engine remapping

[gadjo]

Hi all

 

visited a local dealer at the week end got chatting about vans as you do he asked what we had told him then got on to subject of MPG told dealer we got about 23-24 to the gallon on a good run doing about 60-65.

 

Sharp intake of breath from dealer "you should be getting more than that" he says "people tell me they get about 30 in a coach built like yours".....we also discussed the fact that I think the vans under powered and I wish I had got the 3.0 engine

 

he suggested remapping cos some poeple he knew did this and the MPG got much better and the torque improved??? He wasn't trying to sell me anything just giving a bit of advice I think

 

Now I know this has been discussed on here before and there are issue about insurance effect on engine part etc but it did get me wondering was it worth spending the money on that rather than a new van cos I do like the van??/

 

that then got me wondering has anyone on the forum done it and how did it go...was it the best thing they have ever done and things improved or is it just a money making racket??

 

Anyway any thoughts + or - greatfuly accepted :-)

[BGD]

Ummmm.....but what's the cost of engine remapping, versus just continuing to enjoy the MH you've got as it is?

 

 

Is there another way maybe.....

 

Remember that at anything above about 50 mph, the fuel economy of a brick-like HGV drops like a stone as you go at each 1 mph quicker, because below that speed the main problem is rolling road resistance, but above that it's wind resistance which kills your fuel economy.

 

So perhaps deliberately lighten up with the right foot as a driving technique, or take a days training from an IAM trainer in smooth driving and improving anticipation techniques (VERY worthwhile).......and you'll get maybe 5 to 10% more fuel economy anyway, with no insurance issues (other than maybe a premium discount 'cos you've done some advanced training), and no engine straining issues.

 

But even if you only get up to maybe 26pmg by driving slower/smoother....how many miles do you actually do in a year? Really?

Do the maths.....26mpg verus 30mpg over (say) 5,000 miles per year.....it ain't really costing you a fortune I suyspect.

 

Just drive your MH smooth and slow. Enjoy it. The relative fuel cost isn't the big issue when you consider the rate at which it's depreciating anyway!

[snitrats]

As an alternative to a remap, have a look at energy tuning.co.uk. I have fitted one of these to my 2.2 Fiat and it seems to work quite well.You have a choice of settings to give economy , torque and BHP or switch it off all

together.This has given me about 4-5 MPG extra I told the insurance company but they said no extra premium would be charged

I would think that 24MPG in your van would seem about right, the dealer may be quoting readings off the on board computer which are very optimistic.Prior to fitting this device my computer showed 30.9 MPG , but a proper fill up check shows 25.5 MPH (lol)

[Brian Kirby]

Our 130PS Transit based van is smaller than the Cheyenne, and manages about 29.5 mpg. It is not underpowered, and I tend to cruise it at about 65 MPH where legal, otherwise near permissible limit. Your longer, heavier, wider, taller, van will inevitably use more fuel. So, would a remap result in sufficiently greater fuel economy to pay for itself? Depends in part on how many miles you do in your van per year. Few seem to much exceed 6,000, so that payback will probably be quite slow coming.

[nasher]

We had a 696g highline 2005 reg with the 2.8 turbo engine, prior to this van we had a bessacar e795 same engine but seemed to be a lot quicker. So we had it remapped by tb turbo at lancaster,the mpg stayed the same about 26mpg,but the acceleration through the gears ,especially 3rd gear was much better. we paid £500 for the remap. Would we do it again, not with our current flying machine,Burstner t680 on the renault 3litre. Yipee!!!

[bounty hunter]

Did the remap on 16th March 2010 on a Euramobil 810 with a 2.8JTD weighing in about 4.750 tonnes. Prior to remapping the van was great to drive on the motorway but once you came off onto A roads it wouldn't get out of it's own way. After remapping it became a sheer joy to drive with oodles of oomph available no matter where you were. I have always kept accurate fuel records and we are currently averaging 5.43% better fuel consumption over the 15 months since fitting. I don't use it's full capabilty as I am sure fuel consumption would rise but I do drive it.

Downside ~ Within quarter of a mile of the garage where remapping took place the clutch slipped for the first time and was eventually replaced in June with 15000 miles on the clock. Since then new clutch has slipped twice, first time was caused when cruise control lagged a little bit at the foot of a hill and floored the throttle which meant clutch couldn't handle the torque. Second time I was in third gear just ambling along when it slipped for no apparent reason.

I am not convinced slipping clutch is always caused by the sheer power as the excessive pedal travel was picked up on service by Mr Newell and I think something else is at fault.

Would I do it again? I am now more relaxed and refreshed at the end of a journey and the enjoyment I get on A & B roads means yes, I would remap again.

 

John

[Melvin]

gadjo - 2011-06-14 10:55 AM

 

Hi all

 

visited a local dealer at the week end got chatting about vans as you do he asked what we had told him then got on to subject of MPG told dealer we got about 23-24 to the gallon on a good run doing about 60-65.

 

:-)

 

23-24 is about the same as our 2008 Autotrail Cheynne 660, we have had our engine remapped at 5000 miles, we are up to 6000 miles and have no real difference in performance and fuel consumption. Hopefully this should improve with mileage.

[carioca]

hi gadjo i have a 2005 carioca656 2.3jtd 6 berth coach built mpg has always been pretty poor similar to you getting low 20's per gal, approx 320 - 360 miles per tankfull travelling about 65-70 mph. last weekend went to silverstone motogp following my mate with his caravan travelling at 50 - 60 mph & got 430 miles to tankfull approx 28 - 30 mpg i couldnt believe the difference in fuel consumption by travelling about 10 mph slower certinally made me think about driving slower in future ;-)

[BGD]

carioca - 2011-06-15 11:29 PM

 

hi gadjo i have a 2005 carioca656 2.3jtd 6 berth coach built mpg has always been pretty poor similar to you getting low 20's per gal, approx 320 - 360 miles per tankfull travelling about 65-70 mph. last weekend went to silverstone motogp following my mate with his caravan travelling at 50 - 60 mph & got 430 miles to tankfull approx 28 - 30 mpg i couldnt believe the difference in fuel consumption by travelling about 10 mph slower certinally made me think about driving slower in future ;-)

 

 

 

 

 

BINGO!

 

Just drive slower.

 

 

[murphy99]

Hi First I should confess to being non Technical even though I trained as an Engineer.! Found Management much easier.!! Friend had the same 2.8 JTDi 127 PS lump as us and chipped it himself. Claimed it increased PS to 156 and improved fuel consumpton but I can't recall by how much, which not very helpful.! Reason he did it was they towed a James Trailer with Smart Car. Not sure if Chipping same as Re-mapping.?

Personally I would not bother as I never check mpg as "it does what it does".!

New Van has Ford 2.2 TDCi 140 PS lump which quite impressive (I think).!

Enjoy your Van

Keith

[gadjo]

Thank you all for your responses

 

I had not thought of the cost-v-usage argument makes good sense really. It would take me a long time to recouped the money spent, seen some companies on tinternet £500+ thats a lot of nights away.

 

As we are still tied to jobs and do no more than about 3-4000 miles a year.

 

Looks like I will have to try to limit me speed, take life a bit slower, enjoy the journey and see what happens……..

(lol)

 

cheers

[gadjo]

murphy99 - 2011-06-16 8:22 AM

 

"it does what it does".!

 

 

I like this way of thinking B-)

[Melvin]

gadjo - 2011-06-17 11:51 AM

 

Thank you all for your responses

 

I had not thought of the cost-v-usage argument makes good sense really. It would take me a long time to recouped the money spent, seen some companies on tinternet £500+ thats a lot of nights away.

 

As we are still tied to jobs and do no more than about 3-4000 miles a year.

 

Looks like I will have to try to limit me speed, take life a bit slower, enjoy the journey and see what happens……..

(lol)

 

cheers

 

To be honest the only reason to remapped our Autotrail Cheynne 660 was to tow our Toyota Aygo behind on an A frame.

[Big Momma]

My Autotrail Comanche 3.oL Automatic is returning an estimated 22.6mpg after 4,000 miles. I am a little disappointed as the manual states that it should be around 26mpg and I have seen some other articles in the magazines whereby people with similar size vans (Length, Weight, Engine) are quoting 25-27mpg. Is it that the engine needs to do a few more thousand miles as some suggest ? Surely they are all bench run in these days ?

 

However, I set my Cruise Control to 58-59mph on Motorways & Dual carriageways and find that this is plenty fast enough. On 'A' Class roads the road and traffic conditions dictate varying speeds but I would doubt that I rarely get above 50mph. I have a 90Litre diesel tank and this gives me a range of between 350-400 miles which for a 3.0L 5 ton Motorhome, fully laden, I think is reasonable. Would like to get it to the 25mpg figure but not going to lose too much sleep over it. ;-)

[Keithl]

Big Momma - 2011-06-17 4:21 PM

Is it that the engine needs to do a few more thousand miles as some suggest ? Surely they are all bench run in these days ?

 

Sorry Eric but you're living on cloud cuckoo if you think any manufacturer runs in an engine before fitting it to a new vehicle.

The first time your engine would have been run was the day it left the production line as a finished chassis cab!

Think how many vehicles any manufacturer makes and how many hours it would take to run in each engine then try and estimate how many test beds they would need to accomplish this. And the cost involved would probably be more per engine than AT paid for the chassis cab.

 

On the subject of mpg, the manufacturers figure will be for a finely tuned, carefully run in engine tested on a chassis dynamometer under absolutely ideal conditions and if you can get to within 10% of it you're doing very well :'(

 

Keith.

 

PS Don't ask me what our's does to the gallon as I don't know! I drive it where and when I want and put fuel in it when it needs it. As someone else has said a few pence here or there are nothing in the overall scale of things.

[Big Momma]

Thanks Keith, not having any mechanical or engineering skills or knowledge all I knew was that people were saying that you do not need the first service at 600miles, or whatever it used to be, as engines these days are already run in. I remember in the early days you would buy a new car and after having it for just a very short while it would have to go back to the garage/dealer to have its first service, which as I recall was after only about 500-600 miles. I guess that we have progressed to the stage that engines are built better or something so do not need this first service only the Annual service requirement.

 

I understand what you say about not knowing what mpg your vehicle does, or caring really. I tended not to worry about fuel when I planned my holidays in the Motorhome, the budget included whatever it would cost me on fuel and I still tend to work to that principle. However, it is not just fuel prices that may impact or curtail the amount of travelling, there is the Pay Freeze (if you are suffering from that), the rise in VAT which has an impact on almost everything from consumables to Insurances and utilities, the rise in N.I. payments etc. etc. With outgoings on the increase and less coming in then something has to give. Although we consider our holidays in the van as a necessity, only time to get away from pressures of work for a few weeks a year, this will have to one of the first areas of our budget to be cut.

 

I guess therefore that I can understand people looking for ways to get better economy from their vans, but has already been said here, to make it economically viable you need to be able to use it otherwise it is not a good economic outlay.

[flicka]

Checking the economics, it's a no go as far as I am concerned, if you are looking for Fuel Consumption justification.

 

For sake of calculation:-

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 25 mpg with c10% mpg improvement. It would take 98200miles to recoup costs. or 16 years 4 months.

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 25 mpg with c15% mpg improvement. It would take 68400miles to recoup costs. or 11 years 4 months.

 

If your mpg is >25, the payback period extends.

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 30 mpg with c10% mpg improvement. It would take 117800miles to recoup costs. or 19 years 7 months.

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 30 mpg with c15% mpg improvement. It would take 82100miles to recoup costs. or 13 years 7 months.

 

 

Best scenario, 10,000 miles per annum with 15% improvement would still give a payback period of 6years 10months over 68400 miles. :'(

[BGD]

I have no idea what our fuel consumption/mpg is...beyond knowing that it is pretty crap, 'cos it's a 1992 2.5TD engine, pushing an A-class brick-like body through the air.

 

I drive until it needs filling up, then I fill up. it does what it does.

I didn't buy a motorhome because I was anal about whether I'd get 22.893 mpg or 23.482 mpg.

I bought it to explore all over mainland Europe from our base in Spain, extensively.........20,000 or 30,000 kms per year.

 

But I do know just from the fuel gauge that we can do a LOT more miles on a tankful if we drive at an indicated 100 kmph rather than 110 kmph.

 

Seems to me that by far the biggest effect on fuel consumption is speed. All other issues are tiny by comparison.

 

If you want cheap travel, sell your MH and fly around Europe on package tour holidays.

 

This isn't about cheap. This is a lifestyle choice.

 

Don't worry. Be happy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike B.]

flicka - 2011-06-17 9:21 PM

 

Checking the economics, it's a no go as far as I am concerned, if you are looking for Fuel Consumption justification.

 

For sake of calculation:-

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 25 mpg with c10% mpg improvement. It would take 98200miles to recoup costs. or 16 years 4 months.

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 25 mpg with c15% mpg improvement. It would take 68400miles to recoup costs. or 11 years 4 months.

 

If your mpg is >25, the payback period extends.

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 30 mpg with c10% mpg improvement. It would take 117800miles to recoup costs. or 19 years 7 months.

 

Re-mapping costs £500, Average mileage 6000, Diesel @ £1.40 /litre & 30 mpg with c15% mpg improvement. It would take 82100miles to recoup costs. or 13 years 7 months.

 

 

Best scenario, 10,000 miles per annum with 15% improvement would still give a payback period of 6years 10months over 68400 miles. :'(

 

Thanks Flicka

Just got back from the show where I did contemplate re-mapping on their 'special show offer price' On reading your calculations, there is a pretty good chance I would not live long enough to see a monetary benefit from re-mapping!

Even now with retirement and extra mileage, I think I will just amble on at 60mph and keep my money towards extra holidays

Thank you my man for making the decision easy

Mike