Re-map. Is it worth it?

[Bop]

Evening All,

 

I'm quite interested in tuning/engine performance mods and as such I've checked out my current MH manufacturer who, as an example, will charge the following sums for the various upgrades on the Ducato 2.3 (modded at the factory):

 

1. 130 to 148BHP = £1,195.00

2. 130 to 177BHP = £2,820.00

 

My question is what do the manufacturers do to the engine/ECU components to charge these extortionate prices?

 

I do have a good knowledge of tuning vehicles so you can be as technical as you like.

 

Cheers chaps,

 

Andrew

 

 

[Muswell]

Bop - 2017-02-22 8:00 PM

 

Evening All,

 

I'm quite interested in tuning/engine performance mods and as such I've checked out my current MH manufacturer who, as an example, will charge the following sums for the various upgrades on the Ducato 2.3 (modded at the factory):

 

1. 130 to 148BHP = £1,195.00

2. 130 to 177BHP = £2,820.00

 

My question is what do the manufacturers do to the engine/ECU components to charge these extortionate prices?

 

I do have a good knowledge of tuning vehicles so you can be as technical as you like.

 

Cheers chaps,

 

Andrew

 

 

I remember reading that when VW developed the 16valve Golf the engineers said it would not cost much more, but Marketing said "stuff that" and whacked the price up as much as they dared.

[Derek Uzzell]

Bop - 2017-02-22 8:00 PM

 

Evening All,

 

I'm quite interested in tuning/engine performance mods and as such I've checked out my current MH manufacturer who, as an example, will charge the following sums for the various upgrades on the Ducato 2.3 (modded at the factory):

 

1. 130 to 148BHP = £1,195.00

2. 130 to 177BHP = £2,820.00

 

My question is what do the manufacturers do to the engine/ECU components to charge these extortionate prices?

 

I do have a good knowledge of tuning vehicles so you can be as technical as you like.

 

Cheers chaps,

 

Andrew

 

 

Andrew

 

The four Euro 6 Multijet 2 powerplants fitted to Ducato are described/commented on in the following links (though I’m sure the picture of the 180 Multijet unit is actually of the superseded 3.0litre unit)

 

https://www.fiatcamper.com/en/product/engines

 

http://www.practicalmotorhome.com/news/39133-euro-6-fiat-ducato-variety-and-performance

 

As will be apparent, the 150 motor has a varaible-geometry turbocharger, whereas the 130 does not. (This has always been the case since the Euro 5 version of the 2.3litre unit was introduced in mid-2011.)

 

The 2.3litre 180 motor also has a variable-geometry turbocharger and, in fact, I asked the Fiat representatives at the NEC Show yesterday what differences there were between the 150 and 180 that resulted in an extra 27 horsepower and 20 NM of torque. I said that, when it was announced that Fiat would be providing a significantly higher-power 2.3litre motor for Ducato and dropping the 3.0litre unit, I thought twin turbochargers would be needed but that wasn’t what happened.

 

It was suggested to me that there were technical differences - pistons, con-rods, injectors, turbocharger, etc. - between the 150 and 180 (which seems reasonable) plus revised mapping, but I didn’t really anticipate getting a highly detailed credible answer. I said that, if it were discovered that a 180 MJ 2 was actually just a remapped 150 MJ 2, there would be some seriously disgruntled buyers - which earned some grins.

 

As far as the extre price asked for Ducato motor upgrades, I’m sure you’d find that - if you bought a ‘commercial’ Ducato - the cost would be much less. It would be startlingly naive to think that major motorhome converters don’t get a hefty discount when buying Ducato base-vehicles, and such discount will include engine upgrades. Presumably the elevated pricing of engine upgrades shown in motorhome manufacturers’ price-lists represents a nice littlre (or not so little!) earner. As they all do it, there’s not much you can do about it other than grit your teeth...

[Bop]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-02-23 6:45 PM

 

Bop - 2017-02-22 8:00 PM

 

Evening All,

 

I'm quite interested in tuning/engine performance mods and as such I've checked out my current MH manufacturer who, as an example, will charge the following sums for the various upgrades on the Ducato 2.3 (modded at the factory):

 

1. 130 to 148BHP = £1,195.00

2. 130 to 177BHP = £2,820.00

 

My question is what do the manufacturers do to the engine/ECU components to charge these extortionate prices?

 

I do have a good knowledge of tuning vehicles so you can be as technical as you like.

 

Cheers chaps,

 

Andrew

 

 

Andrew

 

The four Euro 6 Multijet 2 powerplants fitted to Ducato are described/commented on in the following links (though I’m sure the picture of the 180 Multijet unit is actually of the superseded 3.0litre unit)

 

https://www.fiatcamper.com/en/product/engines

 

http://www.practicalmotorhome.com/news/39133-euro-6-fiat-ducato-variety-and-performance

 

As will be apparent, the 150 motor has a varaible-geometry turbocharger, whereas the 130 does not. (This has always been the case since the Euro 5 version of the 2.3litre unit was introduced in mid-2011.)

 

The 2.3litre 180 motor also has a variable-geometry turbocharger and, in fact, I asked the Fiat representatives at the NEC Show yesterday what differences there were between the 150 and 180 that resulted in an extra 27 horsepower and 20 NM of torque. I said that, when it was announced that Fiat would be providing a significantly higher-power 2.3litre motor for Ducato and dropping the 3.0litre unit, I thought twin turbochargers would be needed but that wasn’t what happened.

 

It was suggested to me that there were technical differences - pistons, con-rods, injectors, turbocharger, etc. - between the 150 and 180 (which seems reasonable) plus revised mapping, but I didn’t really anticipate getting a highly detailed credible answer. I said that, if it were discovered that a 180 MJ 2 was actually just a remapped 150 MJ 2, there would be some seriously disgruntled buyers - which earned some grins.

 

As far as the extre price asked for Ducato motor upgrades, I’m sure you’d find that - if you bought a ‘commercial’ Ducato - the cost would be much less. It would be startlingly naive to think that major motorhome converters don’t get a hefty discount when buying Ducato base-vehicles, and such discount will include engine upgrades. Presumably the elevated pricing of engine upgrades shown in motorhome manufacturers’ price-lists represents a nice littlre (or not so little!) earner. As they all do it, there’s not much you can do about it other than grit your teeth...

 

Derek,

 

That's a great write-up and the links are useful for investigating the manufacturers face value figures.

 

However, I smell a rat.

 

Example: If I take the Landrover Defender 2.4TDCi Puma (Euro-5) as an example, with its circa 130BHP Ford Duratorq engine, then we can use this engine as a similar comparable system to the Ducato 2.3.

 

I recently took this engine (the ford) and added a fast-flow air filter; a larger core front mount intercooler (FMIC); disconnected the EGR (*) and had the Landy remapped to produce just short of 180BHP. The engine remained within tolerances throughout the remap and we managed to produce a heavy torque curve that meant excellent acceleration and hard pulling throughout the gear range.

 

This was a bespoke map that was created by pals of mine but nevertheless it would still only cost £650 including the upgraded parts etc.

 

As I see it, Fiat in this instance, will be flashing the ECU with a standard map so it won't even be paying for the bespoke map and therefore the profit margins on such upgrades IMO must be massive.

 

(*) - The ECU was mapped in a way that removed the EGR fault code from the system so no engine management light either.

 

If Mrs Bop and I do get to the NEC on Saturday then I'll have a quick examination of the Ducato FMICs to see if Fiat has used an enlarged unit to help cool the charge-air on the 150 and 180BHP engines. I have a sneaky suspicion that I won't find any difference but I await to be corrected.

 

Final Point: If they've changed/upgraded the Pistons or bottom end then I'm a chocolate snowman :-)

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

[Muswell]

The possible technical differences like turbo, pistons etc. come to about £1600...which is about 10% of the price of a brand new small car on the road. Draw your own conclusions.

[shaggy]

Muswell - 2017-02-24 8:27 AM

 

The possible technical differences like turbo, pistons etc. come to about £1600...which is about 10% of the price of a brand new small car on the road. Draw your own conclusions.

 

 

 

Many years ago when I worked for Nissan I had a tour of the plant in the NE and I asked the question how much does it cost to build a car in terms of raw materials and components. The answer then was about £600 for the lead in model and about £800 for the top of the range model yet the retail price was double the base model. They prefer to manufacture top range models because they make a much greater profit.

The remaining cost of building cars are R and D , marketing and production overheads.

[Bop]

shaggy - 2017-02-24 8:38 AM

 

Muswell - 2017-02-24 8:27 AM

 

The possible technical differences like turbo, pistons etc. come to about £1600...which is about 10% of the price of a brand new small car on the road. Draw your own conclusions.

 

 

 

Many years ago when I worked for Nissan I had a tour of the plant in the NE and I asked the question how much does it cost to build a car in terms of raw materials and components. The answer then was about £600 for the lead in model and about £800 for the top of the range model yet the retail price was double the base model. They prefer to manufacture top range models because they make a much greater profit.

The remaining cost of building cars are R and D , marketing and production overheads.

 

Shaggy (great name BTW) :-),

 

I totally agree with you and Muswell. It is all about creaming profits from the punter.

 

In my opinion I don't reckon there is much difference, if any, between the 130, 150 and 180 power units. There may be a few ancillary changes but if the turbo charger on the 130 is different from the 150/180 ( as an example) then the cost difference will only be by a few pounds - not many at all.

 

I've made a few quick calculations in my head and I reckon that my own manufacturer makes a £2,400.00 gross profit on a 130-to-180 BHP factory conversion.

 

I best buy shares!

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

[Derek Uzzell]

Andrew

 

Regarding the prices of Ducato options, a January 2017 list can be found here

 

http://www.plattsvancentre.com/plattsmedia/fiat-professional-DUCATO-pricelist.pdf

 

The motor upgrade prices you quoted (£1195 for 130hp to 150hp and £2820 for 130hp to 177hp) turn out to be pretty close to those in the ‘commercial' price-list - £900 for 130hp to 150hp and £2820 for 130hp to 177hp. It’s to be anticipated that the buyer of a commercial Ducato will expect a hefty discount for the vehicle complete with the options selected - a bigger discount that a UK buyer of a Ducato-based motorhome is going to be able to negotiate - but that’s the way of the world.

 

I hesitate to say this, but having seemingly chosen the wrong motohome in the Auto-Trail Imala 620 you bought last year, it seems to me you should concentrate on basics relating to its replacement when you visit the NEC - like price, dimensions, payload, layout and marque - rather than seek to explore technical subtleties that (realistically) the people there won’t be able to answer.

 

While it may well be practicable to modify/remap a Ducato MJ 2 130 to provide similar bhp and torque figures to those of a 180 MJ 2 for a price significantly less than £2820, so what? Doing so would immediately invalidate the Fiat warranty, walk roughshod over the motorhome’s Type Approval status, very likely made it non-Euro 6 compliant and there would be no certainty what the long term (or even short term) effect will be.

 

If you go for a motorhome of the size/weight (and cost) of a Rapido 696, you’d be well advised to opt for (at least) the MJ 2 150 unit and accept that this will increase the price by a thousand pounds or so, rather than ‘economise’ by choosing the MJ 2 130 motor, regretting this later and going down the remapping route.

[Bop]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-02-24 9:08 AM

 

Andrew

 

Regarding the prices of Ducato options, a January 2017 list can be found here

 

http://www.plattsvancentre.com/plattsmedia/fiat-professional-DUCATO-pricelist.pdf

 

The motor upgrade prices you quoted (£1195 for 130hp to 150hp and £2820 for 130hp to 177hp) turn out to be pretty close to those in the ‘commercial' price-list - £900 for 130hp to 150hp and £2820 for 130hp to 177hp. It’s to be anticipated that the buyer of a commercial Ducato will expect a hefty discount for the vehicle complete with the options selected - a bigger discount that a UK buyer of a Ducato-based motorhome is going to be able to negotiate - but that’s the way of the world.

 

I hesitate to say this, but having seemingly chosen the wrong motohome in the Auto-Trail Imala 620 you bought last year, it seems to me you should concentrate on basics relating to its replacement when you visit the NEC - like price, dimensions, payload, layout and marque - rather than seek to explore technical subtleties that (realistically) the people there won’t be able to answer.

 

While it may well be practicable to modify/remap a Ducato MJ 2 130 to provide similar bhp and torque figures to those of a 180 MJ 2 for a price significantly less than £2820, so what? Doing so would immediately invalidate the Fiat warranty, walk roughshod over the motorhome’s Type Approval status, very likely made it non-Euro 6 compliant and there would be no certainty what the long term (or even short term) effect will be.

 

If you go for a motorhome of the size/weight (and cost) of a Rapido 696, you’d be well advised to opt for (at least) the MJ 2 150 unit and accept that this will increase the price by a thousand pounds or so, rather than ‘economise’ by choosing the MJ 2 130 motor, regretting this later and going down the remapping route.

 

Morning Derek,

 

I fully get what you're saying but my interest lies with the fact that I have been tuning/modifying cars/bikes/Landys for over 14-years and I want to see what Fiat is doing with its engines and how that effects my wallet. It's a major interest to me and I don't think that paying the manufacturer for a few extra BHP is really worth it. My Imala is currently set at 130BHP and it has no issues on the road; it's has quite sophisticated manners for a big unit if I may say so. The other MHs which I'm looking at seem to have exactly the same laden weight limits so if I go for another 130 then I don't think I'll be too disappointed.

 

That being said I can always up the torque a bit if I need be.

 

If you're interested in this type of thing; my current project car currently sits on a ramp in my garage and has a 4-figure BHP rating and a 0-200mph of not many seconds at all. We are still struggling to get the quarter-mile times down but when the rear wheels continue to spin in 5th gear and has 305/19 tyres fitted to the back then what is a man supposed to do :-)

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

[Muswell]

Bop - 2017-02-24 9:26 AM

 

 

then what is a man supposed to do :-)

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

 

It's blindingly obvious. Buy a MH with a decent garage, stick the motor from the project car in the back,replace the back axle and you're good to go when you need a bit more grunt. I remember when I was in my youth someone built a mini with 2 engines. I saw it at Brands once but I think the problem was balancing them and it didn't really work around the corners.

[Derek Uzzell]

Andrew

 

I can assure you that the real-world performance of the ‘Euro 5+’ 150 motor (as fitted to my Rapido) is noticeably superior to the equivalent 130 unit (presumably the powerplant fitted to your Auto-Trail).

 

Fiat’s on-paper data for the Euro 6 130 MJ2 unit show no output increases over its predecessor, whereas the output of the Euro 6 150 MJ2 goes up by 30Nm (and a couple of horsepower. So it should be anticipated that the previous performance difference will be further accentuated.

 

Your choice of course...

 

 

[Bop]

Muswell - 2017-02-24 10:42 AM

 

Bop - 2017-02-24 9:26 AM

 

 

then what is a man supposed to do :-)

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

 

It's blindingly obvious. Buy a MH with a decent garage, stick the motor from the project car in the back,replace the back axle and you're good to go when you need a bit more grunt. I remember when I was in my youth someone built a mini with 2 engines. I saw it at Brands once but I think the problem was balancing them and it didn't really work around the corners.

 

You are right Muswell but to begin with I'm thinking more along the lines of a set of fluffy dice and a Halfords novelty air freshener - every build has to start somewhere and within budget (I didn't quite adhere to that rule on my current set-up, though).

 

The twin-engined mini sounds like a fab combo but I can only ever recall seeing a similar version in Vauxhall Nova form.

 

The guy who helped me import my current car is attempting to take his Nissan R35 GTR to 1600BHP so I'm off to see him next week for an insight into his build. Would you believe it but his 0-60mph is about the same as the twin-engined Nova which I mention above (about 2.2 seconds) so it goes to show that the old school technology is just as good as the new stuff. That being said, his 0-238mph timing is a bit quicker than the Nova.

 

I'm typing early as I thought I would have a cheeky few minutes on the forum before we set off to the NEC Motorhome Show.

[Bop]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-02-24 1:53 PM

 

Andrew

 

I can assure you that the real-world performance of the ‘Euro 5+’ 150 motor (as fitted to my Rapido) is noticeably superior to the equivalent 130 unit (presumably the powerplant fitted to your Auto-Trail).

 

Fiat’s on-paper data for the Euro 6 130 MJ2 unit show no output increases over its predecessor, whereas the output of the Euro 6 150 MJ2 goes up by 30Nm (and a couple of horsepower. So it should be anticipated that the previous performance difference will be further accentuated.

 

Your choice of course...

 

 

Thanks Derek,

 

The Rapido (besides others) which we are considering is a 150-unit but I still need to consider the fact that I can probably create a better map for the MH and at a fraction of the price.

 

"6-hours to NEC doors open" :-)

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

[Derek Uzzell]

Bop - 2017-02-25 3:42 AM

 

...The twin-engined mini sounds like a fab combo but I can only ever recall seeing a similar version in Vauxhall Nova form...

 

 

There have been quite a few twin-engined cars as these links reveal:

 

http://tinyurl.com/jfn7oal

 

https://simanaitissays.com/2013/08/05/twin-engine-cars/

 

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/11/bi-curiosities-volkswagens-twin-engine-terrors/

 

My tuning experience (in the 70s and 80s) involved petrol engines not diesels and was when using forced induction as a retro-fit on road cars was both expensive and potentially catastrophic, never mind employing a multiple powerplants approach.

 

The on-line MOT status-check facility shows that my first car (a Turner Mk 2) will be 55 years old in July (or the bits I didn’t replace will be) and is still managing to pass its MOT test.

 

When I think back I find it hard to believe how unconcerned we were about making major modifications to vehicles despite having limited mechanical expertise. I remember that, on 7 April 1968 (the day Jim Clark died) the Turner’s original motor was being shoehorned into a friend’s Cortina in his liitle garage. We hung the engine from a scaffold pole using rope, with a couple of sturdy guys supporting the pole on their shoulders as desperate efforts were made to marry the motor up to the gearbox. Amazingly it all worked and the motor outlasted the car.

[ColinM50]

Thanks for all the replies chaps, some very interesting comments here, but niow I'll throw a Spaniard in the works.

 

When I first posed the question it was primarily because I'd read an article in MMM extolling the virtues of remapping and though I thought I'd quite like to do it, I wasn't unhappy with the performance of my Ducato based M/H to actually bother to spend the money. That was a couple of weeks ago and the world's turned a few times since.

 

We went to the NEC last Tuesday to buy some odds and sods and definitely weren't planning to buy a new M/H. However we went on the Eldiss stand and SWMBO fell in love with a Magnum 195 being sold by Pearman and Briggs and after a bit of haggling we did the deal to swap our Lifestyle for the Magnum. Based on a Peugeot it's got a 2.0 litre engine producing 130 BHP, so same as our current Fiat 2.3 but of course it's Euro V1 compliant so might make trips to Germany and Austria easier in the future. I'm aware that Peugeot and Fiat are made in the same factory by a separate company, Serval, and they just stick the relevant badge on and a few different goodies, but in essence the same piece of kit.

 

However, here's the interesting bit, Marquis are selling a dealer special of the same M/H which they claim produces 160BHP. So how do they do that?

 

A couple of other dealers I spoke to claim that it's just a remap and Peugeot wouldn't honour any claim for damage in the event of failure - can't see how they'd get away with that? One even said Marquis hasn't upped the power to 160BHP, it's a standard 130BHP engine and they've done nothing to it, they just assume no-one will check. Hmm, not sure about that.

 

So now what to do? I've emailed Eldiss but not holding my breath waiting for a reply, but anyone want to make a comment as to what's really going on?

 

[Bop]

ColinM50 - 2017-02-27 6:49 PM

 

Thanks for all the replies chaps, some very interesting comments here, but niow I'll throw a Spaniard in the works.

 

When I first posed the question it was primarily because I'd read an article in MMM extolling the virtues of remapping and though I thought I'd quite like to do it, I wasn't unhappy with the performance of my Ducato based M/H to actually bother to spend the money. That was a couple of weeks ago and the world's turned a few times since.

 

We went to the NEC last Tuesday to buy some odds and sods and definitely weren't planning to buy a new M/H. However we went on the Eldiss stand and SWMBO fell in love with a Magnum 195 being sold by Pearman and Briggs and after a bit of haggling we did the deal to swap our Lifestyle for the Magnum. Based on a Peugeot it's got a 2.0 litre engine producing 130 BHP, so same as our current Fiat 2.3 but of course it's Euro V1 compliant so might make trips to Germany and Austria easier in the future. I'm aware that Peugeot and Fiat are made in the same factory by a separate company, Serval, and they just stick the relevant badge on and a few different goodies, but in essence the same piece of kit.

 

However, here's the interesting bit, Marquis are selling a dealer special of the same M/H which they claim produces 160BHP. So how do they do that?

 

A couple of other dealers I spoke to claim that it's just a remap and Peugeot wouldn't honour any claim for damage in the event of failure - can't see how they'd get away with that? One even said Marquis hasn't upped the power to 160BHP, it's a standard 130BHP engine and they've done nothing to it, they just assume no-one will check. Hmm, not sure about that.

 

So now what to do? I've emailed Eldiss but not holding my breath waiting for a reply, but anyone want to make a comment as to what's really going on?

 

Colin,

 

Firstly, many congrats on your new MH. It sounds as if you've made a good choice. In principle the idea of a manufacturer tuning-up the 2-litre lump from 130 to 160BHP is not a big deal and perfectly achievable with an upgraded map.

 

The standard engine components of the 130 will be working well within its limits so a marginal increase to 160 is not going to stress the internals too much more. That being said, there is no real way to prove the output of an engine unless you put it on a top-spec rolling road. You'll probably find that the upgraded map, if applied, will only be producing circa 155-158BHP as it seems that MH manufacturers have a habit of rounding up their figures.

 

EDIT: I would chat with Marquis and ask if they can produce both figures for your engine (BHP and torque) as it's the last one that counts IMO.

 

All the best,

 

Andrew

[brom]

Peugeot's (and Citroen's) new 2-litre engine is available both in 130 and 160bhp versions.

 

The 160bhp isn't available in short or (I think) medium wheelbase panel van conversions, only the LWB - in chassis cab, it seems (from the Relay 2017 spec - I can't find it in the Boxer brochure, but it's probably the same), the 160 engine is available only in L3 and L4 heavy versions.

 

Some of the dealer specials have chosen the more powerful engine as part of their pack, to make it more attractive to customers.

 

The new 130 2-litre is a very sprightly, smooth engine, so I expect (not yet having driven one) the 160 should be great!

[Derek Uzzell]

ColinM50 - 2017-02-27 6:49 PM

 

...I'm aware that Peugeot and Fiat are made in the same factory by a separate company, Serval, and they just stick the relevant badge on and a few different goodies, but in essence the same piece of kit...

 

 

The SEVEL company is described here

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevel

 

Although Citroen Relays, Fiat Ducatos and Peugeot Boxers are built in the same Italian factory and, in the past, have shared major mechanical components (like certain motors) it’s become evident that there are significant differences between the more recent Fiat and Citroen/Peugeot products.

 

This difference has become even more pronounced with the move to Euro 6 motors, where Fiat offers a 2.0litre unit and three versions of a 2.3litre motor with a robotised-manual transmissionas an option, whereas the Citroen/Peugeot motors are all 2.0litre capacity (with no ‘auto’ transmission yet) derived from a car powerplant and requiring AdBlue.

 

http://www.parkers.co.uk/vans/news-and-advice/2016/september/new-euro-6-engines-for-peugeot-boxer-large-van/

 

http://www.auto-sleepers.com/all-you-need-to-know-about-peugeot-euro-6-engines/

 

It will be seen from the above that (as Andrew Bromley has said) the Euro 6 motor fitted to Boxers is offered with a number of power-output choices. So whatever the technical differences between the 130bhp and 160bhp versions, the 160bhp unit fitted as standard to the Marquis ‘dealer special’ models made by Elddis is a proper ‘official’ Peugeot powerplant, not just a 130bhp motor with some retro-tuning.

 

The idea that no-one would notice/check if Marquis sold Boxer-based motorhomes with 130bhp motors instead of the advertised 160bhp engines is frankly ridiculous, as not only would it be straightforward to confirm what the motor started life as (130 or 160) via a Peugeot dealership, but the on-road performance of the 160bhp motor compared to the 130bhp one should be apparent.

[watty55]

Phew!! Remapping and what it entails, too much for me but still a very interesting thread. I think i will stick to my 2.3/130 unit and trundle along in the slow lane.

[Bop]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-02-28 9:33 AM

 

http://www.parkers.co.uk/vans/news-and-advice/2016/september/new-euro-6-engines-for-peugeot-boxer-large-van/

 

 

The idea that no-one would notice/check if Marquis sold Boxer-based motorhomes with 130bhp motors instead of the advertised 160bhp engines is frankly ridiculous, as not only would it be straightforward to confirm what the motor started life as (130 or 160) via a Peugeot dealership, but the on-road performance of the 160bhp motor compared to the 130bhp one should be apparent.

 

G'Day Derek.

 

That was a good link which you posted-up but I have to say that I'm not at all impressed with the Peugeot engine figures.

 

The link highlights the following:

 

* 130BHP and 340Nm

* 160BHP and 350Nm

 

...................so I therefore have to question the financial cost of the upgrade against the minimal increase in torque gain.

 

That said, both of the Euro-6 engines mentioned above do have a marginal hike over their Euro-5 predecessors so that difference alone should be noticeable when someone test drives a E6 over an E5 MH variant.

 

Any MH will suffer from three main issues: (a) Rolling resistance, (b) engine & transmission frictions and © aerodynamic resistance, so having a strong torque curve from 1000-3000 RPM is more important IMO to help mitigate a-c for motorhome driving.

 

The E6 will be a stronger engine when compared to the E5 but I'm not at all convinced that any normal guy will suffer immensely from having a MTPLM of up to 3.7T with a 130BHP unit. If the MTPLM on a van was something greater than 3.7T then I would want as much torque as possible.

 

Unless I get a 150BHP engine-variant thrown into my new MH as a freebie (not likely) then I will simply opt for a 130BHP unit and have it remapped @£250 (plus VAT) to get better results, i.e. to front-load the torque curve.

 

Regards,

 

Andrew

[Derek Uzzell]

Bop - 2017-03-01 9:36 AM

 

...That said, both of the Euro-6 engines mentioned above do have a marginal hike over their Euro-5 predecessors so that difference alone should be noticeable when someone test drives a E6 over an E5 MH variant....

 

Andrew

 

The Fiat reps I spoke to at the NEC told me that (if one were familiar with driving a Ducato with the outgoing Euro 5 130 and 150 motors) there were some differences in ‘feel’ regarding the Euro 6 equivalents.

 

The Euro 6 2.0litre powerplant now fitted to Boxers/Relays is totally different to the superseded Ford-made 2.2litre Euro 5 motors, so it should be anticipated that behavioural differences between the two motor-types will be very obvious for anyone who has experience of driving a vehicle powered by the E5 units.

[brom]

In my experience, the Euro6 Fiat 130bhp engine is smoother and a bit quieter than its Euro5 predecessor. Both motors seem to take a little while 'getting going' from takeoff, but further up the rev. band, they are very responsive and powerful for their output.

 

The new Pug/Citroen 2.0-litre 130bhp car-derived engine seems more responsive lower down than the Fiat, and I think, even quieter, too - it's certainly a great deal less noisy than the previous 2.2-litre (ex-Ford) Euro5 engine they used.

 

All these engines are brand-new and tight when we drive them on test - the 130 Euro5 engine on our own Fiat did become more responsive as it matured.

 

The 2.0 litre 115bhp Fiat Euro6 engine we drove in an empty 'white van' was similar to the Pug's 2.0-litre - much more car-like, quicker on the uptake, and even smoother - a delightful engine, but it ran out of puff a little at higher speeds (talking over 70mph here). That is one engine I think would be ideal for re-mapping, as the same motor gives much higher outputs in Fiat/Alfa cars without any problems.

 

However, I have always been very wary of re-mapping while the van is under warranty, simply because of the scope it would give the manufacturer to avoid paying for any calamitous engine failure. I haven't yet found a re-mapper who would give a proper warranty to cover this, and even if there was such a warranty, the idea of the two companies arguing over responsibility, with me in the middle with a busted engine, doesn't bear thinking about! So, I put it off until 3 years has elapsed, by which time, I always seem to have sold the van and started the process afresh! Hopefully, this time it will be different...!

[Bop]

brom - 2017-03-01 10:32 AM

 

In my experience, the Euro6 Fiat 130bhp engine is smoother and a bit quieter than its Euro5 predecessor. Both motors seem to take a little while 'getting going' from takeoff, but further up the rev. band, they are very responsive and powerful for their output.

 

The new Pug/Citroen 2.0-litre 130bhp car-derived engine seems more responsive lower down than the Fiat, and I think, even quieter, too - it's certainly a great deal less noisy than the previous 2.2-litre (ex-Ford) Euro5 engine they used.

 

All these engines are brand-new and tight when we drive them on test - the 130 Euro5 engine on our own Fiat did become more responsive as it matured.

 

The 2.0 litre 115bhp Fiat Euro6 engine we drove in an empty 'white van' was similar to the Pug's 2.0-litre - much more car-like, quicker on the uptake, and even smoother - a delightful engine, but it ran out of puff a little at higher speeds (talking over 70mph here). That is one engine I think would be ideal for re-mapping, as the same motor gives much higher outputs in Fiat/Alfa cars without any problems.

 

However, I have always been very wary of re-mapping while the van is under warranty, simply because of the scope it would give the manufacturer to avoid paying for any calamitous engine failure. I haven't yet found a re-mapper who would give a proper warranty to cover this, and even if there was such a warranty, the idea of the two companies arguing over responsibility, with me in the middle with a busted engine, doesn't bear thinking about! So, I put it off until 3 years has elapsed, by which time, I always seem to have sold the van and started the process afresh! Hopefully, this time it will be different...!

 

That's a good write-up Brom. It is good to hear some real time experiences.

 

Very best,

 

Andrew

[Bop]

watty55 - 2017-02-28 10:42 AM

 

Phew!! Remapping and what it entails, too much for me but still a very interesting thread. I think i will stick to my 2.3/130 unit and trundle along in the slow lane.

 

I didn't realise that motorhomers were such speed freaks until joining this forum :D

 

I'm with you Watty, I'll be sticking with 130BHP for anything under 3.7T unless a manufacturer gives me a free upgrade.

 

I'm in my 40's now so I should be taking it easy in my old age.

 

Cheers,

 

Andrew

[Bop]

We have not yet considered the point about auto boxes and how they can potentially reduce the power/torque levels.

 

I always calculate the reduction in power of an auto box setup by 7%.

 

I've not driven a MH with an auto box so I await your experiences in terms of the drive quality and engine performance against a standard 6-speed system.