Guest 1footinthegrave Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Peter James - 2011-11-29 8:32 AM Interesting post, Thank You Brambles. & I've learned a new word 'stiction'. I notice that PSA remap/chip the 2.2 engine in some models of the Boxer/Relay from 100hp to 120hp. But they don'tjust leave it at that like the aftermarket bods. They fit a different clutch with a dual mass flywheel. My Citroen Relay handbook also shows this remap from 100hp to 120hp reduces mpg by about 11% - manufacturers figures So when these aftermarket bods claim they are so much more clever than the engine manufacturers, with all their millions of pounds spent on research and development, that can both increase their power and reduce their fuel consumption I find them very hard to believe. Particularly since, as far as I know, no manufacturers or sizeable fleet operators use their remaps. From my experience of the transport industry, I know they are obsessed with fuel consumption. If they could get a reduction in their astronomical fuel bills from something like this they would be all over it like a rash. I'm almost with you on this, and It's something I've considered, BUT from what I've read engines are set up for sometimes poor grades of fuel depending on the countries they end up in, is it true, I don't know. I do wonder if it is the placebo effect though after spending a few hundred quid, I'm sure others will have a view. If I found a company that could guarantee me getting an additional 10% fuel economy, or my money back I may still go for it, but does such a company exist I wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brambles Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 No, the 2.0 hdi (jtd) does NOT have a DMF. Just an ordinary bog standard clutch which is very sensitive to slip with the slightest touch of the clutch pedal. I will warn you the following is a bit of a ramble..... Another thing aftermarket remappers do not tell you is the original mapping is designed to maximise service intervals and prolong the life of the oil. If you remap you contaminate the oil a lot more with acids, fuel, and carbon so more frequent service intervals are required. This puts up the cost for fleets who look at whole life costs. A fleet operator or small business is different from a private user, as his cost for servicing is a lot less but then has to add the cost of the vehicle being out of use while serviced. Chipping, means more servicing of the engine, less life for the exhaust and extra strain on the clutch. Increased tyre wear if the power is used and of course increased wear on the engine and transmission overall. It is possible to remap to get a bit more power AND ecomomy but will still have an affect on the pollutants in the exhaust and oil. It is also feasible to remap to allow for the margins allowed for the spread of vehicles and tolerances and some companies offer this, but for the cost and only for a few BHP hardly seems worth it, and what about the odd times the fuel tank gets a load of duff diesel and needs the original mapping. Bear in mind your fuel degrades when left in tank for long lay up periods. Some have an obsession with more power in 5th to get up hills. I luckily have a gear box and can slip down into 4th and manage to climb the hill just as fast or sucessfully and anyway who wants to rip the tyres tread off in sheets as the wheels creep a lot more as they rotate. (sorry..a bit of sarcarcastic tone there!) I deliberately slow down and use less power than require to keep my speed up, as the weight gets thrown back to rear so resulting in increased tyre wear at front on every hill especially of I keep the speed up. Another reason not to use low engine speeds with max torque is the power arrives as pulses at the wheels so , you have felt the extra vibration and this all transmits through your tyres increasing wear. Using a higher engine speed will save fuel and reduce tyre wear even though you maintain the same speed, and means the clutch is transmitting less torque (less chance of these clutch slips on peak torque of the power stroke, and engine is running more efficiently. I accidenty drove all the way up the M6 once in 4th at about 60mph, I was pleasantly surpised to find I had far better mpg than using 5th. Food for thought! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 1footinthegrave - 2011-11-29 10:04 AM , BUT from what I've read . I guess you didn't read that on anything originating from the manufacturers. Whats the chance of 'what you have read' originating from someone with an interest in selling remaps ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I believe that some of the early Boxers were cable operated clutch - certainly the petrol engined ones were - and some of these are/were adjustable at the gearbox end where it connects to the clutch actuating arm? Slackening the cable slightly - but not too much - will take the pressure off the clutch plate and buy you some time. Just how much time depends how often it's been done before! I can't remember, but if you look under the bonnet and see a cable going to the clutch it is cable, and if there is a clutch hydraulic master cylinder it's hydraulic! The hydraulics are non adjustable so it's new clutch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Tracker - 2011-11-29 6:24 PM I believe that some of the early Boxers were cable operated clutch - certainly the petrol engined ones were - and some of these are/were adjustable at the gearbox end where it connects to the clutch actuating arm? Slackening the cable slightly - but not too much - will take the pressure off the clutch plate and buy you some time. Just how much time depends how often it's been done before! I can't remember, but if you look under the bonnet and see a cable going to the clutch it is cable, and if there is a clutch hydraulic master cylinder it's hydraulic! The hydraulics are non adjustable so it's new clutch. I think Boxers/Ducatos/Relays had cable-operated clutches up to 2002-ish and, presumably, there would have been a need to maintain some 'free play' by suitably adjusting the cable'a tension. After that operation switched to hydraulic, with no adjustment needed or possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lizken Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 Thanks to all for your comments and help. I did not mean to offend Derek, but I did state in the original query that it was an HDI. It is definitely hydraulic, and I will have to invest in a new clutch, although I would say that as we live in the Lake District, with hills in every direction, the extra torque has helped enormously. The van has done 35000 miles, which is not a lot for a clutch, but I may use the gears more in future, following your various advice. The remapping was done at 500 miles, for information. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Peter James - 2011-11-29 6:12 PM 1footinthegrave - 2011-11-29 10:04 AM , BUT from what I've read . I guess you didn't read that on anything originating from the manufacturers. Whats the chance of 'what you have read' originating from someone with an interest in selling remaps ;-) Of course your right, anyone selling these services are going to make claims real or imagined, but I was told or read somewhere some time ago that different engine BHP outputs can be achieved on the exact same engine by the manufacturers themselves remapping at the end of the production line, any truth in that I wonder. (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 1footinthegrave - 2011-11-30 5:57 AM Peter James - 2011-11-29 6:12 PM 1footinthegrave - 2011-11-29 10:04 AM , BUT from what I've read . I guess you didn't read that on anything originating from the manufacturers. Whats the chance of 'what you have read' originating from someone with an interest in selling remaps ;-) Of course your right, anyone selling these services are going to make claims real or imagined, but I was told or read somewhere some time ago that different engine BHP outputs can be achieved on the exact same engine by the manufacturers themselves remapping at the end of the production line, any truth in that I wonder. (?) Vehicle manufacturers may choose to map Engine Control Units differently for a given motor depending on the motor's intended usage. For example, the 2.3litre Euro 4 motor used in the X250 Boxer/Ducato/Relay produced 120bhp when used in panel vans, but 130bhp when intended for 'coachbuilt' motorhomes. It's also commonplace for manufacturers to remap ECUs to address unwelcome characteristics that show up after a vehicle's launch or just to provide improved drivability. Such remaps may be performed as part of normal servicing, or at owner request, or as a 'recall'. Remapping was carried out on some X250s afflicted with reversing-judder to alter low-revs performance: an on-request remap was available on Mk 7 FWD Transits to make them less stall-prone. I'm not aware of any manufacturer that maps identical motors so that some versions produce radically different outputs to others. If there is a big step-up in power output between versions of the same-capacity motors, there will be significant differences between those motors to begin with. If you look at the first three entries in the "Ford Transit & Connect 2006+" section in the PERFORMANCE DATA part of the following webpage http://www.ecopower-remaps.co.uk/product/263/ford-transit-ecu-chip-tuning you'll see that remapping a Ford Transit TDCi 2.2litre 85 motor claims to increase the original 85bhp/250Nm to 114bhp/310Nm. These outputs exceed the original output figures for a Ford Transit TDCi 2.2litre 110, but are still less than the original outputs for a Ford Transit TDCi 2.2litre 140. Although you can remap an 85 to be more powerful than a 110, or remap a 110 to be almost as powerful as a 140, you cannott remap a 2.2litre 85 to be as powerful as a 2.2litre 140, or remap a 110 to be as powerful as a remapped 140. That's because remapping alone can only go so far and, if power is to be coupled with reliability, 'mechanical' changes also need to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euroserv Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Hello, Some good points made there about remapping. I mentioned some months ago that I thought this was something of a scam. The two different Iveco Dailys that we run with 2.3 engines can be either 116hp or 136hp and the maker stated that there was a varaiable rate turbo fitted to the latter. It is not. Exactly the same urbo is fitted to either and the difference is down to mapping alone. In other instances we have noticed that higher powered vans from Ford and Fiat that actually DO have variable rate turbo's use considerably more fuel than those without. If you can get more power from the lower spec engine by remapping and not resorting to the variable turbo you should do so without using as much fuel and at a much reduced cost! I would eye with suspicion any vehicle; car or van where there is a cost premium of more than a grand for a 10 or 15hp improvement. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.