Frank McAuley Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Your views please. The mhome is 2 yrs old;3k+ miles and I tow an iQ on a trailer.So many people are recommending the procedure but I'm not sure. I had to have the EGR valve replaced last year and it was also suggested it could be "turned off"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly58 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Have a look at www.eco-torque.co.uk I picked their leaflet up at a show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolandrat Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 You could try Quantum Tuning. National Helpline 08456 529 530 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Having an IQ3 Auto, I was wondering how you got on towing, any hassles or any advice you could give ? Maybe a 2.3 X250 has not got quite enough ooomph, if you are considering chipping a 3 litre ? Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawki Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Frank McAuley - 2013-03-23 4:30 PM Your views please. The mhome is 2 yrs old;3k+ miles and I tow an iQ on a trailer.So many people are recommending the procedure but I'm not sure. I had to have the EGR valve replaced last year and it was also suggested it could be "turned off"! What are you hoping to achieve from remapping? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Pardon my cynicism, but I've never understood how these aftermarket bods can produce a better map than the people who designed and built the engine *-) To ask them whether you need a remap is like asking a barber whether you need a haircut *-) (as Warren Buffet would say) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Frank McAuley - 2013-03-23 4:30 PM Your views please. The mhome is 2 yrs old;3k+ miles and I tow an iQ on a trailer.So many people are recommending the procedure but I'm not sure. I had to have the EGR valve replaced last year and it was also suggested it could be "turned off"! By "...it was also suggested it could be "turned off"", do you mean that it was suggested to you that your Fiat motor's EGR-valve could be disabled rather than replaced? It's common enough practice for EGR valves to be blanked off to avoid the cost of replacement. For example: http://www.autobedsuk.com/www.autobedsuk.coms/info.php?p=9 However, as an EGR-valve is part of a vehicle's emissions-control system, there's no guarantee emission levels won't be affected adversely and, with modern motors like yours, it's more than likely that disabling the EGR-valve will result in dashboard warning lights coming on. Regarding increasing your motor's performance by remapping its ECU (or, as an alternative, fitting a 'tuning module'), towing a car on a trailer behind an Auto-Trail Delaware will already be putting stress on the motorhome's clutch/transmission. Increasing the motor's power/torque significantly (and that's what a remap/tuning-module should do) will further stress the clutch/transmission if you exploit the extra performance (and, if you don't intend to exploit the extra performance, why would you want to spend cash on tuning?!) Your 3000-odd mileage in 2 years statement (if right and not a typo) means that your motor won't be properly run in yet. The potential output of Fiat's 3.0 litre motor is hardly puny and, with a few thousand more miles under its belt, there should be a noticeable increase in performance. If (as seems likely) your Delaware is still under warranty, I'd leave matters alone. Once your motorhome has covered more mileage and is outside warranty, you can decide then whether the urge to have the motor tuned is still attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 My 3L has done around 32000 miles and I can't fault the performance, as has been said, best to leave well alone to save other problems. By the way, so far it has been trouble free, and I do occasionally tow a trailer with a smart. Take care Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Peter James - 2013-03-23 5:28 PM Pardon my cynicism, but I've never understood how these aftermarket bods can produce a better map than the people who designed and built the engine *-) To ask them whether you need a remap is like asking a barber whether you need a haircut *-) (as Warren Buffet would say) Vehicle manufacturers won't fit high-powered motors to inexpensive commercial vehicles where longevity is a priority expectation of the buyer. Having said that, a modern turbo-diesel motor is a tough cookie and, if it's wished to increase its power/torque significantly, remapping the ECU is straightforward and quite cheap. The website of "Evolution Chips" advertises that, for £299, the 125bhp/285Nm output of the Ford 2.0litre motor in my Hobby could be increased to 155bhp/335Nm - that's an increase of 24% and 17,5% respectively. For the same sum, Evolution Chips advertise the standard 160bhp/400Nm of a Euro 4 Fiat Ducato 3.0litre motor could be increased to 190bhp/480Nm. For the Fiat motor this company also offers to delete EGR and DPF functions and is mentioned here: http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-108260-0.html Whether what one ends up with is a 'better' ECU map than the original is a matter of semantics. The motor should certainly produce more performance, but emissions control may be harmed and the vehicle manufacturer's warranty will be put at risk. For me, my Hobby's performance is adequate for how I drive the vehicle and I feel no need to have the motor tuned. If I felt that the vehicle's performance was lacklustre, or I had a reluctance to down-shift gears, then I might find having it tuned attractive. But I don't and I haven't, so I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank McAuley Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 Comments are indeed interesting and I look forward to hearing from someone who has experienced the results of remapping;their answers to some of the questions posed so far would also be helpful! AS regards towing the iQ:- it's on the Micromax B J trailer; Alko stabiliser fitted; trye pressures @ 80 psi rather than the 90+; movers fitted to afford flexibility in tight spots; correct towing height at towball ( I found) to be crucial; and placing the iQ as far forward on the trailer as possible. When I finally balanced the trailer and car as described above towing was much less demanding(stressful). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muswell Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Is there a mechanical difference between the 110, 130 and 159 bhp 2.3 L Fiat engines, or are they just mapped differently? If it's just the mapping it's a jolly good way for them to make money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolandrat Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Sound advice Derek, at 3000 miles the engine will still be tight. The 3 ltr is a beast of an engine with power galore. The 2.3 ltr is quite powerfull as well but if it is chipped it performs like a prancing horse, I know because a friend of mine had his remapped by Quantum and what a difference it made and no following problems whatsoever. You commented on the transmission and clutch, another friend of mine had his 3 axle 2.8 ltr remapped and he had constant clutch slip problems even after another one was fitted. He eventually parted with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Hi muswell, the engines are indeed different, the 3L is in fact a iveco engine, and completely different to the Fiat engine,it is in fact the best M/H engine I have had, including 2.9 merc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-03-23 6:20 PM Peter James - 2013-03-23 5:28 PM Pardon my cynicism, but I've never understood how these aftermarket bods can produce a better map than the people who designed and built the engine *-) To ask them whether you need a remap is like asking a barber whether you need a haircut *-) (as Warren Buffet would say) Vehicle manufacturers won't fit high-powered motors to inexpensive commercial vehicles where longevity is a priority expectation of the buyer. Having said that, a modern turbo-diesel motor is a tough cookie and, if it's wished to increase its power/torque significantly, remapping the ECU is straightforward and quite cheap. The website of "Evolution Chips" advertises that, for £299, the 125bhp/285Nm output of the Ford 2.0litre motor in my Hobby could be increased to 155bhp/335Nm - that's an increase of 24% and 17,5% respectively. For the same sum, Evolution Chips advertise the standard 160bhp/400Nm of a Euro 4 Fiat Ducato 3.0litre motor could be increased to 190bhp/480Nm. For the Fiat motor this company also offers to delete EGR and DPF functions and is mentioned here: http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-108260-0.html Whether what one ends up with is a 'better' ECU map than the original is a matter of semantics. The motor should certainly produce more performance, but emissions control may be harmed and the vehicle manufacturer's warranty will be put at risk. For me, my Hobby's performance is adequate for how I drive the vehicle and I feel no need to have the motor tuned. If I felt that the vehicle's performance was lacklustre, or I had a reluctance to down-shift gears, then I might find having it tuned attractive. But I don't and I haven't, so I don't. Thanks for the reply. What you say makes sense to me. The boss who pays the fuel and repair bills might want to steady whitevanman down a bit. What I still find hard to believe is when these aftermarket remappers claim to produce an increase in mpg as well as an increase in power. The same 2.2 pinto PSA/Ford engine is fitted in the Citroen in 100bhp and 120bhp form. But its a bit more than just a remap, the 120bhp one has an uprated (dual mass) flywheel and clutch. The 120bhp also does less to the gallon than the 100bhp - manufacturers figures. So if the engine manufacturer can't increase power without reducing mpg, (and fitting uprated components) how do these aftermarket bods do it *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muswell Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 trooper - 2013-03-23 8:01 PM Hi muswell, the engines are indeed different, the 3L is in fact a iveco engine, and completely different to the Fiat engine,it is in fact the best M/H engine I have had, including 2.9 merc. Thanks, but I was refering to the 2.3 L engines which, from the photos in the brochure, appear identical. I was wondering where the money went. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Frank's van is a euro4, For fiat there are only two 2.3L engines for this 120 like ours and 130. the 110 is 2.2L and the 160 is 3L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muswell Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 No 'm not interested in Frank's van, or even yours :-D .I'm just trying to find out if there is any difference, other than mapping, between the 3 Euro5 2287cc engines shown in the Fiat Professional brochure for the Ducato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGD Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Why not just drive it as is, and enjoy the scenery. We haven't bought sports cars, we've bought delivery vans with caravan bodies stuck on the back. If anyone is worried about fuel economy, here's an instant, and totally free, technical secret that will save you 10 to 15% on all your motorhome and car fuel bills, at no smart-box/remap/voodoo charm/ insurance premium increase cost at all, and with no worries about voiding manufacturer warranty, nor worries about shortening the life of your clutch or driveshaft or gearbox components..................... just DRIVE SLOWER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Peter James - 2013-03-23 8:05 PM The same 2.2 pinto PSA/Ford engine is fitted in the Citroen in 100bhp and 120bhp form. I suspect you mean "Puma", as the "Pinto" name was used by Ford for a range of petrol motors introduced in the 1970s. A manufacturer's motors with the same capacity, but different power outputs, can differ significantly in specification. My Hobby's 125bhp 2.0litre motor has common-rail fuel injection and a variable-geometry turbocharger, neither of which were found on the 100bhp version of that motor also available at the time in Transits. Regarding muswell's questions, Nick Fisher (euroserv) can probably provide chapter and verse, but my understanding is as follows... Outside the UK the latest Ducato is offered with three different-capacity motors - a 2.0litre, a 2.3litre and a 3.0litre. As has historically been the case, the 2.3litre and 3.0litre powerplants are Iveco-developed. UK Ducatos don't get the 2.0litre motor. Instead, there is a 'detuned' 110bhp version of the 2.3litre engine lacking the "Start&Stop" and "Comfort-Matic" options available on the more powerful 130bhp and 148bhp variants of this motor. I don't know if the 110bhp motor is just a 'down-mapped' version of the 130bhp engine, but it seems plausible. As should be apparent from the Fiat Professional website, the 148bhp version of the 2.3litre motor does differ mechanically from the 130bhp variant. Like my Ford motor the "150 MultiJet Euro 5" powerplant has a variable-geometry turbocharger and its ECU mapping will reflect this and (should) differ from a 130bhp motor's mapping. It's also quite likely that the 150's intercooler is bigger than the 130's, but that's just speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muswell Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-03-24 10:05 AM As should be app arent from the Fiat Professional website, the 148bhp version of the 2.3litre motor does differ mechanically from the 130bhp variant. Like my Ford motor the "150 MultiJet Euro 5" powerplant has a variable-geometry turbocharger and its ECU mapping will reflect this and (should) differ from a 130bhp motor's mapping. It's also quite likely that the 150's intercooler is bigger than the 130's, but that's just speculation. Ah yes, quite right the turbo is different for the 150. Can't see the difference between the 110 and 130 though. The price lift for the 150 seems an awful lot for a different turbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-03-24 10:05 AM I suspect you mean "Puma", as the "Pinto" name was used by Ford for a range of petrol motors introduced in the 1970s. . Well done That Man :$ I wondered who would be the first to spot that ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Muswell - 2013-03-24 11:02 AM Ah yes, quite right the turbo is different for the 150. Can't see the difference between the 110 and 130 though. The price lift for the 150 seems an awful lot for a different turbo. I have a Haynes manual for Ford Transit Mk 6 vehicles built 2000-2006. Four 2.0litre motors are referred to, with power outputs of 75PS, 85PS, 100PS and 125PS. All of these powerplants have the same bore/stroke and all are turbocharged. The obvious difference lies in their fuelling system with the 75PS, 85PS and 100PS units having direct-injection, whereas the 125S motor is common-rail. However, each of the four powerplants has a different Ford engine code. The Haynes repair instructions reveal that (as one would expect) there are significant differences between the 125PS motor and its lower-power siblings, primarily relating to its common-rail fuelling system and variable-geometry turbo. However, the repair instructions are identical for all three direct-injection motors. It could be that their differences in power output just result from ECU mapping, but the different Ford engine codes suggest otherwise. It might be the case that the 85PS motor is an 'up-mapped' version of the 75PS unit and the 100PS motor has a different turbocharger/intercooler to provide more power. Dunno and don't really care... I note in current Carthago motorhome brochures that a premium of €1300 is quoted for opting for the 150 Multi-Jet 2.3litre motor over the 130 Multi-Jet, and that figure will undoubtedly be way more than the difference in cost between the 130s fixed-geometry turbo and the 150's variable-vane one. I'm certain Nick Fisher would tell you that fleet buyers of Ducato 'white vans' will pay nothing like that figure if they opt for a 150 motor instead of a 130. Vehicle( (and motorhome) manufacturers' philosophy will be (and should be) to maximise their profit margin. I'm sure we all appreciate that they aren't charity organisations. If Fiat (or a motohome builder) sets a whopping premium on going from the 130 motor to the 150, and buyers are prepared to pay that premium, that's the buyers' choice if they want the more powerful motor. And, if the buyers aren't willing to fork out for the extra oomph, that's their choice too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muswell Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Thanks for all that info. I remember reading that when VW brought out the 16 valve engine for the Golf the engineering department worked out the extra cost over the 8 valve. Marketing said that was far too little and there should be a big price premium for the 16v badge. Following that sort of pricing structure logic it follows that for a given profit margin over the whole ranget the best value will be for the lowest spec vehicle. Trouble is once you've had the oomph and the aircon etc. it's hard to go back. :'( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Generally speaking the two litre lump of metal under the bonnet is little different from the two litre lumps in cars with probably slightly different gear ratios. Considering commuting 2 litre diesel cars are now getting up to 190-hp and 280 lb-ft of torque. Maybe chipping is the way to go. Thanks for the feed back on towing the IQ Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Muswell - 2013-03-24 12:37 PM Thanks for all that info. I remember reading that when VW brought out the 16 valve engine for the Golf the engineering department worked out the extra cost over the 8 valve. Marketing said that was far too little and there should be a big price premium for the 16v badge. Following that sort of pricing structure logic it follows that for a given profit margin over the whole ranget the best value will be for the lowest spec vehicle. Trouble is once you've had the oomph and the aircon etc. it's hard to go back. :'( I owned 4 VW Golf GTIs in succession - two Mk 1s (both 8-valve motors), a Mk 2 8-valve and a Mk 2 16-valve (one of the first in the UK). I don't know about the relative cost of the 16-valve motor over the 8-valve, but the 16-valve was considerably more complex and powerful, and revved far higher. I loathed the Mk 2 8-valve (I'd only bought it because VW continually delayed marketing the 16-valve version in the UK), but quite liked the Mk 2 16V which differed from the 8-valve in areas other than the motor. In the October 2011 issue of the French motorhome magazine "Camping-Car" there was a 5-page article on the then-new Euro 5 Fiat Ducato motors. This involved taking four TEC Rotec motorhomes, identical except for their powerplants and measuring the power/torque of their motors via a rolling-road dynamometer and measuring their on-road performance, noise, fuel-consumption, etc. No great mind-blowing conclusions - the 2.0litre motor (5-speed gearbox) was considered OK for small motorhomes and small panel-van conversions, the 2.3litre (130PS) motor fine for reasonably sized motorhomes and larger PVCs, the 150PS version perfect for bigger motorhomes (which, in France, still means no heavier than 3500kg MTPLM) and, for over-3500kg motorhomes, the 3.0litre motor would be best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.