Fuel efficiency remapping

Gloomendoom

motorguy wrote: »

Nope. Wrong again.

This is the company in question for both BT and Thames Water

Homeserve too.

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

And what else do they do...?
https://viezu.com/news/viezu-launches-its-new-aftermarket-carbon-fibre-body-kit-for-the-jaguar-xe

Classy.

Is that the best you can come up with??

:rotfl:

Just admit you were wrong. Be a man about it.

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

And what else do they do...?
https://viezu.com/news/viezu-launches-its-new-aftermarket-carbon-fibre-body-kit-for-the-jaguar-xe

Classy.

And heres something else funny -

Its run by some bloke and his missus from an industrial unit!

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06687347/officers

:rotfl:

You couldnt make it up!

Imagine - a tiny company able to improve so many vehicles and save so much money for companies. :T

Still sneering at the "man and his wife in a shed" remappers eh?

Scania_Man

Wow this thread has taken off on a somewhat different yet interesting tangent. I've no personal experience of remaps but spoken to several who've had them years ago, recently or currently and all report a definite performance increase and fuel efficiency increase if driven sensibly but they do warn that with the power available it may be that you do not use it in an efficient manner but that's up to each and every driver themselves.

I've tried greenlight who flatly refused as they said 15,000 miles per annum is their absolute max. I'll try those other brokers but it looks increasingly that while the cost of the works would seemingly be easily covered within one year of use, the insurance is going to double or treble if I get any quote.

On a separate note it appears that some websites state that a tow bar is a modification!

Joe_Horner

There've always been plenty of reasons for car manufacturers to not tune their cars as far as hey could:

• Reliability / longevity. For a given engine, increasing the specific output will inevitably result in shorter engine life. While it's a major practical concern in itself with modern engines, it is a marketing concern. We all know the models that have reputations for reaching starship mileages, and the companies benefit in sales from that reputation until they push things too far and ruin the rep.
  
• Driveability: Manufacturers have to aim their cars at "average" drivers for their target market. They don't generally design for people who tend to scream round at the redline or those who cruise around in the highest gear it'll pull comfortably. That inevitably means compromises.
  
• Official tests: Makers are mainly interested in getting good figures in the official tests because that's what sells cars. Very often that'll come at the expense of real-world economy and / or power.
  
• Model differentiation: It's not uncommon for the difference between (say) a 1.8l and 2.0l model to be so minor that it makes commercial sense to de-tune the 1.8 in order to make the 2l look good. Makers have been pulling that trick since at least the 1960s.
  
• Giving themselves wriggle room for the New Iproved model next year. If you release a model already tuned to the max, where do you go with it in a couple of years when you want to sell them a new one? Engine technology doesn't improve that fast no matter what the they'd like you to believe. If it did, we'd all be commuting on a teaspoon of fuel by now!

There are probably other reasons that I've overlooked but it's 11:30 after a long day and that should be enough for now

Scania_Man

Thanks folks appreciate all the comments ����
I can bet a few bt vans might do more miles than me...wonder who they use for insurance! ��

Insurance company stated that they could possibly refer me to a sister company dealing with modified cars but would require an engineers report to state the impact on the performance. I'll try and get something for then to work from for a quote but can't see it bring fruitful unfortunately

Gloomendoom

Scania_Man wrote: »

Thanks folks appreciate all the comments ����
I can bet a few bt vans might do more miles than me...wonder who they use for insurance! ��

They may just post a bond if they have a large fleet.

Call those brokers that I mentioned.

Scania_Man

Gloomendoom wrote: »

They may just post a bond if they have a large fleet.

Call those brokers that I mentioned.

That's way over my head! I will and thank you!

Noticed that viezu database has an Eco and then a performance map. The Eco is only 15hp more but I reckon any such change whether it is 0.5hp or 500hp a 'normal' insurer will not be interested

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

And heres something else funny -

Its run by some bloke and his missus from an industrial unit!

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06687347/officers

:rotfl:

You couldnt make it up!

Imagine - a tiny company able to improve so many vehicles and save so much money for companies. :T

Still sneering at the "man and his wife in a shed" remappers eh?

Still claiming they're all "multi-million pound" businesses? Will we be admitting that one was as false as a false thing?
https://www.duedil.com/company/06687347/viezu-technologies-ltd/financials

DavidFx

Joe_Horner wrote: »

There've always been plenty of reasons for car manufacturers to not tune their cars as far as hey could:

And of course the big elephant in the room is diesel emissions.
VW got caught effectively having 2 maps in their vehicles (one for testing, one for driving) - In the UK there is no post maunfacture NOx testing and as none of the remappers quote higher power, better mpg and lower emissions I am assuming the former is at the expense of the latter.