ECU RE-map. Do they really save on fuel?

fivetide

As said, yes but only 1 or 2 mpg.

Personally I didn't use the extra power all the time. I drove the same before and after with the happy knowledge that if I wanted to overtake a lorry on a single lane section of the A1 I could turn the boost up and whip past safely.

It didn't turn me into a boot and brake boy at all. The turbo spooled up a bit faster which helped overall performance but unless you planted the right foot then fuel economy improved. Even with spirited driving it was better than before because I had a cat removed so the fuel could be leaned out (extra fuel protects the cat) even then, it still passed the emissions test for MOT!

5t.

TrickyWicky

Gloomendoom wrote: »

There won't be any problem at all because it won't be part of the MoT test next year.

Erm, from what I've read in a few places yes it will.

If you know different, please spill the beans.

chrisw

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Erm, from what I've read in a few places yes it will.

If you know different, please spill the beans.

I think it was proposed but I've found a VOSA MOT manual online for jan 2012 which says:-

Inappropriate Repair or Modification
Repairs and modifications to vehicles must be assessed on their merits, taking account of the nature and function of the component.
The main criterion to be used when assessing repairs is whether the repair is obviously likely to adversely affect the roadworthiness of the vehicle. In respect of modifications, the main criterion should be whether the modification has seriously weakened the component.

It would still have to meet emmission tests.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/MOT%20Inspection%20Manual.pdf

Gloomendoom

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Erm, from what I've read in a few places yes it will.

If you know different, please spill the beans.

There was a lot of scaremongering a while back that stemmed form an EU document that proposed the harmonising of MoT requirements along with the banning of "illegal" engine modifications.

Read next year's manual using the link above and see for yourself... there won't be any problem.


Yet!!!

harveybobbles

I had my Audi A4 1.8T remapped a few years ago and yes the extra power was brilliant. Didn't notice any difference in MPG either way to be honest.

The only thing I'd say is: you tend to use the extra power more often, so any saving on MPG will get wiped out lol.

gord115

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

stainless exhaust, replacement re useable panel filter from the likes of k&n piper and other places, replace old fuel filter, dont use air con (climate control etc), warm car up in the mornings (let it idle to temp),keep eye on tyre pressures, make sure tracking and balancing is spot on, use the recommended fuel for the car. usually 95RON in most vehicles, add an injector cleaner once a or twice a year, you cant go wrong to save few MPG's.

I agree with all these points except
1,"leave car idling in a morning,"this is by far one of the worst ways to waste fuel,try it. A car takes three times longer to reach operating temp in the morning-ticking over-than driving it straight away.
2,"injection cleaner" if you steer away from supermarket fuels and use Shell or BP,they have detergents already in.

I should also add I've had two cars re-mapped(for extra BHP) and although both have claimed to increase the mpg this hasn't been the case.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Gloomendoom wrote: »

There was a lot of scaremongering a while back that stemmed form an EU document that proposed the harmonising of MoT requirements along with the banning of "illegal" engine modifications.

Read next year's manual using the link above and see for yourself... there won't be any problem.


Yet!!!

and the easy way around this when it does become legislation that cats are present, remove the gummings, put blanking bolts in the lambda holes and disconect the sensors and tie them out the way, have the ecu mapped and lambdas de activated so no EML, come MOT time plug lamda's in. looks like you have a normal cat there. as long as it passes emissions for MOT.

MattLFC

If you have a turbo petrol, or a diesel/t.diesel, then a re-map certainly can "slightly" increase fuel economy, because the engine will usually be more efficient, however you may only notice the increase under certain conditions. For instance, if you want to sit at 60 on the motorway, you will see more economy because effectively, your engine should be working less to maintain this speed, than with a standard map, which means less fuel being put into the engine to do the same job.

However, if most of your driving is around town, you probably won't notice it so much.

I have one of my cars (turbo) remapped, and it probably does increase the economy slightly, but it was mainly a performance increase that I was after. I also have a Synergy tuning box (imilar to a remap, half the price) on my turbo diesel, and the economy has certainly gone up with that fitted, but it also gives the benefit of removing a "flat-spot" between 1500 and 1900 revs that the engine suffers at standard (as well as increasing performance by ~20bhp).

On a standard petrol (non-turbo), the increase in performance/efficiency is so small, that you would not notice any MPG benefit, so not worth the cost. Keep your car serviced well, tyres in good condition and inflated correctly etc, and continue with your economical driving, and your economy will remain as good as can be. If you're after more MPG from a remap, considering a Synergy tuning box is around £180 and a fully-fledged remap is around £340, then you would have to cover a lot of miles to make any money back on either - though imho, they are worthy upgrades for performance increases and correcting any flat-spots your engine may have.

Speak with some remapping companies, they may be able to provide you with a custom remap aimed at economy above all-else - but most are just performance orientated.

Some older diesels can be "tuned" with a tool kit (mechanical pump systems and the like), and give similar benefits (including MPG) to a remap on newer models. Maybe go onto an enthusiast forum for your particular model of car and see if they have any advice on there??

atrixblue.-MFR-.

gord115 wrote: »

I agree with all these points except
1,"leave car idling in a morning,"this is by far one of the worst ways to waste fuel,try it. A car takes three times longer to reach operating temp in the morning-ticking over-than driving it straight away.
2,"injection cleaner" if you steer away from supermarket fuels and use Shell or BP,they have detergents already in.

I should also add I've had two cars re-mapped(for extra BHP) and although both have claimed to increase the mpg this hasn't been the case.

reason behind warming the car rather than driving it cold and forcing it to temp, is because youll be protecting against wear on the internal componants, especially a turbo vehicle. youll use more fuel and add wear driving it cold, than warming it up.

BP and shells 98ron only does a slight job in performance vehicles and scoobys love the shell one. but its also been proven that vehicle not perfomance based but economy based these fuel could reduce power by 2-6%. hence adding a injector cleaner rather shells brand of ecpensive fuel or BP's.

forgotmyname

Letting it tickover for less than a minute then drive it gently is best. Sitting idle probably causes as much wear as driving
it hard from a cold start.