Fuel efficiency remapping

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Mmm.

Facts and reality can be so inconvenient, can't they, when they interfere with your feel-good over having splunked a few hundred quid...?

Then - i give the the Ford Fiesta ST Mountune

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/fiesta/65518/ford-fiesta-st-mountune-review

Simple remap and a new airbox.

Power up from 178BHP to 212BHP.

£599 fitted by your FORD DEALER.

So there you go. A company like Mountune (just another small time tuning company) have produced a better map than Ford themselves do, and Ford will happily fit it for you and warrant it.

So are you still saying

(a) its the equivalent of snake oil?
(b) manufacturers extract the max out of their cars all the time
(c) even small tuning companies can have the know how to improve on what one of the worlds largest motor companies can do??

:T

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

So what the !!!! are you arguing against us all about?????

Because that increase comes at a cost. You get more out by putting more in.

If you're driving in a region of the map where the increased power is unnecessary, then - unless the OEM's development engineers are far less competent than the remapper - the best possible outcome is no significant difference.

Like I said - there's an exception, where a vehicle is so underpowered it's struggling to keep up with traffic. That is not a large proportion of modern vehicles, he says with a massive understatement.

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

Then - i give the the Ford Fiesta ST Mountune

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/fiesta/65518/ford-fiesta-st-mountune-review

Simple remap and a new airbox.

Power up from 178BHP to 212BHP.

£599 fitted by your FORD DEALER.

So there you go. A company like Mountune (just another small time tuning company) have produced a better map than Ford themselves do, and Ford will happily fit it for you and warrant it.

So are you still saying

(a) its the equivalent of snake oil?
(b) manufacturers extract the max out of their cars all the time
(c) even small tuning companies can have the know how to improve on what one of the worlds largest motor companies can do??

:T

No, I'm saying it's easy to increase power.

But I'll bet you that that mapped Fester is a good chunk thirstier and dirtier than the unmapped one, which is THE ONLY REASON why Ford don't use a similar (but more highly developed) map as standard.

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Because that increase comes at a cost. You get more out by putting more in.

If you're driving in a region of the map where the increased power is unnecessary, then - unless the OEM's development engineers are far less competent than the remapper - the best possible outcome is no significant difference.

Like I said - there's an exception, where a vehicle is so underpowered it's struggling to keep up with traffic. That is not a large proportion of modern vehicles, he says with a massive understatement.

More power, more torque, further down the rev range = a potential for improved economy.

End. Of.

Gloomendoom

AdrianC wrote: »

Because that increase comes at a cost. You get more out by putting more in.

If you're driving in a region of the map where the increased power is unnecessary, then - unless the OEM's development engineers are far less competent than the remapper - the best possible outcome is no significant difference.

Like I said - there's an exception, where a vehicle is so underpowered it's struggling to keep up with traffic. That is not a large proportion of modern vehicles, he says with a massive understatement.

As has been explained several times before, the remappers are not working under the same constraints as the manufacturer.

If the manufacturers ignore the constraints, they can work wonders.

VW proved that.

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

No, I'm saying it's easy to increase power.

But I'll bet you that that mapped Fester is a good chunk thirstier and dirtier than the unmapped one, which is THE ONLY REASON why Ford don't use a similar (but more highly developed) map as standard.

If you use the extra power all the time, then yes, obviously.

However what if you are sitting at 70MPH on the motorway in 6th gear in a remapped car 160BHP car, compared to sitting at 70MPH on the motorwar in 6th gear in the same car only not remapped and sitting at 130BHP?

THATS the trick. The car will be using a smaller percentage of its overall power, and a smaller percentage of its overall capability to keep the car at a steady 70MPH.

thescouselander

motorguy wrote: »

If you use the extra power all the time, then yes, obviously.

However what if you are sitting at 70MPH on the motorway in 6th gear in a remapped car 160BHP car, compared to sitting at 70MPH on the motorwar in 6th gear in the same car only not remapped and sitting at 130BHP?

THATS the trick. The car will be using a smaller percentage of its overall power, and a smaller percentage of its overall capability to keep the car at a steady 70MPH.

Are you honestly saying manufacturers wouldn't have already thought of this? There are strong tax incentives to increase MPG and running costs are also a major factor in sales. What reason would manufacturers have for developing inefficient maps?

motorguy

thescouselander wrote: »

Are you honestly saying manufacturers wouldn't have already thought of this? There are strong tax incentives to increase MPG and running costs are also a major factor in sales. What reason would manufacturers have for developing inefficient maps?

Because they are constrained by producing generic maps to deal with fuel, climate and altitude variances worldwide.

You will notice that i have not at any point said you WILL get a SIGNIFICANT improvement in economy, but that it is entirely possible you will see an improvement.

I personally have never had a remap done or a tuning box fitted for economy, but to me its a very cheap power upgrade, with the added potential benefit of improved economy.

And lets not forget that what we have seen over the years is improved performance AND economy from specific engine sizes. Its not that long ago that BMW were getting 136BHP out of their 320D and 42MPG in the real world. The latest models are north of 180BHP and around 50-55MPG.

thescouselander

motorguy wrote: »

Because they are constrained by producing generic maps to deal with fuel, climate and altitude variances worldwide.

You will notice that i have not at any point said you WILL get a SIGNIFICANT improvement in economy, but that it is entirely possible you will see an improvement.

I personally have never had a remap done or a tuning box fitted for economy, but to me its a very cheap power upgrade, with the added potential benefit of improved economy.

And lets not forget that what we have seen over the years is improved performance AND economy from specific engine sizes. Its not that long ago that BMW were getting 136BHP out of their 320D and 42MPG in the real world. The latest models are north of 180BHP and around 50-55MPG.

Why do you think that? Cars are generally region specific with various devices and design features tailored to meet local regulations and conditions. It's quite easy to impliment region specific software too. There's no reason why manufacturers would knobble they cars to have poor MPG.

motorguy

thescouselander wrote: »

Why do you think that? Cars are generally region specific with various devices and design features tailored to meet local regulations and conditions. It's quite easy to impliment region specific software too. There's no reason why manufacturers would knobble they cars to have poor MPG.

Its not a matter of knobbling it. Its a matter of producing a car from one factory to be shipped worldwide.

As i said earlier. A friend of mine owned a haulage firm and the first thing they did when they got a new lorry was to remap it. More power for them was just the side effect of producing better economy. They ran a fleet of maybe 20 lorries.

The theory is more performance = less RPM for a given speed = potential for better economy.

I found that to be bourne out over the 10+ cars i've had remapped / chip tuned.

I personally have only ever done it for the performance gains, and any fuel usage improvement was merely a bonus.

I've had my Volvo 2.5 T5 chip tuned from around 225BHP to approx 260BHP which is a useful gain in power.

Next will be the A45 - it will be up from 380BHP to 430BHP.

Both only do around 25MPG anyway, and we begrudge neither of them a penny of it.

Any time i've needed a car for exceptional economy, i've bought the right one that suits my requirement in the first place, and driven it accordingly for MPG.