Eric writes:

>I=92ve noticed a recent post or two on OBD II and the soldered-in chips
>mandated for model year 96 and beyond. Doing searches on =93OBD II=94 a=
nd

>reading what is available on the net, it appears -- if auto repair
>industry trade groups are to be believed -- that the new system kills
>the possibility of essentially *all* engine performance enhancements and
>may even interfere with the use of certain non-engine modifications that
>trigger the =93check engine=94 light. My questions are: =20

>is it the consensus of this list that the disaster scenario is true? =20

No, not in total .. the onset of OBD-II has made performance enhancement of any significant degree MUCH more challenging, since you not only have to make the changes to operating code, but corresponding changes to=20 the "checking" or OBD-II code..

The second caveat comes when you consider that there is really NO room i= n
the new law for ANY modifications .. certainly not to the checking code..

Enforceable?? probably not .. but who knows in this era of Politically Correct court decisions..

>Are there any horsepower enhancements that can get around the rule?=20

Depends on the CAR .. Example: an EXHAUST change on a Ford Mustang will illuminate the MIL, but you can raise the FUEL pressure of a new Porsche Turbo quite a bit and get NO MIL .. in the Pcar's case, you get signific= ant
performance increase via this method...

>What will happen to companies like Dinan? =20

A more apropos question is .. "What will happen to the enthusiast"

The big COMPANIES out there KNEW about OBD-II YEARS AGO .. and rather th= an
co-operate to the common good, they chose to continue to mystify the who= le
thing as black magic ..=20

Now they are scrambling and pointing fingers ..

C'est la vie!

Jim