hi prof. have to say this is possibly the worst post with no useable information that you have ever posted! and i will add many fully accredited automobile engineers would scoff at that statement,along with me for its technical incorrectness,and lack of understanding of how tunning boxes actually work.and for grouping them all together. might as well say all cars are crap at towing because one tries to tow an average caravan with a Austin A35!!!!!!!!!!!!Prof John L said:
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,677
- 3,934
- 50,935
Jonny
Nothing in my statement was technically incorrect, and nothing in my statement gave any incling of what level of understanding my BIL has in respect of how chips or even remaps work, other than he is a very well respected automibile engineer and his business is infact often subcontracted by several main dealers in his area to resolve engine managemnt issues.
It remains a fact that he has advised customers to have so called 'tuning chips or remaps' to be removed/reverted because of service problems, MOT failures, and even mechanical failures.
Nothing in my statement was technically incorrect, and nothing in my statement gave any incling of what level of understanding my BIL has in respect of how chips or even remaps work, other than he is a very well respected automibile engineer and his business is infact often subcontracted by several main dealers in his area to resolve engine managemnt issues.
It remains a fact that he has advised customers to have so called 'tuning chips or remaps' to be removed/reverted because of service problems, MOT failures, and even mechanical failures.
Not wanting to talk about a person who isnt actually posting,and given your vague reason for why he states what he does!!!!!!!!! Modern vehicles are now actually coming for want of a better term "remapped"as they can carry 2 and 3 maps,of varying performance spec as standard!
So i say hog wash, never herd so much miss information on modern engines concerning,remaps and the better tunning boxes.!
Many car manufactuers offer these services,or advicate those of certain tuners, so it may remain a fact he advises there removal,how many has he come across? and what check system does he use to assertain its a map problem? sorry prof this is the 21st century not the 1980! no wonder we read so much about dealers not being able to fix or even identify modern electronic control unit problems,and sensor issues,they live in the past..................................
So i say hog wash, never herd so much miss information on modern engines concerning,remaps and the better tunning boxes.!
Many car manufactuers offer these services,or advicate those of certain tuners, so it may remain a fact he advises there removal,how many has he come across? and what check system does he use to assertain its a map problem? sorry prof this is the 21st century not the 1980! no wonder we read so much about dealers not being able to fix or even identify modern electronic control unit problems,and sensor issues,they live in the past..................................
But its totally true,a problem arises with the engine.It automatically has to be the fault of the "box" look at Icemaker when his Sharan called it a day.First thing VW done was blame the "box".A DTUK,400 quids worth ,top end of the market,well proven.
Yes the cheaper ones may be crude but dont put them in the same group as the expensive ones.The one fitted to my car is a factory option by Fiat/Alfa.Ive distributed the exact same module as fitted to my car all over the uk for commercial vehicles.I back them 100% and give a 3 warranty straight from Austria.But i dont get involved supplying for cars.
As an example of the fuel saving ability,Using a high end Mercedes tractor unit (500hp)over 100km it will save 2litres of fuel over standard.
Compared with a 600hp(16litre v8) Mercedes tractor unit,which the exsisting 500hp(12litre v6) will now be rated at through the fitment of the "box"it will save 7litres of fuel over 100km over the bigger 600hp original brother.
That is some hard evidence and speaks for its self.
Yes the cheaper ones may be crude but dont put them in the same group as the expensive ones.The one fitted to my car is a factory option by Fiat/Alfa.Ive distributed the exact same module as fitted to my car all over the uk for commercial vehicles.I back them 100% and give a 3 warranty straight from Austria.But i dont get involved supplying for cars.
As an example of the fuel saving ability,Using a high end Mercedes tractor unit (500hp)over 100km it will save 2litres of fuel over standard.
Compared with a 600hp(16litre v8) Mercedes tractor unit,which the exsisting 500hp(12litre v6) will now be rated at through the fitment of the "box"it will save 7litres of fuel over 100km over the bigger 600hp original brother.
That is some hard evidence and speaks for its self.
Damian. i more than most love the profs normally full descriptive postings,so no its not personal.Damian-Moderator said:
your remark "silly chip or tunning box" ! sorry cannot see anything silly about either of them, afterall there popularity has grown strongly over the last decade,that if you buy a car secondhand car, as time goes buy, it is going to be a high possibility that you end up with one, without actually knowing it. So it stands to reason to be best informed about what is what, where these devices are concerned, does it not?
Because the "map" is designed for a variety of countrys with poor conditions.Also makers like to leave a little bit in the bag for following years.
What makes you think that? Car manufacturers are well used to having different specifications for different countries, certainly the suspension settings for UK, France and Germany are usually different.seth said:
For parts of Europe, or further afield, where the fuel quality is lower than the EN standards we use then a different map would have been installed at the factory.
Getting corporate fuel consumption down is hard enough without "leaving a bit for following years".
Car manufacturers spend millions getting the mapping optimised - how much do the chip manufacturers spend "improving" them?
Together with purchase price I would have thought that nowadays fuel consumption is one of the major selling points of a car. I find it very difficult to believe that if it is possible to increase miles/gallon by the addition of a plug in box for a couple of hundred quid the manufacturer is not fitting them as standard.
hi rogerL
Who exactly are these car manufacturer, chip designers? Most Ecu's are bosch based in the EU, then the chip designers get to work on the specifics, for each individual car [apparently] petrol air fuel mixture is sopposedly 14.7-1 air to fuel for the so called "perfect mix" if that is the case then one would assume thats the Only ratio the chip designer should be aimimg for, right? and yet some lean burn engine, in this case lets say honda's will run a 22-1 ratio! which not so many years ago would have melted your pistons. Of corse this is petrol engines, as diesel can run an extremely wide air fuel ratio.so there is no 100% right map, never has been never will be, well not in our lifetimes.
So ray the car manufacturer should get the mapping spot on? he can not because there is no spot on set up, add to that they ALL go for a setting that gets them the best Eu urban and non urban [theoretical] mpg. [note how often people or testers complain about flat spots at certain speeds?] surely that shouldnt exist or ever happen?and yet they do, Well actually get your car remapped and that doesnt happen.....Ford BMW AND CITROEN,[there the ones i know of no doubt theres more] have had car re flashed [new map] put on custmer cars as they werent running right with the original. strange you'd have thought the'd get it right straight off.
In 20 years i have used endless tuning boxes and remaps, only problem i have ever encountered is when a sensor like the MAF or the egr valve isnt working 100%. Yes like the prof said one car failed it MOT and having removed the tuning box it passed, just. but then having cleaned my MAF and cleaned out the EGR vavle, refitted the tunning box it sailed through the emmisions test! So a tunning box or Remap will highlight other faults in sensors. And lastly, if the manufacturers mapping technicians are the last word in Ecu maps, then it seems strange that both renault and Mercedes [again that i have come across] when highlighting some 10 or 24 hour production car event have bragged how their standard cars were slightly tunned,remaped, and actually remapped by outside sources. to show their relaibilty! Why not in house? There is room for improvement in a standard car, both in performance and economy, might not be as big as some suggest but never the less room .
Who exactly are these car manufacturer, chip designers? Most Ecu's are bosch based in the EU, then the chip designers get to work on the specifics, for each individual car [apparently] petrol air fuel mixture is sopposedly 14.7-1 air to fuel for the so called "perfect mix" if that is the case then one would assume thats the Only ratio the chip designer should be aimimg for, right? and yet some lean burn engine, in this case lets say honda's will run a 22-1 ratio! which not so many years ago would have melted your pistons. Of corse this is petrol engines, as diesel can run an extremely wide air fuel ratio.so there is no 100% right map, never has been never will be, well not in our lifetimes.
So ray the car manufacturer should get the mapping spot on? he can not because there is no spot on set up, add to that they ALL go for a setting that gets them the best Eu urban and non urban [theoretical] mpg. [note how often people or testers complain about flat spots at certain speeds?] surely that shouldnt exist or ever happen?and yet they do, Well actually get your car remapped and that doesnt happen.....Ford BMW AND CITROEN,[there the ones i know of no doubt theres more] have had car re flashed [new map] put on custmer cars as they werent running right with the original. strange you'd have thought the'd get it right straight off.
In 20 years i have used endless tuning boxes and remaps, only problem i have ever encountered is when a sensor like the MAF or the egr valve isnt working 100%. Yes like the prof said one car failed it MOT and having removed the tuning box it passed, just. but then having cleaned my MAF and cleaned out the EGR vavle, refitted the tunning box it sailed through the emmisions test! So a tunning box or Remap will highlight other faults in sensors. And lastly, if the manufacturers mapping technicians are the last word in Ecu maps, then it seems strange that both renault and Mercedes [again that i have come across] when highlighting some 10 or 24 hour production car event have bragged how their standard cars were slightly tunned,remaped, and actually remapped by outside sources. to show their relaibilty! Why not in house? There is room for improvement in a standard car, both in performance and economy, might not be as big as some suggest but never the less room .
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
I don't know, but i would have thought than very few if any maps were done in house?
I would be expecting a specialist contractor to carry out such work.
Also its quite common for "bugs" to be found in software, my xtrail has had a remap, by the dealer after the seat swab was replaced.
I know its a different map, because the window is now one shot in both directions, and a couple of other things.
How often do we read, "the dealer is waiting for a ECU fix for the problem"
I would be expecting a specialist contractor to carry out such work.
Also its quite common for "bugs" to be found in software, my xtrail has had a remap, by the dealer after the seat swab was replaced.
I know its a different map, because the window is now one shot in both directions, and a couple of other things.
How often do we read, "the dealer is waiting for a ECU fix for the problem"
Body Control Modules are usually a different electronic box. Automatics also have a transmission ECU although signals are exchanged between it and the engine ECU.
It's the updated engine maps from the manufacturer under warranty that make a mockery of checking for remaps at MoT time.
It's the updated engine maps from the manufacturer under warranty that make a mockery of checking for remaps at MoT time.
Take a look at BMW,s 2.0 litre diesel thats had a bit left in the bag for the past 4 years.Every year its steadily increased hp by about 10hp.When an engine is designed it is not designed for today but for the next ten year lifespan.Its maximum power rating is designed from the outset.
People struggle to find reason with these devices or a remap,its been said on here a few times "you get nothing for nothing" or "how can you save fuel if your adding more fuel" Who says a remap or box is adding more fuel?Just maybe some work by bringing the power in lower down the rev range and lean it off on the top end.This will enable you to stay in that same gear instead of changing down and using excessive engine speed.This especially applies to automatic vehicles and towing vehicles.
As Jonny says ive seen engines with the same installed power and the actual power has varied by as much as 30 hp so just how good and unform is factory mapping.
People struggle to find reason with these devices or a remap,its been said on here a few times "you get nothing for nothing" or "how can you save fuel if your adding more fuel" Who says a remap or box is adding more fuel?Just maybe some work by bringing the power in lower down the rev range and lean it off on the top end.This will enable you to stay in that same gear instead of changing down and using excessive engine speed.This especially applies to automatic vehicles and towing vehicles.
As Jonny says ive seen engines with the same installed power and the actual power has varied by as much as 30 hp so just how good and unform is factory mapping.
Economy and power depends on just two things - the calorific value of the fuel and the engine's efficiency - you can't alter the fuel calorific value so how does a chip/remap change the efficiency?
Or to put the question another way - why do manufacturers deliberately build engines with lower than optimum efficiency?
Or to put the question another way - why do manufacturers deliberately build engines with lower than optimum efficiency?
- Jul 15, 2008
- 3,822
- 958
- 20,935
……there is a third!
The ability of the driver to use the power available correctly.
It has long been known that the driver has the biggest impact on economy, reliability and performance on any given vehicle.
Driver training always pays dividends........... electronic gismos, if they have any affect at all, can easily have any gain negated by an inexperienced and untrained driver.
The ability of the driver to use the power available correctly.
It has long been known that the driver has the biggest impact on economy, reliability and performance on any given vehicle.
Driver training always pays dividends........... electronic gismos, if they have any affect at all, can easily have any gain negated by an inexperienced and untrained driver.
i dont get it.Less gear changing means better fuel economy.Simple.Moving the power further down so it can be used better will equal better economy.These things work its that simple.My only problem with them has been the crudeness of the cheaper ones.What do you class as the calerific value,do you mean the stoichometric A R value?
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,677
- 3,934
- 50,935
Lets come back to the opening question,
"bobatkinson
anyone used one of these chips on deisel car are they as good as they say"
Several members have used them with varying success.
The potential gains the chip manufacturers or suppliers claim in their advertising hype are rarely fully attained. The conditions under which they achieve those claims are rarely sustained in real driving. So you are unlikely to achieve what they say they can do. (however the same has to be said of the MPG figures the car manufactures also claim)
Some forum members (and other none forum members) have reported bad experiences with them and subsequently removed them reverting to the car manufactures standard systems. To balance the point, there are some users who report they are happy with them, and have no problems
The use of chips and remaps constitutes a modification to the car and your insurers must be told about it. Some car manufacture guarantees may be voided by the use of chips and remaps.
Check with your car manufacture if your chosen device will affect your guarantee cover.
"bobatkinson
anyone used one of these chips on deisel car are they as good as they say"
Several members have used them with varying success.
The potential gains the chip manufacturers or suppliers claim in their advertising hype are rarely fully attained. The conditions under which they achieve those claims are rarely sustained in real driving. So you are unlikely to achieve what they say they can do. (however the same has to be said of the MPG figures the car manufactures also claim)
Some forum members (and other none forum members) have reported bad experiences with them and subsequently removed them reverting to the car manufactures standard systems. To balance the point, there are some users who report they are happy with them, and have no problems
The use of chips and remaps constitutes a modification to the car and your insurers must be told about it. Some car manufacture guarantees may be voided by the use of chips and remaps.
Check with your car manufacture if your chosen device will affect your guarantee cover.
Calorific value is the basis of ALL energy, it's the e in e=mc2.seth said:
Think of the fuel pipe - there's only two ways to get more power, increase the fuel flow (which increases consumption) or increase the efficiency of the fuel used.
The modern approach by manufacturers is to increase the number of gear ratios, up to 8 - so that the engine can work in a NARROWER torque band to improve efficiency. This means more gear changes, not less.
Widening the torque band forces the engine to work at lower efficiency.
Have ANY of the chip retailers actually subjected even ONE of the many models they support to the full EU fuel consumption testing regime? Car manufacturers are not allowed to make any claim on fuel consumption other than the EU test regime - that same restriction should be placed on chip suppliers.
Hi roger. one minor problem with einstiens formula being applied to cars, and that is no vehicle is 100% effiiecent so einstien rules do not apply.......properly till they are. till then we have to relie on improving effiecentcy. Ie over the last 2 decades [and this is more seth department] we have been increasing injector pressure to make a vehicle more effiecent. more power more mpg,? which you couldnt do if einsteins theories applied whole heartedly. example when the Fiat range went over to JTD [commonrail] higher fuel pressure systems all there cars gained extra power and between 5 and 10% better fuel ala the EU tests.... Remapping and tuning boxes use this and more to improve efficientcy......
I love the bit "Einstein's rules do not apply"JonnyG said:
My post made clear the two parts - calorific value to which Einstein's rules do apply - and efficiency.
Chipping doesn't alter a particular engine's efficiency.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
Engineering tolerances will always produce engines that are slightly different to each other.
In days of old performance engines were had built, and pistons hand picked.
This produced the most efficient engine.
I get the bit about producing a general map, i can relate to that, when i worked on closed loop systems we always set the controller up to a standard set up, then individually fine tuned the control to get the best result for that particular system.
If we didn't poor control would result.
So i can see how a individual map for a car engine could optimise performance, an individual tune up in the past produced the same result.
What i struggle with is the claimed increases that such add on boxes are supposed to give.
I find it odd that say 30 bhp extra can be obtained over and above the standard mapping?
I wouldn't except such a large increase.
So that makes me think that recommended manufacturers limits are being pushed?.
I also did a lot of PLC programming while i worked, not much different to a ECU, and i could quite easily make equations give a different result, so what reassurance do you have that the sudden increase in MPG isn't a result of a fiddle factor.
In days of old performance engines were had built, and pistons hand picked.
This produced the most efficient engine.
I get the bit about producing a general map, i can relate to that, when i worked on closed loop systems we always set the controller up to a standard set up, then individually fine tuned the control to get the best result for that particular system.
If we didn't poor control would result.
So i can see how a individual map for a car engine could optimise performance, an individual tune up in the past produced the same result.
What i struggle with is the claimed increases that such add on boxes are supposed to give.
I find it odd that say 30 bhp extra can be obtained over and above the standard mapping?
I wouldn't except such a large increase.
So that makes me think that recommended manufacturers limits are being pushed?.
I also did a lot of PLC programming while i worked, not much different to a ECU, and i could quite easily make equations give a different result, so what reassurance do you have that the sudden increase in MPG isn't a result of a fiddle factor.
Its such a shame that the remap or tuning boxs that Prof and Rodger L fitted to their vehicles werent a success story.Mine was/is.Even the "advitising hype" was correct.210 hp standard,240 hp with the box on factory settings leaving another 30% unused in the box,0.95 bar of boost,standard is 0.9 bar all proven an a rolling road.Not exactly stressed shall we say..As in my preivous post the fuel saving has been proven.Last year the manufacturer sold 40,000 units world wide.But hang on they dont work.RUBBISH.As normal we have people talking about things they have no experience with or telling chinesse wispers.
Rodger L as you talk about the calarific value,which ive never heard anyone refere to in 25 years of heavy diesel engineering does it apply to common rail diesel engines were a power gain can be had by just a simple increase in fuel pressure and no increase in fuel quantity what so ever which is exactly how common rail functions?
Quite a simple question out of two engines,one running at 2000 rpm and one running at 3000rpm both under load what one would have the best fuel economy.
Heres my answer the one with the lower engine speed.
Rodger L as you talk about the calarific value,which ive never heard anyone refere to in 25 years of heavy diesel engineering does it apply to common rail diesel engines were a power gain can be had by just a simple increase in fuel pressure and no increase in fuel quantity what so ever which is exactly how common rail functions?
Quite a simple question out of two engines,one running at 2000 rpm and one running at 3000rpm both under load what one would have the best fuel economy.
Heres my answer the one with the lower engine speed.
Ray I doubt wheather an extra 30hp on an engine would have any ill effects reliabilty wise.Last week i attended to a public service vehicle that had been involved in a road accident .Sadly the impact was directly on the o/s/r corner were the ECM was fitted so we fitted a new one and calibrated it and adjusted the parametres etc.We calibrated it at 267hp as original.But the same engine is fitted in marine applications.I was getting bored so i just had a browse through some marine application calibrations for the same engine on the laptop.425hp was the highest one.Yes ok the boat engine has an extra heat exchanger but the basic "long" engine is the same.I remember speaking to a vw enthuasast who at the time had a seat leon 2.0tdi 170,the first of the commonrail versions.The vw rating was 168hp,on a rolling road day it was measured at 202hp and was totally standard infact only 6 months old.The mapping can differ vastly just down to the age of the calibration(map) Improved versions are being developed all the time by the manufacture.
The next thing is as Jonny says the stiochometric A R(air fuel control).The ideal for a diesel is about 18.1.Under 16.1 it will black smoke.Manufactures seem to settle on between 22.1 and 25.1 this leaves a large amount of scope.
The next thing is as Jonny says the stiochometric A R(air fuel control).The ideal for a diesel is about 18.1.Under 16.1 it will black smoke.Manufactures seem to settle on between 22.1 and 25.1 this leaves a large amount of scope.
Facebook
Twitter