# Re-mapping



## nickb (Oct 21, 2012)

Has anyone had a wow remap on a fiat 2.0 jtd engine was thinking of getting mine done as its only 84 bhp

Nick


----------



## David & Ann (Oct 21, 2012)

I have had my Ducato done a while back. Done it for the pulling power and also to get to top gear quicker. I have 94 / 128. Quite expensive at anything from £430 and upwards. The type I have is called a Tunit and it is not remapped into the engine. It is a cable to the engine and can be removed and put into your next MH. Remapping, you cannot take with you. I am happy with it as it gives me an extra 30% more power. Great up hills. It does not give you a higher speed, does not increase your fuel consumption. All in all it is pretty good except for the price. If you can afford it, do it.☺☺☺


----------



## nickb (Oct 21, 2012)

David & Ann said:


> I have had my Ducato done a while back. Done it for the pulling power and also to get to top gear quicker. I have 94 / 128. Quite expensive at anything from £430 and upwards. The type I have is called a Tunit and it is not remapped into the engine. It is a cable to the engine and can be removed and put into your next MH. Remapping, you cannot take with you. I am happy with it as it gives me an extra 30% more power. Great up hills. It does not give you a higher speed, does not increase your fuel consumption. All in all it is pretty good except for the price. If you can afford it, do it.☺☺☺



Cheers David pulling power is what I want, as with only 84bhp on a 2.0 engine we do struggle up hills, will see if there is anything at the nec show tomorrow 
Thanks


----------



## Wooie1958 (Oct 21, 2012)

Hi Nick,

I have one of these fitted :-    Turbotune

Check the application list for your vehicle, your vehicle is listed.

A " Re-map " is a permanent procedure and you have to go back to them for
any different settings at cost i might add.

I have a Turbo Tune DT fitted, it is a " Very Easy " DIY fit and you can adjust
and alter the settings at will very easily.

You have a choice of " Low,  Medium,  High. " for both the Torque and BHP
and you can mix and match to find the best setting for you.

I`ve had it fitted for 4 years now and it really is " Fit and Forget " with no 
problems what so ever.

You can also remove it easily if you sell the vehicle and can be used on 
others ( might need a software update, not expensive ).

I find it gives a much more relaxing drive and also extra MPG.

Hope this helps

Regards.

Graham.


----------



## nickb (Oct 21, 2012)

Thanks graham I will have a look at that


----------



## Ggohd (Oct 21, 2012)

*Plug in chip*



nickb said:


> Has anyone had a wow remap on a fiat 2.0 jtd engine was thinking of getting mine done as its only 84 bhp
> 
> Nick


I fitted a plug in chip to my 2.8JTD a few months ago. Performance is hugely improved and fuel consumption seems to be better by about 2 litres per 100km. I will have a better idea of this when I have had about 10 refuels and can average it out.
Chip fitted is from Chip Express, cost GBP395.
Easily fitted into the engine wiring harness and stows away in a corner of the engine bay.
If you change your vehicle, you can remove the chip, send it back and get the right chip for your new model for a payment well below the cost of a completely new chip.
It is possible to change the settings on the chip to your requirements, so far I have left mine in the default settings.


----------



## novice1968 (Oct 21, 2012)

I had my 2.8 engine remapped  by Wow tuning remapping was done by linking up van with a Pc  and reprogramming took the technician 10mins Think it was under £300 (did think it was easy money for the company) but had to admit that big improvement in torque and small improvement to mpg There is increase in black smoke if I am in a hurry but drivability of van is much better.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Oct 21, 2012)

novice1968 said:


> I had my 2.8 engine remapped  by Wow tuning remapping was done by linking up van with a Pc  and reprogramming took the technician 10mins Think it was under £300 (did think it was easy money for the company) but had to admit that big improvement in torque and small improvement to mpg There is increase in black smoke if I am in a hurry but drivability of van is much better.





Hi there,

You should not be getting any " Black smoke " and if you are then it is not set up right.

I would contact " WOW Tuning " and discuss it with them because i think it needs adjusting.

Regards.

Graham.


----------



## Teutone (Oct 31, 2012)

Wooie1958 said:


> Hi there,
> 
> You should not be getting any " Black smoke " and if you are then it is not set up right.
> 
> ...



a bit of black smoke on full throttle is ok, Diesels do smoke on full chat if mapped for max performance.
As long as you don't leave a cloud of smoke behind you, I wouldn't worry.


----------



## maingate (Oct 31, 2012)

I have nothing but praise for Tunit. They have been around a long time (not internet fly-by-nights), have a good product and tremendous after sales service.


----------



## ivecotrucker (Oct 31, 2012)

An interesting thread !. 
I've always been very wary if not downright dubious about all these remapping sales claims. Surely the likes of Ford, Iveco, Mercedes etc. map their power units for the optimum performance consistent with their engine design and mechanical endurance/reliability. They are all selling into a competitive market place with regard to fuel consumption, torque, repair costs, service intervals etc so it must be in their interest to optimise their engine mapping parameters. I realise that the newer Tranny is just the same engine re-mapped for their different power band sales options but surely there is a limit to re-mapping beyond which the working life of piston rings, big & little ends, turbo bearings etc is compromised. Maybe I'm just an old(ish) one time ex-mechanic fuddy-duddy ?.


----------



## dave docwra (Oct 31, 2012)

ivecotrucker said:


> An interesting thread !.
> I've always been very wary if not downright dubious about all these remapping sales claims. Surely the likes of Ford, Iveco, Mercedes etc. map their power units for the optimum performance consistent with their engine design and mechanical endurance/reliability. They are all selling into a competitive market place with regard to fuel consumption, torque, repair costs, service intervals etc so it must be in their interest to optimise their engine mapping parameters. I realise that the newer Tranny is just the same engine re-mapped for their different power band sales options but surely there is a limit to re-mapping beyond which the working life of piston rings, big & little ends, turbo bearings etc is compromised. Maybe I'm just an old(ish) one time ex-mechanic fuddy-duddy ?.



I am with you ivecotrucker, more power more fuel simples...

Dave.


----------



## ivecotrucker (Oct 31, 2012)

Thanks Dave, that makes two of us v the rest !. It probably IS possible to re-map for maximised mpg versus say torque & BHP (at a loss to acceleration & load-hauling) or maximum BHP versus engine life & fuel economy but to maximise every performance parameter offends the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.


----------



## maingate (Oct 31, 2012)

dave docwra said:


> I am with you ivecotrucker, more power more fuel simples...
> 
> Dave.



Not necessarily.

The extra power on my 5 ton van means I get from a standing start to 5th gear a lot quicker and I can hold a higher gear on inclines. The fuel saving is fairly marginal in average driving but can be demonstrated on long motorway runs. I would be wary of anyone claiming huge improvements but some owners claim a big difference after remapping and chipping.

If you are heavy footed or use the extra power to drive at a faster top speed then you will use more fuel. The best way to drive a motorhome is at around 2,000 revs and have a light right foot. They have the aerodynamic features of a housebrick and drag increases dramatically the faster you go.


----------



## ivecotrucker (Oct 31, 2012)

Hi Maingate, I appreciate your comment about being able to go up through the box faster (& hence reduce rpm & hence fuel use) but surely your brief period of faster acceleration must partially offset this fuel saving ?. When you hold in the same gear longer on a bank are you also depressing the Go pedal harder ?.


----------



## maingate (Oct 31, 2012)

ivecotrucker said:


> Hi Maingate, I appreciate your comment about being able to go up through the box faster (& hence reduce rpm & hence fuel use) but surely your brief period of faster acceleration must partially offset this fuel saving ?. When you hold in the same gear longer on a bank are you also depressing the Go pedal harder ?.



Hi,

It is a matter of giving enough power without wasting it. As for holding a higher gear on inclines, you need to start planning before you hit the bank.

Many years ago, I fitted a vacuum gauge to a Ford Cortina. It taught me how to stop wasting fuel and drive efficiently. The needle quickly went into the red area when the accelerator was pressed and stayed there a long time if you got it wrong. I never let the engine struggle in too high a gear either, 2,000 rpm (which is about 56 mph) seems to be a good benchmark. The max. torque is at 1,800 rpm but is not fuel efficient and gives no leeway when you come to a slight incline. Whenever we are away in the van, we are not in a hurry and this helps a bit with economy.


----------



## ivecotrucker (Nov 1, 2012)

Hi Maingate,

I agree, it is all about correct calibration of the Right boot. Vacuum gauges were brilliant for Go pedal training, I fitted one on on my old 100E  --didn't make the vacuum wipers work any better though !! . As a long time ago one-time truck driver I know all about planning for a bank ahead (& descending banks with the old 'ratchet-up-the-slack' handbrake lever); most 1950's early 1960's British trucks were awful. We pull about 1,870 rpm at 56mph in the Iveco which gives us about 32 mpg on goodish roads.


----------



## nickb (Nov 1, 2012)

my Burstner a530 only has 84bhp from its 2.0 jtd engine so when it comes to hills even with planning ahead sometimes we still get overtaken by the lorrys we have overtaken on the flat, on a full tank of diesel we are getting 400+ miles wich is about 26mpg, but i little more grunt for the up hills would be nice.


----------



## maingate (Nov 1, 2012)

When you say you overtake lorries, what sort of speed are you doing?

You could be getting more mpg if you travel at the same speed as the HGV's.


----------



## Teutone (Nov 1, 2012)

nickb said:


> my Burstner a530 only has 84bhp from its 2.0 jtd engine so when it comes to hills even with planning ahead sometimes we still get overtaken by the lorrys we have overtaken on the flat, on a full tank of diesel we are getting 400+ miles wich is about 26mpg, but i little more grunt for the up hills would be nice.



there is no such thing as free lunch.

With the 2.0 engine the MH is quite underpowered. (I have the same engine). You will get 100bhp ish with a remap but economy WILL suffer. If your floor your 84bhp and it's not enough you will need to floor the 100bhp to see some difference in speed etc. I guess you will see not more than 20-22mpg if you use the "free power" from the repmap.

Yes, a remap can increase economy. Manufacturers sometime have to map Diesel engines WRONG (in terms of best performance) and overfuel them to achieve some silly emmission laws. (especially from Euro2 going to Euro3). With a proper remap, the tuner resets some parameters in the mapping to the desired values which saves a bit of diesel under SAME driving conditions. But as soon as you put your foot down you will use MORE diesel if the mapping is modified to increase power.

Yes, a remap will make it more torque. But it will also add MORE stress to the engine and gearbox. As long as you don't overdo it, there is usually some safety margin in every engine to get a bit more out without damage.

More power = more fuel. Especially for turbo charged engines. NA engines usually don't benefit too much from fiddling with the maps as they are only able to get a amount of air in which has it's natural limits of how much fuel you can add to achieve max power.

With a turbo you just increase the amount of air pumped in the engine and you can add more fuel = more power.

But everything has it's limits. Increase the boost pressure and air get hotter = LESS air available to add fuel to it.

I would add a Oil temperature gauge to my engine if I remap it. It's always the first sign of a too hard working engine if the oil temp goes up. 
Use common sense, if you have a remapped engine and you are steaming up a hill in Italy with 30deg ambient, watch your oil temperature and LIFT if it get too hot.

BTW, I do not like the add on boxes. They are just "signal benders" fooling the ECU to change parameters based on wrong information. 
I prefer a ECU remap. But who do you trust doing a good job.....


----------



## dave docwra (Nov 2, 2012)

I done a job on a Volvo V70 D5 last Monday, the owner told me since it was remapped his fuel economy & power has been much better, I checked the ecu & informed him it was standard as the day it had left the factory.

He contacted the company that remapped the vehicle & today he received his refund cheque.

Dave.


----------



## Kontiki (Nov 3, 2012)

Interesting discussion, I think we would all like more power & better fuel economy. My previous van was a low profile on a Renault Master 2.5, 150 bhp automatic, 38650 Kgs. Over 25k miles I averaged over 27 mpg from new & was regularly starting to get nearer to 30 mpg. I don't tend to rush preferring to drive around the same sort of speed the wagons drive at.My latest van is a A class based on a 3.0 litre Ducato, 157 bhp manual, 3850 kgs, both vehicles feel about the same sort of power & I don't think my driving style has changed, the differences are mainly the base vehicle & the profile. I have only had one full re-fill but it gave me 21 mpg, not enough data to be sure but reading from other owners of similar vans this isn't too far away from what they are getting. Most of this was motorway driving & I am getting used to changing gears again. What is the best way to get good fuel economy? Drive nice & smoothly, not revving too high, floor it to get into top as soon as possible or something in between? Also is there a way to determine what the optimum speed would be for economy driving a big plastic slab? Thought about sticking some bits of string on the back to see what's happening, there must be  point when the drag effect starts & you need more power to overcome the suction.


----------



## Teutone (Nov 4, 2012)

dave docwra said:


> I done a job on a Volvo V70 D5 last Monday, the owner told me since it was remapped his fuel economy & power has been much better, I checked the ecu & informed him it was standard as the day it had left the factory.
> 
> He contacted the company that remapped the vehicle & today he received his refund cheque.
> 
> Dave.




hahaha, nice one!


----------



## Whitecube10 (Nov 4, 2012)

*Re mapping*



nickb said:


> Has anyone had a wow remap on a fiat 2.0 jtd engine was thinking of getting mine done as its only 84 bhp
> 
> Nick



I had mine done a week after buying it, WOW what a difference, sits at 75 mph and the fuel consumption has been massively improved, so much better drive ability I would absolutely recommend it. The company I use did a torque and economy mapping.....it thing it's 115 bop now...


----------



## Teutone (Nov 5, 2012)

Whitecube10 said:


> I had mine done a week after buying it, WOW what a difference, sits at 75 mph and the fuel consumption has been massively improved, so much better drive ability I would absolutely recommend it. The company I use did a torque and economy mapping.....it thing it's 115 bop now...



Well, I have the same engine and with 75mph you are almost FLAT OUT (the best I ever got was a shade under 80mph) AND your fuel economy has MASSIVELY improved.

sorry but if it walks like a duck.......(and looking at your post count I am not sure how you are going to back this up)


----------



## rugbyken (Nov 6, 2012)

iveco wrote "I've always been very wary if not downright dubious about all these remapping sales claims. Surely the likes of Ford, Iveco, Mercedes etc. map their power units for the optimum performance consistent with their engine design and mechanical endurance/reliability."

   the way i heard it was that yes they are set up for optimum performance of something like a delivery van that runs one way fully loaded and the other empty , but our vans are fully loaded all the time & the remap takes account of that, now i'm heavy footed and when on a motorway drive as fast as i deem safe i can sit on a motorway in spain for 5 hrs at 80 for 24.5 mpg or 8 hrs at 50 for 30 thats an extra day spent driving to save 3 gallons of fuel about £15 , each to there own but there and back thats a couple of extra days by the pool when i retire fully and can travel for 3/4 months i may change but for now!!!!


----------



## gaz2676 (Nov 6, 2012)

believe it or not modern engines are not as fuel efficient as they should be ..be cos of euro regulations your engine is now being strangled to death and is subsequently using more fuel in a cleaner way there are ways to reverse this but may become a head ache come mot time emission testimg...dunno if id do it... it would have to be someone local and totally trusted by others..... mines a euro 4 engine think ill leave it alone an just have a gentle right foot.... sitting at a 100 kph aint so bad keeps out the way of the trucks an feels like ya get somewhere quite economically ex wagon driver 100kph was what was the old speed they governed wagons too before... its 90 kph now.. surprising what 10ks gets ya past


----------



## maingate (Nov 6, 2012)

rugbyken said:


> iveco wrote "I've always been very wary if not downright dubious about all these remapping sales claims. Surely the likes of Ford, Iveco, Mercedes etc. map their power units for the optimum performance consistent with their engine design and mechanical endurance/reliability."



Nope.

They are set up to run as cleanly as possible.

The vehicles they sell to Africa, South America, Mongolia etc. will be built to the spec that the customer demands. By doing away with the emmission controls, they can run on less refined diesel and not use expensive catalytic converters. This will also give better mpg. However, the cleaner engines will be a selling point to some other countries.

Having spent some time in Africa, the Diesel that went into my Pickup was nothing like the diesel on a British or European forecourt.

Fuel efficiency has improved over the years but that is down to better design and NOT the added emmission controls. I have read that the Euro 5 gives less mpg than the same engine with Euro 4 system.


----------



## Teutone (Nov 7, 2012)

maingate said:


> I have read that the Euro 5 gives less mpg than the same engine with Euro 4 system.



that was the point I made earlier. 
I haven't got a PhD in diesel emissions but have a friend working in engine design etc. He explained it to me a while ago (the remapping gains etc)
that for example a Euro 3 engine is basically wasting diesel to fulfil some numbers on the emission paperwork. EGR is a good example, mixing exhaust gases to the inlet reduces some other stuff in the exhaust but to achieve this they need to run the engine too rich. Because of that exhaust fumes contain more sud. Oh, we can solve this with Euro4! Now we need to have a particle filter to filter out stuff which doesn't need to be there in the first place!

One doesn't need to worry about the change in emissions after a remap. It is NOT measured in the UK for an MOT. You can REMOVE your catalitic converter and no exhaust test will show this. Because they don't measure it. As long it doesn't smoke like mad, you're fine. (the particle filter needs to be working)


----------



## Whitecube10 (Nov 19, 2012)

*Engine Re map*



Teutone said:


> Well, I have the same engine and with 75mph you are almost FLAT OUT (the best I ever got was a shade under 80mph) AND your fuel economy has MASSIVELY improved.
> 
> sorry but if it walks like a duck.......(and looking at your post count I am not sure how you are going to back this up)



Not really sure of your point....I was only commenting to a quote and giving my recent experience of having our van remapped.......Mine would barely do 60 mph and only hit 70 going down hill, it now sits at 75 and will hit 80 without much problem. Before it would do 270 miles on a tank and on a recent trip to Kent and sussex it covered 340 miles..... I can only presume that that you spend a lot of time on this site picking holes in peoples postings....


----------



## Whitecube10 (Nov 19, 2012)

*engine remap*



Teutone said:


> that was the point I made earlier.
> I haven't got a PhD in diesel emissions but have a friend working in engine design etc. He explained it to me a while ago (the remapping gains etc)
> that for example a Euro 3 engine is basically wasting diesel to fulfil some numbers on the emission paperwork. EGR is a good example, mixing exhaust gases to the inlet reduces some other stuff in the exhaust but to achieve this they need to run the engine too rich. Because of that exhaust fumes contain more sud. Oh, we can solve this with Euro4! Now we need to have a particle filter to filter out stuff which doesn't need to be there in the first place!
> 
> One doesn't need to worry about the change in emissions after a remap. It is NOT measured in the UK for an MOT. You can REMOVE your catalitic converter and no exhaust test will show this. Because they don't measure it. As long it doesn't smoke like mad, you're fine. (the particle filter needs to be working)



This is basically what the guy told me doing the remap, rather than manufactures building lots of different Engine maps for different countries and environments, they produce one map for a global audience , hence the gains available from a remap..


----------



## maingate (Nov 19, 2012)

Whitecube10 said:


> Not really sure of your point....I was only commenting to a quote and giving my recent experience of having our van remapped.......Mine would barely do 60 mph and only hit 70 going down hill, it now sits at 75 and will hit 80 without much problem. Before it would do 270 miles on a tank and on a recent trip to Kent and sussex it covered 340 miles..... I can only presume that that you spend a lot of time on this site picking holes in peoples postings....



Who rattled your cage then?

If you had bothered checking, you would have discovered that teutone has been very helpful and knowledgeable to other members of this forum.

You must be one of these knowitalls that I have read about.

According to your performance before the remap, you needed a good service as my 5 tonne ducato outperforms your van before the remap.

teutone has been very quiet on here for a while. maybe that's because of too many smartarses coming on here. An apology to him would not be amiss but I have the feeling I am wasting my breath.


----------



## Whitecube10 (Nov 19, 2012)

maingate said:


> Who rattled your cage then?
> 
> If you had bothered checking, you would have discovered that teutone has been very helpful and knowledgeable to other members of this forum.
> 
> ...



Not quite sure why you think i am a smart arse, I innocently responded to a thread asking if anyone had any experience of having their engine remapped which I had as i had it done that week, If you had bother reading his response you would see that he comment came across with an air of arrogance... I am new to this site and I have to say being a fully paid up member I don't feel particularly welcomed as so far the only response to my comments have been from arrogant members who seem to gang up on new members...

I have to say your comments are not advertising this as a close knit community site that welcomes new members  providing them with support and advice....


----------



## maingate (Nov 20, 2012)

I am sorry that you feel that way but your claims do come across as a bit far-fetched.

You say you only had the van a week before the remap. That is not really long enough to compare before and after accurately. If you bought from a dealer and the van had been stood around for any length of time, it could be sluggish until it has had a couple of good runs. I know mine did that as it had stood a long time.

You also mentioned a lot more mpg and higher speed. I think you probably meant it is capable of better acceleration. If you were to drive at 75 mph (as you say in your earlier post) then there is no way you would be getting an increase in mpg. This is because a motorhome is shaped like a house brick and the co-efficient of Drag increases as the square of the speed. Something like a steady 60 mph should give you a decent mpg. I drive using the revs, not the speedo but my van has the Fiat 'long' 5th gear and 2,000 rpm is fuel efficient for me. 

This topic (remapping or chipping) always causes arguments on every forum, so you are not alone. I was well and truly slagged off one time because I add a little 2 Stroke engine oil to my fuel (I believe it is good for the engine).

A couple of other things to bear in mind. Teutone is posting in his second language. His command of written and oral English is excellent but may come across as a little abrupt at times. Him and I have had the odd spat in the past but we agree to differ on those occasions. Also, when someone makes an aggressive sounding post late at night, the demon drink is often involved.

Don't take things to heart. Arguments are quickly forgotten and someone who disagrees with you one week will give you valuable help the next week.


----------



## cornishlad (Nov 20, 2012)

Sorry if I've missed it, but nowhere in this discussion on re-mapping has anyone mentioned insurance or warranty. Insurance companies don't like engine mods and require you to tell them about it. It would be interesting to know how many of the folk who have done it, have done so. And what experience they've had re premium hikes.

MH's under warranty may also be an issue.


----------



## maingate (Nov 20, 2012)

Ring them up and tell them but they accept it as long as you have not done something ridiculous like doubling the power. It is he same with chipping an engine. (as I did).


----------



## Teutone (Nov 22, 2012)

Whitecube10 said:


> Not really sure of your point....I was only commenting to a quote and giving my recent experience of having our van remapped.......Mine would barely do 60 mph and only hit 70 going down hill, it now sits at 75 and will hit 80 without much problem. Before it would do 270 miles on a tank and on a recent trip to Kent and sussex it covered 340 miles..... I can only presume that that you spend a lot of time on this site picking holes in peoples postings....



back it up with real data. 

I am burning petrol and diesel for a long time now and know my a**se from my ellbow. 

Sure your van is now doing 75-80mph. But if it uses less fuel now than it used before with 60mph than there was something really wrong with it BEFORE it got remapped.

OK, I might have sounded a bit harsh. But that was because these post with " I found the miracle " as subject from people with very low post counts are usually coming from traders of the described miracle posing as members. And NO, I didn't say that this is happening in your case.

MORE power and LESS fuel is just not possible. A bit like the "food which burns more calories than it contains" stuff. Yeah, let's eat ourself slim....

Yes, I am very critical. I want to see evidence.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Nov 22, 2012)

Teutone said:


> back it up with real data.
> 
> I am burning petrol and diesel for a long time now and know my a**se from my ellbow.
> 
> ...






I beg to differ.........slightly.

MORE power can mean LESS fuel if used sensibly and driven carefully by being able to change gear less and not having
to work the engine as hard.

However " Thrashing the backside " off it at 75-80mph is going to burn fuel a damned site faster than travelling at say 60.


----------



## Teutone (Nov 23, 2012)

Wooie1958 said:


> I beg to differ.........slightly.
> 
> MORE power can mean LESS fuel if used sensibly and driven carefully by being able to change gear less and not having
> to work the engine as hard.


agree with you on that, but the more power is not a result of using less fuel, the savings in fuel are coming from using the correct air/fuel ratio. (or mapping a little be more optimistic on the lean side than the OEM)
In certain areas the OEM mapping has to overfuel the engine to achieve certain emissions parameter (or just to be on the safe side for all circumstances) and by setting the air/fuel ratio to be optimal for best power output you actual save some fuel compared to before.



Wooie1958 said:


> However " Thrashing the backside " off it at 75-80mph is going to burn fuel a damned site faster than travelling at say 60.



that's my point.
What we have to keep in mind is that the mapper/tuner isn't only mapping the "errors" out of the OEM's map, generally they ADD power by increasing boost (and/or modifing other parameters, i.e. max inlet air temperature) and fuel and this will (if used by the driver) INCREASE fuel usage.

But nobody would pay good money for a remap for just a few corrections, everybody wants the big bang as well.

some manufacturers sell different engine specs with different power outputs just to create different models, but in reality it's the same engine just with less boost. BMW 118d and 120d for example.


----------



## hextal (Nov 23, 2012)

Just thought i'd chip in with my thoughts on this.  Having had a carb bike re-jetted and a fuel injection bike re-mapped (by someone else I hasten to add) there's a few things worth a mention:-

1) I'd say it's not always about the headline figures of x bhp compared to y fuel consumption.  Smoothing out the torque curve and power delivery is a useful thing to do (I guess more so on bikes due to the rev range), but even so, sorting out flat spots can make quite a difference to the feel of the 'pull' without necessarily doing much to the top end figures.

2) swapping exhaust bits, air-filters etc etc (even the ambient temperature) will all make a difference, as I'm sure will age of a vehicle in terms of whether or not a re-map may be an improvement.  Just cos the map may have been bang-on 10 years ago doesn't necesarilly mean that it might not need some tweaking now.  I had a bike that through, age, changed filters, headers etc etc had dropped from 100bhp to 80ish (over the space of several years so i didn't notice massively), got it done and it was like a new bike.

3)Kinda random this one and not fully relevant so make of it what you will, but a few years my car stopped working.  After lots of head scratching and sensor checking I managed to track the issue to the Mass Air Flow sensor.  The replacement part was 200+ notes so I ran it for a short stint just to make sure it wasn't something else.  With the sensor detatched (as it remained for the next few years) it was up 8-10bhp above what it was prior to the problem and was returning an average of 4-5mpg more than previous.  So I figured the trade-off would be that it would fail it's emmissions check, but it passed that too...  I figured there had to be some trade off, but never found it (plus I kept my 200 quid too - result)..  Possibly the MAF was strangling the engine too much, possibly I had a duff unit, possibly it needed a re-map beforehand and binning the MAF brought it more in line, who knows.  As I say, no real point to this one, just a bit of a blather...


----------



## Hawkmoon (Nov 24, 2012)

I had a WOW engine remapping on my old Avantgarde 120, Peugeot based, 2.2 litre 100 bhp van and it made a vast difference in acceleration and being able to maintain a given speed on inclines on motorways.

This last fact I believe is where any fuel savings result from.  I also believe that the fuel savings would be greater if it were possible to change the final gearing as it felt like it could do with an extra gear or overdrive.  An extra 20~30 bhp can make for a more relaxed journey if used sensibly.

My mate's old Fiat based Autotrail 2.8 litre was transformed after his WOW remapping - made the engine so much smoother with an increase in fuel economy regularly seen.  He was so impressed that he had his 2011 3 litre Autotrail 160 bhp van remapped as well and is happy with the outcome.

On the insurance front both of us had no problems or increases in premiums when declaring the remaps.


----------

