The 1.8 16V is CIS-E, which is not very hard to control fuel wise. No chipping required.

The 2.0 16V is CIS-E Motronic which can do more, but mostly via chip tuning, and there are few that can do this in a customized format as an IT racer would need.[/b]
CIS is great. It's virtually fool-proof, but it has no potential in IT when compared with the real EFI on most other modern cars. CIS-E and CIS-Motronic are really the same system for IT purposes (and haven't changed much since the mid '70s). Same inputs and outputs, just a fancier computer to control the fuel pressure on the Motronic (but same sized box). In fact, I've interchanged between CIS-E and CIS-Motronic fuel distributors (inputs and outputs are self-contained) on street cars without any problems at all. The tolerances may be slightly different, and occasionally they need readjusting, but it's the same system controlled by a slightly newer design "computer" (glorified fuel pressure controller). The one difference is that CIS-E has a separate ignition system box, while CIS-Motronic pulls it into the same box as the fuel pressure controller. The fact is that changing the fuel pressure for the entire system simply can't be done fast enough to even compare with real electronic fuel injection systems. The various chips simply allow it to run richer than the original lambda sensor output would allow with the stock computer. Most just yank the Lambda on these things and set it open-loop. The chips can't help it there (other than recurving the ignition on the CIS-Motronic). Some even disconnect the "computer", run a separate ignition, and adjust the mixture manually with fuel pressure or metering pin height.

Edit: CIS really is just a glorified (and spread out) carburetor, although it's more like a Zenith-Stromberg than a Weber. At least it's more reliable, though.