Remaps and other tuning

[Aladoro69]

I'm aware that there are a number of tuning options for A110 with regards to engine performance

The cheaper/simpler options being-
Direct remap
ECU piggy back remap
Throttle add one to change response
Exhaust
Air filters

Being automatic I presume somebody will have also come up with transmission remap?

What are people's experiences with any or all of these?
Are they worth it? Thinking more road use than track
Having done it would you do it again or save your money and keep standard?

[Spokeyblokey]

I had the Milltek exhaust fitted (just the back section, not the cat) and an ECU re-map then went back for a TCU re-map. Results can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcRS-K43Ozc

Personally I think it's advisable to have a TCU re-map when upping the engine power & torque, even though it is a relatively modest uplift. Happy with the results. Increase in torque across is particularly noticeable in the mid range when pulling out at junctions/roundabouts/etc and aids overtaking. I'd do it again, but appreciate some won't want to interfere with the warranty.

[five50]

I have anecdotally read that the facelift S model (so 2022 cars onwards) are a bit quicker than the pre-facelift S.
Would be interesting to know if there is a way to add the OEM facelift S map to the pre-facelift car and whether it makes a noticeable difference.
Again anecdotally (no actual detail or science here) I thought I read that the engine hardware is the same.

[five50]

Spokeyblokey said:

I had the Milltek exhaust fitted (just the back section, not the cat) and an ECU re-map then went back for a TCU re-map. Results can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcRS-K43Ozc

Personally I think it's advisable to have a TCU re-map when upping the engine power & torque, even though it is a relatively modest uplift. Happy with the results. Increase in torque across is particularly noticeable in the mid range when pulling out at junctions/roundabouts/etc and aids overtaking. I'd do it again, but appreciate some won't want to interfere with the warranty.

Thanks for the link. Interesting watch. Can I ask some qns:

Any feedback on the Powerflex torque mount?
How is the sound of the exhaust? (tips look good btw)
Any thoughts on doing the catback vs the downpipe? Would guess the downpipe with sportscat would give a bit more on the dyno - but not sure of other implications / costs etc.

[Whaleblue]

Spokeyblokey said:

I had the Milltek exhaust fitted (just the back section, not the cat) and an ECU re-map then went back for a TCU re-map. Results can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcRS-K43Ozc

Personally I think it's advisable to have a TCU re-map when upping the engine power & torque, even though it is a relatively modest uplift. Happy with the results. Increase in torque across is particularly noticeable in the mid range when pulling out at junctions/roundabouts/etc and aids overtaking. I'd do it again, but appreciate some won't want to interfere with the warranty.

He seems to confuse BHP and PS (at least in the video narrative). In stock tune they measure 294BHP which is close to 300PS. The final output he quotes as 325BHP, which is about 330PS - so up about 10% on stock.

The reason i post is mainly to ask whether the car’s transmission will take that (and perhaps more importantly the increased torque)? I assumed that the R stuck to the same output as the S (and GT) due to such transmission limitations?

[Spokeyblokey]

five50 said:

Spokeyblokey said:

I had the Milltek exhaust fitted (just the back section, not the cat) and an ECU re-map then went back for a TCU re-map. Results can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcRS-K43Ozc

Personally I think it's advisable to have a TCU re-map when upping the engine power & torque, even though it is a relatively modest uplift. Happy with the results. Increase in torque across is particularly noticeable in the mid range when pulling out at junctions/roundabouts/etc and aids overtaking. I'd do it again, but appreciate some won't want to interfere with the warranty.

Thanks for the link. Interesting watch. Can I ask some qns:

Any feedback on the Powerflex torque mount?
How is the sound of the exhaust? (tips look good btw)
Any thoughts on doing the catback vs the downpipe? Would guess the downpipe with sportscat would give a bit more on the dyno - but not sure of other implications / costs etc.

Wasn't the best of YouTube presentations (not helped by constant reference to it being an 'A 10'!) but reading off the dyno print out the figures were/are as follows:

Original (A110S) spec:
294.5 bhp @ 6,136 rpm (equates to 298.6 PS) and 370.2 Nm @ 3,464 rpm (equates to 273.0 ft lb)

A110S with Milltek exhaust and ECU re-map:
316.2 bhp @ 5,996 rpm (equates to 320.6 PS) and 404.7 Nm @ 2,887 rpm (equates to 298.5 ft lb)

A110S with Milltek exhaust and ECU and TCU re-map:
325.6 bhp @ 6,170 rpm (equates to 330.1 PS) and 427.6 Nm @ 3,460 rpm (equates to 315.4 ft lb)

Renault's Megane RS 300 Trophy has essentially the same engine and gearbox as the Alpine and outputs 420Nm - albeit with one fewer ratio - so we felt we weren't going too far out on a limb by pushing the figures to this level especially as the clamping pressure would be adjusted to suit. However, when Litchfield developed their A110 they said that the car started to become 'undriveable' when they pushed the torque beyond 440Nm so for that reason I don't intend pushing for more power/torque hence I'm not looking at swapping the downpipe & cat. For the record, my insurers only wanted another £25 on my premium when I informed them of the modification.

When I was at Spires a couple of months back for my AST coilovers Matt weighed the car and it came out at 1,127.5kg (adjusting for DIN standards) so it now has a theoretical power to weight ratio of 288.8bhp/tonne which compares well with an A110R (277bhp/tonne). All of this would be academic of course if it was a pig to drive but tbh it hasn't changed in character at all - it just has a bit more vim and vigour across the rev range, but more importantly in the range 2,500-5,000rpm where I guess I do most of my driving, it has noticeably more urge.

I'm in the process of changing the alloys, rotors and battery and these should effect a further 28kg in weight savings leaving the car at c.1,100kg and 296bhp/tonne, which is where I intend leaving it. It rides really nicely on the ASTs with Life110's geo too.

Powerflex? Tbh I think it is difficult notice the difference. Maybe, it sharpens the pick-up when you accelerate but you'd be a better man than me if you could tell the difference in a blind testing. My view was, the car will be up on the ramp for the Milltek, why not get the Powerflex fitted at the same time? (David Pook said that really you need to change all the drivetrain mounts to make a proper difference but the cost of this - from MP-R - is prohibitive.)

And the Milltek? Well I like the exhaust tips, and the exhaust note is a bit less 'flatulent'(!) but don't expect a weight saving..

[J321 ALP]

Useful info, thanks. May I ask who you are insured with? I also have the same Milltek exhaust and agree on the look of the tips and noise.

[BCA]

five50 said:

I have anecdotally read that the facelift S model (so 2022 cars onwards) are a bit quicker than the pre-facelift S.
Would be interesting to know if there is a way to add the OEM facelift S map to the pre-facelift car and whether it makes a noticeable difference.
Again anecdotally (no actual detail or science here) I thought I read that the engine hardware is the same.

Would also like to know if anyone has the later S standard Alpine maps available to add to a base car too.

Have Regal worked out a workaround to the torque limit for the later cars?

Will be verrrrry tempted by a map when the warranty is finished, hope by then there are good choices/ known durability impacts (or none known in a good way!)

[Spokeyblokey]

Whaleblue said:

He seems to confuse BHP and PS (at least in the video narrative). In stock tune they measure 294BHP which is close to 300PS. The final output he quotes as 325BHP, which is about 330PS - so up about 10% on stock.

The reason i post is mainly to ask whether the car’s transmission will take that (and perhaps more importantly the increased torque)? I assumed that the R stuck to the same output as the S (and GT) due to such transmission limitations?

Tbh I think the reason Alpine didn't increase the power/torque in the A110R was less to do with their engineering capability or the practical limits of the gearbox, and totally to do with France's sliding scale CO2 malus eco-tax. France was always going to be their main market, and upping the power output would adversely affect emissions which in turn would lead to a big increase in the malus premium, potentially making an already expensive car prohibitively so. I think the premiums have risen for 2024 but as I understand it last year in France the malus premium on the A110R was c.€2,500 whereas for a 718 GTS with >200g/km it was more like €28,000! (Don't quote me though, I'm relating this 2nd/3rd hand... perhaps one of our French forum members can fill us in?)

[Spokeyblokey]

J321 ALP said:

Useful info, thanks. May I ask who you are insured with? I also have the same Milltek exhaust and agree on the look of the tips and noise.

Admiral

..and a cautionary tale..
I had the exhaust and re-map done about three weeks before the end of my cover with Churchill. I rang them to inform them only to be told that they did not allow modifications and consequently they would have to cancel my insurance - no debate, and no possibility of an additional premium. Consequently, for the sake of three weeks, I 'lost' a year of NCB on my Alpine insurance. If I'd stuck the car in the garage (it's not used as a daily) and informed them at the end of the insurance period I'd have had the extra year of NCB. Admiral have been much more obliging.

Edited by Spokeyblokey on Thursday 11th January 16:00

[Simon Owen]

Very interesting summary thank you. Is the TCU remap primarily to manage increased risk of clutch slip with the extra torque ? I don’t recall all suppliers referring to this change, albeit appreciate some maps mange torque increases lower in the rev range to reduce this.

I assume it’s also linked to shift points, shift speeds etc ?

[jont-]

Spokeyblokey said:

Admiral

..and a cautionary tale..
I had the exhaust and re-map done about three weeks before the end of my cover with Churchill. I rang them to inform them only to be told that they did not allow modifications and consequently they would have to cancel my insurance - no debate, and no possibility of an additional premium. Consequently, for the sake of three weeks, I 'lost' a year of NCB on my Alpine insurance. If I'd stuck the car in the garage (it's not used as a daily) and informed them at the end of the insurance period I'd have had the extra year of NCB. Admiral have been much more obliging.

Edited by Spokeyblokey on Thursday 11th January 16:00

And not just that, but presumably you have also declared to the new insurers that you've had insurance cancelled on you?

[J321 ALP]

Thanks I am with Admiral too, as a result in a ridiculous increase in premium increase when I notified my previous insurers.

[Spokeyblokey]

Simon Owen said:

Very interesting summary thank you. Is the TCU remap primarily to manage increased risk of clutch slip with the extra torque ? I don’t recall all suppliers referring to this change, albeit appreciate some maps mange torque increases lower in the rev range to reduce this.

I assume it’s also linked to shift points, shift speeds etc ?

Yes, increase in clamping pressure to offset the increase in torque and c.200rpm increase in rev limit. Apparently there is a slight improvement in shift speed too, but tbh I couldn't say I can tell.

[five50]

jont- said:

Spokeyblokey said:

Admiral

..and a cautionary tale..
I had the exhaust and re-map done about three weeks before the end of my cover with Churchill. I rang them to inform them only to be told that they did not allow modifications and consequently they would have to cancel my insurance - no debate, and no possibility of an additional premium. Consequently, for the sake of three weeks, I 'lost' a year of NCB on my Alpine insurance. If I'd stuck the car in the garage (it's not used as a daily) and informed them at the end of the insurance period I'd have had the extra year of NCB. Admiral have been much more obliging.

Edited by Spokeyblokey on Thursday 11th January 16:00

And not just that, but presumably you have also declared to the new insurers that you've had insurance cancelled on you?

I think that question relates to other circumstances

[Aladoro69]

Spokeyblokey said:

Renault's Megane RS 300 Trophy has essentially the same engine and gearbox

Although the engine is basically same as Megane, I thought that the gearbox was actually from the Clio 200/220 1.6 rather than the Megane for size and weight, hence the torque limitation

[Spokeyblokey]

Aladoro69 said:

Spokeyblokey said:

Renault's Megane RS 300 Trophy has essentially the same engine and gearbox

Although the engine is basically same as Megane, I thought that the gearbox was actually from the Clio 200/220 1.6 rather than the Megane for size and weight, hence the torque limitation

I'm really no Renault expert but I understand the A110 gearbox is a wet clutch 7 speed developed by Getrag as opposed to the Clio gearbox which is a dry clutch 6 speed developed by Renault Sport. Also, I'm sure David Twohig was adamant that there were no Clio drive train components carried over from the Clio!

[Liam22]

Spokeyblokey said:

Also, I'm sure David Twohig was adamant that there were no Clio drive train components carried over from the Clio!

Only the shift paddles!

[a110au]

Aladoro69 said:

Spokeyblokey said:

Renault's Megane RS 300 Trophy has essentially the same engine and gearbox

Although the engine is basically same as Megane, I thought that the gearbox was actually from the Clio 200/220 1.6 rather than the Megane for size and weight, hence the torque limitation

the torque design is literally in the name of the box: dct300 (well the design limit is 320nm)
it was a dct developed specifically for economical cars (not sports cars) as obviously with a typically higher kg weight 300nm is not a lot of shove. With higher torque the clutch plates wear more and eventually begin to slip at change points but there is also a failure that can happen internally which if you search for dct300-7 rebuild you can find pictures of what fails first:
https://maktrans.net/7DCT300-clutch-case-repair

and their particular solution to the failure.