Re-Mapping, your experiences.
Discussion
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
I would think any remap worth paying for would need to be done on a dyno, where the AFR can be recorded and the fueling adjusted accordingly? Strikes me as stabbing in the dark otherwise.
I don't agree. I remap my car on the road (albeit a nice straight bit of road near an airfield which is very very quiet), and use an Innovate LM-1 wideband to log my AFRs. But I obviously would never map without using a wideband or as you say, its a (dangerous) stab in the dark.Edited by hyperblue on Tuesday 17th April 23:39
Having a Dyno to do it would be fantastic and very convenient but not essential.
hyperblue said:
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
I would think any remap worth paying for would need to be done on a dyno, where the AFR can be recorded and the fueling adjusted accordingly? Strikes me as stabbing in the dark otherwise.
I don't agree. I remap my car on the road (albeit a nice straight bit of road near an airfield which is very very quiet), and use an Innovate LM-1 wideband to log my AFRs. But I obviously would never map without using a wideband or as you say, its a (dangerous) stab in the dark.Edited by hyperblue on Tuesday 17th April 23:39
Having a Dyno to do it would be fantastic and very convenient but not essential.
My point was, you dont have to use a dyno to log AFRs and do a decent job.
hyperblue said:
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
I would think any remap worth paying for would need to be done on a dyno, where the AFR can be recorded and the fueling adjusted accordingly? Strikes me as stabbing in the dark otherwise.
I don't agree. I remap my car on the road (albeit a nice straight bit of road near an airfield which is very very quiet), and use an Innovate LM-1 wideband to log my AFRs. But I obviously would never map without using a wideband or as you say, its a (dangerous) stab in the dark.Edited by hyperblue on Tuesday 17th April 23:39
Having a Dyno to do it would be fantastic and very convenient but not essential.
My Camaro has a 1:1 on 3rd, on the dyno the operator bugged out when it was reading 140mph on the speedo. Had he kept going he'd have been doing around 160mph at the red line.
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
I would think any remap worth paying for would need to be done on a dyno, where the AFR can be recorded and the fueling adjusted accordingly? Strikes me as stabbing in the dark otherwise.
I don't agree. I remap my car on the road (albeit a nice straight bit of road near an airfield which is very very quiet), and use an Innovate LM-1 wideband to log my AFRs. But I obviously would never map without using a wideband or as you say, its a (dangerous) stab in the dark.Edited by hyperblue on Tuesday 17th April 23:39
Having a Dyno to do it would be fantastic and very convenient but not essential.
My point was, you dont have to use a dyno to log AFRs and do a decent job.
hyperblue said:
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
RobCrezz said:
hyperblue said:
I would think any remap worth paying for would need to be done on a dyno, where the AFR can be recorded and the fueling adjusted accordingly? Strikes me as stabbing in the dark otherwise.
I don't agree. I remap my car on the road (albeit a nice straight bit of road near an airfield which is very very quiet), and use an Innovate LM-1 wideband to log my AFRs. But I obviously would never map without using a wideband or as you say, its a (dangerous) stab in the dark.Edited by hyperblue on Tuesday 17th April 23:39
Having a Dyno to do it would be fantastic and very convenient but not essential.
My point was, you dont have to use a dyno to log AFRs and do a decent job.
BorkFactor said:
sparks_E39 said:
Not a lot of money for a substantial gain, I imagine. I don't know if it's worth getting my 528 done.
With NA engines, I think it is more of a question of improving the drivability rather than focusing on increasing performance. You would probably get a better throttle response, more linear power delivery, and all the flat spots would be ironed out. If it doesn't cost you too much, then go for it
Devil2575 said:
BorkFactor said:
But would remapping it with the M50 manifold not compensate for the loss in torque?
I ask as I am thinking about getting my E46 328i mapped and I was going to put the 325i manifold on first.
Glad the remap made a difference though
The M50 manifold does not fit on the E46 328. You can fit an M54 manifold from a 330i from what I have read though.I ask as I am thinking about getting my E46 328i mapped and I was going to put the 325i manifold on first.
Glad the remap made a difference though
Edited by Devil2575 on Wednesday 18th April 08:57
I have a Tesco Value remap waiting for me at home when I return from Scottishland, £47.50 delivered off Ebay, basically just an actual chip, proper old school remap that involves swapping a chip rather than uploading anything, not after additional power (944 S2) though it may release a couple of bhp, apparently it improves the power delivery and maps out the stupid fuel cut on the overrun and the associated shudder.
Did the BSR map on my previous Saab and that transformed it from meek and mild with a bit of shove to quite agressive (for a Saab) though the clutch doesnt like it and initially it caused bucking and stuttering some of the time, I re-gapped the plugs down a little and it cured it, always try the cheap things first !
Did the BSR map on my previous Saab and that transformed it from meek and mild with a bit of shove to quite agressive (for a Saab) though the clutch doesnt like it and initially it caused bucking and stuttering some of the time, I re-gapped the plugs down a little and it cured it, always try the cheap things first !
Many people are saying 'better performance and improved MPH' 
So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
Dr Doofenshmirtz said:
Many people are saying 'better performance and improved MPH'
So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
Manufacturer's have to provide a warranty, they'll always err on the side of caution.So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
Dr Doofenshmirtz said:
Many people are saying 'better performance and improved MPH'
So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
The catch is emissions and BHP tax brackets. You can get mega BHP or mega MPG but you are going to kill your emissions doing so. These remaps say 'fSo what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
k off' to the emissions regs and go for either/or...and in some cases improve both.But what everyone has to remember is that something like a Superchip Bluefin is a piggy-back device playing around with certain parameters. You don't know what exhaust temperatures they're getting - don't be too surprised if 6/12 months down the line you need a new exhaust or head.
Jimmy No Hands said:
There's no substantial gain in remapping a NA petrol 1.6.
Not always entirely true, the first generation BMW MINI Cooper and One both used the same engine in a different state of tune. It's very easy to remap the 90bhp One to a 120bhp Cooper equivalent and the difference in noticeable. Where you are right of course is that remapping a Cooper from it's original 115bhp to 120 or so is a waste of time E38Ross said:
BorkFactor said:
sparks_E39 said:
Not a lot of money for a substantial gain, I imagine. I don't know if it's worth getting my 528 done.
With NA engines, I think it is more of a question of improving the drivability rather than focusing on increasing performance. You would probably get a better throttle response, more linear power delivery, and all the flat spots would be ironed out. If it doesn't cost you too much, then go for it
If I go for it I will... the car doesn't need more power but more mpg and smoother delivery would be great.
Dr Doofenshmirtz said:
Many people are saying 'better performance and improved MPH'
So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
There are lots and lots of reasons.So what's the catch?
Why don't manufacturers do it properly in the first place?
I can understand them strangling performance on a mundane common every day car like a BMW, where company car tax (the biggest market) is based on emissions - but something like an Impreza or Lancia should surely be maxed out to within safe tolerances from the factory, and going beyond these limits will likely cause damage - no?
-emissions, type approval test for different things to an MoT. Hence why some car makers offer "dealer fit" maps to side step this.
-warranty, car makers want safe and reliable as they sell huge numbers of cars in many markets driven all over the world by non car people.
-variance, car makers don't custom map every single car, so they want a safe map that will work on all the cars they build
MrCippo said:
what did you get out if I may ask ? got a 9-3 tid auto and thinking to get it done up...
I went from 150bhp to 212bhp (torque 236 to 327)This was on a '55 plate car. CelticTuning did the work.
Apart from the £1000 bill for the Flywheel, I loved the remap. Completely transformed the car and I'd do it all again.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff