Why? Because the ALWAYS develop software as soon as the car come out.

>
>"As with any service offered, we had to improve as it became
>apparent that knackered cars like yours were not able to
>produce such power."
>
>My car is far from Knackered as you so put it!

Let's agree to disagree on this one ;)

>
>Do you not think your site is misleading then? 304BHP for a
>T5R....But only if it's brand new!

No, because all potential customers are now informed about this prior to making the decision.

Adam.

[Shestica]

>
>>That is why I feel that Don's comments about
>>ourselves, our customers, and RICA, implying that all are
>>stupid, gullible and dishonest, is completely out of order
>and
>>a very unprofessional comment to have made, let alone
>>unsubstantiated.
>
>I suggest you re-read the text. Don has not made reference to
>RICA in this case and I will re-state that his comments are
>very fair and should apply to all within the tuning community.
> You will find that it is "Shestica" who has implied and made
>direct reference to RICA in this context. I do think you need
>to stop mis-quoting what others have said and using it to your
>advantage.
>
>

Pyapp, it would hardly be appropriate to apply what Don said to say....baked beans would it, 57 varieties and there isnt, as this is a VOLVO forum. I asked a simple question to a statement made by Don, and although he has replied to this thread has yet failed to answer. I'm twisting nothing, im implying nothing, i would just like "Don" to answer the question.

[SaffronC70]

http://ask.yahoo.com/20010621.html

Bit off topic, but I was bored.

Chris
________________________________________________

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sava.jpg with a few go faster modifications . .

http://chriswhiteuk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

>So that means my PE figures are a good comparison then ?

yes it is quite good. Because it's done on the same dyno, same operator etc like you say. It would have been possible to minimise the variable even further.

>
>I'm in no way knocking RICA, I must state. What you get is
>good.
>
>MTE just seems to give more power without the big claims.
>
>Chris

I do wish we had the opportunity to resolve your issue on our new dyno. Our off-the-shelf map produced good top end results but not so good bottom and mid range, which we would have been able to address. But at the end of the day, you are happy with what you have and that's what's important.

Adam.