Chipping: More Power, Better MPG ?
Discussion
The manufacturers tuning also has to be conservative enough to allow for variation between individual cars, environments, fuel quality around the world etc and still guarantee durability.
So if you can get an ECU tuned to your specific car you can get a better result, especially if you know you'll always put good fuel in it and maintain it properly.
So if you can get an ECU tuned to your specific car you can get a better result, especially if you know you'll always put good fuel in it and maintain it properly.
The manufacturer is trading a LOT of things against each other; if you improve one or two of them, it will almost inevitably be at the expense of others. Of course it may be that some of those others don't affect particular people (the ability to run on fuel poorer than anything available in the UK, for example) or don't matter much (shortening the life of the engine a bit), but they are still there. I also thought it was to do with the marketing. e.g VW produce a 105bhp tdi, put it on sale. A year later a 115bhp engine and command more money for it and so on. The engine's are the same.
It's like the Merc 200 and 180 Kompressors are actually the same size. Only the chips diffrentiate them.
That's what I was told anyway, could be wrong.
It's like the Merc 200 and 180 Kompressors are actually the same size. Only the chips diffrentiate them.
That's what I was told anyway, could be wrong.
ukzz4iroc said:
I also thought it was to do with the marketing. e.g VW produce a 105bhp tdi, put it on sale. A year later a 115bhp engine and command more money for it and so on. The engine's are the same.
It's like the Merc 200 and 180 Kompressors are actually the same size. Only the chips diffrentiate them.
That's what I was told anyway, could be wrong.
Whilst that's true, the lower diesel will still be balanced for the best fuel economy they can manage. I've never heard of a manufacturer releasing a higher powered version of an engine with better fuel economy simply through a remap. It's like the Merc 200 and 180 Kompressors are actually the same size. Only the chips diffrentiate them.
That's what I was told anyway, could be wrong.
Herman Toothrot said:
Running a petrol car leaner than setup by the manufacturer will give more power, but then exhaust gas temps rise and you shorten valve life span etc. Risk detonation if a poor quality fuel is used. Really it all comes down to protecting the engine.
Au contraire - most engines now come from the factory running way LESS than the ideal stoichiometric ratio. Making them run richer produces more power.blindswelledrat said:
Also they have to produce a car that they can sell in any country. Quality of fuels varies between countries as to many other factors so as standard the ECU must be programmed to account for the lowest common denominator
^^^ This. Manufacturers also work off a 7 year component lifespan outwith wear items like cambelts. They don't want the engine to rev higher or work harder so that it's closer to the edge of its tolerance.
There are two situations:
1.At part throttle, you could run the engine at a leaner air fuel ratio - the K-Series could run at upto 20:1 afr. The introduction of catalytic converters however, demands that the afr is held at stoichiometric, which for 95 RON ULG is 14,7:1 I think. Outside of this afr, the cat won't be at its most efficient.
2.Full throttle is different. Without the need to limit emissions at this part of the map, a manufacturer will generally run richer than necessary, to cool the combustion chamber - ie 10:1
It would be easy for a mapper to lean that off to 12:1 and gain both power and reduce consumption, but the long term durabillity of the engine would be affected. Not something id personally recomend.
1.At part throttle, you could run the engine at a leaner air fuel ratio - the K-Series could run at upto 20:1 afr. The introduction of catalytic converters however, demands that the afr is held at stoichiometric, which for 95 RON ULG is 14,7:1 I think. Outside of this afr, the cat won't be at its most efficient.
2.Full throttle is different. Without the need to limit emissions at this part of the map, a manufacturer will generally run richer than necessary, to cool the combustion chamber - ie 10:1
It would be easy for a mapper to lean that off to 12:1 and gain both power and reduce consumption, but the long term durabillity of the engine would be affected. Not something id personally recomend.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff