which cars gain the most when remapped?
Discussion
I remapped my Volvo Amazon and was pleasantly surprised. In standard specification it produced around seventy five horsepower, but with a simple stage one remap and a sports cataleptic converger I achieved a agin of three hundred an seventeen horsepower, with the addition of a free flowing air condenser, a further fifty horsepower was gained. Verified with an independent power wheel measurer.
stevesingo said:
Why, if Rototest are trying to sell their product, would they produce a set of statistics which have no relevance to the product they are selling and then use the statistics to try to sell their product.
Not sure I follow. The relevance is they produce figures on their machine, then are using them as being 100% accurate compared to manufacture claims. That sounds like a rather hefty marketing claim to me.I'm not knocking Rototest, I don't personally know them and I have no personal gripes against their products.
My point was, I don't believe transmissions today are vastly more efficient in terms of drivetrain loss vs transmission from not all that many years ago. Which is what another poster was claiming.
AW111 said:
note : this reply is not aimed specificall at scuffers, 'coz he probably knows this stuff already.
For an insight into how the manufacturers' figures are obtained, look at SAE J1995, if you have access to an engineering library.
Things are a lot different to the old days.
While I agree with scuffers on ramp rates, unfortunately for some reason owners of "tuned" cars (especially turbos) seem to think that their car will explode and catch on fire if ramped too slow, let alone held at constant speed
I assume they never drive uphill....
The primary cause of error on fast sweep/ramps is that the faster the ramp, the more power goes into spinning up all the rotating mass in the driveline and dyno. Unless you have some means of measuring this inertia and correcting for it, the figures will be wrong. For tuning purposes, as long as the same ramp rate is used, the effect is less of an issue, but for producing "magic" power numbers, it is pretty critical.
At a "fast" ramp rate, just accelerating the wheels and tyres can absorb 10 kW or more at 90 mph.
back (vaguely) on topic, changing the throttle map makes a car feel more powerful, as does making it louder, and making the boost come in more savagely.
A mate swapped the SU carbs on his historic rally car for Webers (old-skool remapping
), and swore that it was much more powerful. Unfortunately, I ran the car before and after...he had gained a lovely induction noise, and a bit of power at the top end, but nowhere near as much as he thought, which really surprised him.
Now if I had sold him theremap carbies, and had a financial interest in keeping him happy, there would be a huge temptation to give him a dyno chart showing the improvement he felt that he had.
I am not accusing any remapper of fudging the figures, but the temptation is clearly there.
100% with you on all of this.For an insight into how the manufacturers' figures are obtained, look at SAE J1995, if you have access to an engineering library.
Things are a lot different to the old days.
While I agree with scuffers on ramp rates, unfortunately for some reason owners of "tuned" cars (especially turbos) seem to think that their car will explode and catch on fire if ramped too slow, let alone held at constant speed
I assume they never drive uphill....
The primary cause of error on fast sweep/ramps is that the faster the ramp, the more power goes into spinning up all the rotating mass in the driveline and dyno. Unless you have some means of measuring this inertia and correcting for it, the figures will be wrong. For tuning purposes, as long as the same ramp rate is used, the effect is less of an issue, but for producing "magic" power numbers, it is pretty critical.
At a "fast" ramp rate, just accelerating the wheels and tyres can absorb 10 kW or more at 90 mph.
back (vaguely) on topic, changing the throttle map makes a car feel more powerful, as does making it louder, and making the boost come in more savagely.
A mate swapped the SU carbs on his historic rally car for Webers (old-skool remapping
), and swore that it was much more powerful. Unfortunately, I ran the car before and after...he had gained a lovely induction noise, and a bit of power at the top end, but nowhere near as much as he thought, which really surprised him.Now if I had sold him the
I am not accusing any remapper of fudging the figures, but the temptation is clearly there.
And yes, I really struggle to understand people using stupidly high ramp rates, if the power-train cannot deal with steady state full power running, what do you think its going to do on a road (track)? I'm thinking of Camel straight at Spa for example.
Yes, a turbo will get somewhat hot doing this, but it's going to get just as hot in use only you can't see it, and if something is going to catch fire, I would rather it did it in a dyno cell where it's not moving and I have a fire extinguisher to hand etc.
https://vimeo.com/64793283
yes, they get quite hot!
300bhp/ton said:
My point was, I don't believe transmissions today are vastly more efficient in terms of drivetrain loss vs transmission from not all that many years ago. Which is what another poster was claiming.
Well, with all due, you are going to be surprised at just how far on gearboxes have progressed in the last ~20 years.That said, even 20+ years ago, they were nothing like as bad as you seem to think they were, modern transverse gearboxes are amazingly efficient, mostly down to better design, vastly better materials and machining tolerances.
Volvo owner here, 163bhp 2.4d, mapped by shark performance upto approx. 210/220 and it has been faultless for the last 30k. The difference is absolutely amazing and it pulls like a train from 1k.
They had a test D5 there that can get well in access of 300BHP with a few mods.
Best £300 I've ever spent, and I still average over 40mpg.
They had a test D5 there that can get well in access of 300BHP with a few mods.
Best £300 I've ever spent, and I still average over 40mpg.
CorvetteConvert said:
One huge boost you can get is the one to 730 bhp for the new M5 with remap and minor other work. 730 is just amazing from 4.4 litres.
Jesus, 730 bhp in a 5 series BMW, that is ridiculous, I wonder how usable that much power is, traction must be at a premium with 2wd, those F10s always seem to make more than the book figure as standard.stevesingo said:
Of course, you don’t have to worry about tyre losses with a hub dyno. Which in the case of Rototest measures torque reaction generated at the hubs against a hydraulically applied load via a reaction arm with a load cell attached and rpm of the hubs. Couldn’t be simpler.
"Steady State is the standard test condition used by the automotive manufacturers. The Powertrain Performance™ at Steady State is measured at different constant engine speeds. Unless otherwise stated all tests are conducted at Steady State, i.e. at a fixed engine speed, and the engine is kept at full load (wide open throttle, WOT) until certain conditions are met when the measurements are taken. The engine speed is then changed to the next engine speed usually about 500 rpm apart and/or closer at the expected peak power and torque."
I think that is a really important point.
http://rototest-research.eu/index.php?DN=28
I love reading through threads like this.
Quite a few owners have been on the thread and posted the actual results they got after their cars were mapped and dynoed.
In general people are getting 20-50bhp from a map which has been the norm for years.
Yet still people come on and quote claims from online tuners of 100bhp +, sometimes for cars such as the mini cooper s which would be a 50% gain.
Before you part with your hard earned please do some research as you won't get such large gains from a remap on a small engine.
Standard intakes, exhausts, fuel systems, clutches etc don't come from the factory so over engineered that they can take or support that much of an increase.
Quite a few owners have been on the thread and posted the actual results they got after their cars were mapped and dynoed.
In general people are getting 20-50bhp from a map which has been the norm for years.
Yet still people come on and quote claims from online tuners of 100bhp +, sometimes for cars such as the mini cooper s which would be a 50% gain.
Before you part with your hard earned please do some research as you won't get such large gains from a remap on a small engine.
Standard intakes, exhausts, fuel systems, clutches etc don't come from the factory so over engineered that they can take or support that much of an increase.
Panjy said:
I love reading through threads like this.
Quite a few owners have been on the thread and posted the actual results they got after their cars were mapped and dynoed.
In general people are getting 20-50bhp from a map which has been the norm for years.
Yet still people come on and quote claims from online tuners of 100bhp +, sometimes for cars such as the mini cooper s which would be a 50% gain.
Before you part with your hard earned please do some research as you won't get such large gains from a remap on a small engine.
Standard intakes, exhausts, fuel systems, clutches etc don't come from the factory so over engineered that they can take or support that much of an increase.
The quote I got for my Mini comes with a 14-day money back guarantee.Quite a few owners have been on the thread and posted the actual results they got after their cars were mapped and dynoed.
In general people are getting 20-50bhp from a map which has been the norm for years.
Yet still people come on and quote claims from online tuners of 100bhp +, sometimes for cars such as the mini cooper s which would be a 50% gain.
Before you part with your hard earned please do some research as you won't get such large gains from a remap on a small engine.
Standard intakes, exhausts, fuel systems, clutches etc don't come from the factory so over engineered that they can take or support that much of an increase.
I don't doubt the increase quoted is optimistic, but it only takes a quick dyno run before and after the map to see how good an increase they actually offer, to decide whether to keep it or not.
Wow, this thread grew quite quickly, and while I appreciate the input by those taking about the accuracy of measurements I don't see it as much of an issue.
If the remap centre has a rolling road (or another way of measuring power) and does a before and after on your car using the same method then the improvements should be obvious.
Whether or not they are accurate against someone else's way of measuring is immaterial.
If the remap centre has a rolling road (or another way of measuring power) and does a before and after on your car using the same method then the improvements should be obvious.
Whether or not they are accurate against someone else's way of measuring is immaterial.
stephen300o said:
I remapped my Volvo Amazon and was pleasantly surprised. In standard specification it produced around seventy five horsepower, but with a simple stage one remap and a sports cataleptic converger I achieved a agin of three hundred an seventeen horsepower, with the addition of a free flowing air condenser, a further fifty horsepower was gained. Verified with an independent power wheel measurer.
you were lucky to get away with such impressive power gains without adjusting the foo-foo valveTyler Durden said:
I have read that certain BMW's share the same hardware but leave the factory with different levels of tune.
So a 325i can be mapped as a 328i and therefore go from 185bhp to 285bhp very easily.
Are there any other examples of this kind of thing?
Many similar engines have differences not visible with just a visual inspection. For example the 1.8t 180/150 are identical to look at, but the 180 has a slightly larger compressor or exhaust turbine (can't remember which) inside the turbo housing. The best way to find out what's different, is to go through part numbers on a manufacturers database. So a 325i can be mapped as a 328i and therefore go from 185bhp to 285bhp very easily.
Are there any other examples of this kind of thing?
Edited by Tyler Durden on Saturday 21st November 10:12
The best modern engines to chip are turbocharged at low boost levels. The lower the boost level, especially if the engine has NA like compression ratios, the more potential power the engine has when the boost is raised.
The humble 100ps ecoboost 1.0, can go up to a *claimed* 146-155ps depending on the tuner. However the stock ecoboost 100ps pushes 13psi, tuned it's 21-22psi! Stock boost for the 140ps is 24 psi, and that has probably got a slightly larger turbine exhaust or compressor turbine hiding in the same housing. Stock the 140ps makes more to the wheels than any 100ps/125ps does with just a tune, with a lower risk of expensive part failures and better drivability.
deadslow said:
stephen300o said:
I remapped my Volvo Amazon and was pleasantly surprised. In standard specification it produced around seventy five horsepower, but with a simple stage one remap and a sports cataleptic converger I achieved a agin of three hundred an seventeen horsepower, with the addition of a free flowing air condenser, a further fifty horsepower was gained. Verified with an independent power wheel measurer.
you were lucky to get away with such impressive power gains without adjusting the foo-foo valve
JezF said:
You will not get 300 Bhp from a 2.0 Saab 9000 with a remap and a downpipe!
My 9000 2.3 Aero had 290bhp with a Speedparts remap (like Maptune), a full 3" exhaust system and air filter.
I was in the Saab scene and saw plenty at rolling road sessions, 300bhp from anything less than a highly modified 2.0 isn't possible.
However, the 150 to 225 leap for a 2.0 LPT is one of the biggest I know of. Anything that is LPT has the greatest power increase potential.
My 9000 2.3 Aero had 290bhp with a Speedparts remap (like Maptune), a full 3" exhaust system and air filter.
I was in the Saab scene and saw plenty at rolling road sessions, 300bhp from anything less than a highly modified 2.0 isn't possible.
However, the 150 to 225 leap for a 2.0 LPT is one of the biggest I know of. Anything that is LPT has the greatest power increase potential.
Edited by JezF on Monday 23 November 21:53
When I took my 2.0 Vector LPT to be serviced I was given a 2.3 (not an Aero) courtesy car that went like a stabbed rat.When I inquired as to whether my car could produce similar performance, the mechanic said that he could get up to 190bhp as a bare minimum for very little money as Saab already produced a factory tuned 2.0 LPT with 193 bhp. He said north of 200 bhp was reliable and definitley realistic.
Also, the chap that fixed my immobiliser said that he had a 300bhp 9000 Aero. TBF, from the pics on his phone and the description he gave it looked like it had seen some serious mods.
Edited by jogger1976 on Tuesday 24th November 22:29
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff