which cars gain the most when remapped?
Discussion
gbruckner said:
What makes you say that? Do you have first hand experience?
The 2012+ F20 114i has a software detuned N13B16 engine, same as the one in the Mini Cooper S, 116i, 118i, 316i and 320i ed.
It's an engine was sold as a 170 PS/250 Nm (118i/320i ed) version with the same internals, turbo, cooling. etc. BMW detuned it via software because it was cheaper for them to reuse the same parts. You're really "only" running it 40 PS / 30 Nm over the spec.
IMO these cars are real bargains at the moment. Cheap as chips, RWD and enough power to hang with a new GTI.
This.The 2012+ F20 114i has a software detuned N13B16 engine, same as the one in the Mini Cooper S, 116i, 118i, 316i and 320i ed.
It's an engine was sold as a 170 PS/250 Nm (118i/320i ed) version with the same internals, turbo, cooling. etc. BMW detuned it via software because it was cheaper for them to reuse the same parts. You're really "only" running it 40 PS / 30 Nm over the spec.
IMO these cars are real bargains at the moment. Cheap as chips, RWD and enough power to hang with a new GTI.
It's cheaper and easier to just flash the same hardware with a different map for lower insurance group etc.
It's getting increasingly common with forced induction engines.
Horse Pop said:
This.
It's cheaper and easier to just flash the same hardware with a different map for lower insurance group etc.
It's getting increasingly common with forced induction engines.
I couldn't quite believe it but some google work suggests it is true. It's cheaper and easier to just flash the same hardware with a different map for lower insurance group etc.
It's getting increasingly common with forced induction engines.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153692...
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153583...
MG CHRIS said:
Motorrad said:
VW T5 gains are pretty impressive.
84bhp to 138bhp- over 60% more power.
Yep then the van s84bhp to 138bhp- over 60% more power.
ts itself when ever it gets used.I had Revo Technik software added to our Mk6 Golf GTi (stage 2) which claimed to take the power from 207bhp to 270bhp with just a remap. I actually went straight to the Stage 2 with a downpipe/intake/cat back exhaust with claimed figures of 300bhp. The car used a version of the current Mk7's EA888 engine so the numbers may be realistic looking at the OEM performance of this car in its various models.
Sadly I never had it rolling loaded to qualify the figures but it absolutely transformed the cars performance, and made for a plenty fast enough FWD hatchback.
Sadly I never had it rolling loaded to qualify the figures but it absolutely transformed the cars performance, and made for a plenty fast enough FWD hatchback.
gizlaroc said:
Tyler Durden said:
Are those gains possible with any 2.0 TFSI engine?
Pretty much. I just sold a 2.0T A4 with an AMD map on it, rolling road was 196hp stock and 258bhp after map, that was the basic map too.
Max_Torque said:
RemyMartin said:
doogz said:
Max_Torque said:
Are we comparing "Bullsh*t" aftermarket tuner BHP with actual, measured under controlled conditions to a European std BHP?
In which case, my car went from 130bhp to 14,000,000 bhp and all i did was "map" it, init..........
Why do you let these threads bother you so much? Just stay away if it upsets you so.In which case, my car went from 130bhp to 14,000,000 bhp and all i did was "map" it, init..........
But you can compare before and after dyno runs. To see what gains there have been.
AW111 said:
As a 20+ year veteran in the dyno industry, I hate "flywheel" power figures from chassis dynos with a passion!
Unfortunately, our customers' customers insist on it. Especially in the UK.
It really does depend upon whether you have a car with lower HP but the same hardware as one with a higher HP.
My Focus is a case in point. I bought it with 150PS and had it remapped to 195PS (dyno showed 155PS and 200PS as before and after so knocking 5PS off to bring it back to a reasonable baseline). The hardware is identical to the 180PS in the Focus (and the Fiesta ST) but the 180PS will still only hit ~195PS or so - therefore I am very happy with the gains from the 150PS but I would probably be a little bit less pleased had I bought the 180PS to begin with!
It does also depend upon how long you want it to last, but the main thing is how much head-room has been built in to the stock engine and components.
My Focus is a case in point. I bought it with 150PS and had it remapped to 195PS (dyno showed 155PS and 200PS as before and after so knocking 5PS off to bring it back to a reasonable baseline). The hardware is identical to the 180PS in the Focus (and the Fiesta ST) but the 180PS will still only hit ~195PS or so - therefore I am very happy with the gains from the 150PS but I would probably be a little bit less pleased had I bought the 180PS to begin with!
It does also depend upon how long you want it to last, but the main thing is how much head-room has been built in to the stock engine and components.
300bhp/ton said:
AW111 said:
As a 20+ year veteran in the dyno industry, I hate "flywheel" power figures from chassis dynos with a passion!
Unfortunately, our customers' customers insist on it. Especially in the UK.
for a measurement to be remotely meaningful it must stand up to being quantifiable and empirical, and anything that involves a measurement taken with a rubber/roller interface in the middle is simply not going to cut it.
(I await the howls of how wrong I am and how they are super accurate because of XYZ).
now, if you bolt your car to a hub-dyno (ala. dynapack/Rotatest/etc) then that's a different subject, as you have a 100% direct, non-slipping connection with the power-train, and (assuming it's a decent dyno) something that can actually be calibrated.
this, however, is still not power at the wheels, but power TO the wheels.
legless said:
Horse Pop said:
VW engines tend to show pretty big gains too because VW love under rating them. The Golf Mk7 GTI, if you compare VWs given figure to what it dynos at after a remap is pretty big, but the figure it dynos at before a remap vs the after figure is less of a difference.
I think there's lots of very optimistic rolling roads around. Having worked in the industry for over 10 years, I've yet to come across a VW Group (or any manufacturer) engine that exceeds its rated headline power figure at the flywheel by more than 2% when put on a bench dyno under proper test conditions. Calculating the flywheel figure from the wheel HP is an inexact science and involves many assumptions about the transmission losses. Many of these can turn out to be quite wrong.
From what I've seen over the years with VAG turbo engines, the optimistic dyno readings tend to be caused by either the wastegate control solenoid getting lazy and it over-boosts momentarily (hence the massive torque spikes), or the dyno operator fudging the correction inputs with silly (i.e. untrue) ambient temp and barometric figures.
As for testing in 'controlled conditions', it's just not feasible for a road car owner to take his/her engine out and fit it to a bench dyno, and even then that's no guarantee of achieving exactly the same results as the factory. How do we know the factory don't use chargecoolers bathed in liquid nitrogen during their tests?
If a rolling road measures (after correction) the quoted factory power, then that ought to be taken as accurate enough imo.
Edited by SuperchargedVR6 on Monday 23 November 16:51
Scuffers said:
RWHP is a totally meaningless metric.
for a measurement to be remotely meaningful it must stand up to being quantifiable and empirical, and anything that involves a measurement taken with a rubber/roller interface in the middle is simply not going to cut it.
(I await the howls of how wrong I am and how they are super accurate because of XYZ).
now, if you bolt your car to a hub-dyno (ala. dynapack/Rotatest/etc) then that's a different subject, as you have a 100% direct, non-slipping connection with the power-train, and (assuming it's a decent dyno) something that can actually be calibrated.
this, however, is still not power at the wheels, but power TO the wheels.
HP is torque, just at speed.for a measurement to be remotely meaningful it must stand up to being quantifiable and empirical, and anything that involves a measurement taken with a rubber/roller interface in the middle is simply not going to cut it.
(I await the howls of how wrong I am and how they are super accurate because of XYZ).
now, if you bolt your car to a hub-dyno (ala. dynapack/Rotatest/etc) then that's a different subject, as you have a 100% direct, non-slipping connection with the power-train, and (assuming it's a decent dyno) something that can actually be calibrated.
this, however, is still not power at the wheels, but power TO the wheels.
HP = torque x rpm / 5252
Hub dyno's are fine, but arguably less meaningless. As they still suffer the same losses through the rest of the drivetrain, so can't give you any more accurate 'estimated' flywheel figures than regular rolling roads. Neither are accurate.
Hub dyno's are also rarer and sometimes charge more. So neither is all that helpful.
Plus you could argue the only meaningful power figure is the one you put to the road, so removing the tyres kind of defeats that.
And lets not forget, the best thing a rolling road can be used for is tuning. You really want to mimic a car rolling on tarmac to get the best tune setup. But these points are extremely minor.
Monty Python said:
wormus said:
Saab 95 2.0t. Goes from 150hp to 225hp/340NM with a stage 1 remap. Add an exhaust down pipe and it will go to 300hp.
Who offers that?Edited by wormus on Saturday 21st November 08:38
I have had two cars remapped.
The first was an XC90 D5 which in theory produces some excellent results. 163-200 bhp and loads of torque.
It was noticeable but nothing special and about 1 mpg economy difference, but when my gearbox subsequently went I didn't feel excited about it.
My current Phaeton V6 Diesel, however, has had a remarkable response to it. I don't remember the figures (perhaps 230bhp-280 and a similar torque increase) but it has transformed the car from a bit of a bloater to a genuinely quick car. Even more remarkably, from the moment it was done I got mpg increase of about 25%. Actually 25% and not just internet speak 25%.
Long term average previously was around 23 mpg and it has been 30+ ever since.
The first was an XC90 D5 which in theory produces some excellent results. 163-200 bhp and loads of torque.
It was noticeable but nothing special and about 1 mpg economy difference, but when my gearbox subsequently went I didn't feel excited about it.
My current Phaeton V6 Diesel, however, has had a remarkable response to it. I don't remember the figures (perhaps 230bhp-280 and a similar torque increase) but it has transformed the car from a bit of a bloater to a genuinely quick car. Even more remarkably, from the moment it was done I got mpg increase of about 25%. Actually 25% and not just internet speak 25%.
Long term average previously was around 23 mpg and it has been 30+ ever since.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff