Power upgrade.
Discussion
bogie said:
20bhp is hard enough to tell a difference on a 750kg Elise ...on a 1.6 ton Vantage it might be imperceptible, except in the wallet ...so I havnt bothered upgrading either 
That's like saying there's no perceptible difference between a power upgraded 4.3 and a 4.7 which in turn means there's no difference between a 4.3 and a 4.7.... 
excellent! 
[quote=Good Soil (Pete)]I have to say I drove an Aston with the official AM Power upgrade and I really couldn't tell the difference.....now I have owned my standard one for 6 months or so it would be interesting to 'compare' again....
[/quote]
The worst thing about the standard car is that awful delay on the throttle, press the accelerator to give it a 'quick blip' and .................... 5 seconds later in revs.
The upgrade gets rid of that and also allows better performance from super unleaded.
Its not just about 20 odd HP- thats missing the whole point; it is about revisions to the delivery of power especially higher in the rev range.
I would never go back to standard and the same applies to the sports suspension- stranforms the car!
[/quote]
The worst thing about the standard car is that awful delay on the throttle, press the accelerator to give it a 'quick blip' and .................... 5 seconds later in revs.
The upgrade gets rid of that and also allows better performance from super unleaded.
Its not just about 20 odd HP- thats missing the whole point; it is about revisions to the delivery of power especially higher in the rev range.
I would never go back to standard and the same applies to the sports suspension- stranforms the car!
Edited by 355f on Wednesday 4th May 13:04
Stephen - you cannot disgree with Pete for expressing an opinion when he is clearly qualifying it by saying he is willing to revisit his position.
He has already displayed a willingness to revise his original viewpoint after undertaking further tests.
Essentially, you are disagreeing with someone who has displayed a propensity to disagree with himself.
Such a co-existing dichotomy is nigh on impossible to challenge.
Now, if you had disagreed with Bogie's unqualified statement........
He has already displayed a willingness to revise his original viewpoint after undertaking further tests.
Essentially, you are disagreeing with someone who has displayed a propensity to disagree with himself.
Such a co-existing dichotomy is nigh on impossible to challenge.
Now, if you had disagreed with Bogie's unqualified statement........
Jockman said:
Stephen - you cannot disgree with Pete for expressing an opinion when he is clearly qualifying it by saying he is willing to revisit his position.
He has already displayed a willingness to revise his original viewpoint after undertaking further tests.
Essentially, you are disagreeing with someone who has displayed a propensity to disagree with himself.
Such a co-existing dichotomy is nigh on impossible to challenge.
Now, if you had disagreed with Bogie's unqualified statement........
Point appreciated!- However, if GSP could not notice any difference on his first encounter with the upgrade, I doubt that opinion will change on a second revisit!He has already displayed a willingness to revise his original viewpoint after undertaking further tests.
Essentially, you are disagreeing with someone who has displayed a propensity to disagree with himself.
Such a co-existing dichotomy is nigh on impossible to challenge.
Now, if you had disagreed with Bogie's unqualified statement........
As to Mr B's opinion, 'you cant notice 20bhp on a 1.5 ton car' is indeed a view shared by all and reiterated whenever such a subject is raised, however, as stated before its not about the 20bhp its to do with the way the engine responds
Jockman said:
Now, if you had disagreed with Bogie's unqualified statement........
I did.....but whether it makes a difference or not, I only upgraded for bragging rights 
Seriously though, It's difficult to quantify an extra 20bhp other than in the way that 355f has above; all of which I agree with. Trying to compare two different cars left as standard doesn't necessarily mean that you're testing two cars with identical BHP as has been shown in previous posts. It's a less similar argument for those that suggest that there's no discernible difference in power retained by leaving the exhaust valves closed as opposed to removing fuse 22. This exercise can be tested/felt instantly by way of the exhaust valve switch, carried out on the same journey and in the same car, and we're talking of a lot less than 20bhp.
mine went on the dyno as standard at 392bhp and remapped to 419bhp. Yes you can feel the difference, not the 25bhp but the throttle response and the power delivery. I agree with 355F on this one
It also ironed out a dip in the power curve.
I'd also say my economy is slightly up - I seem to be able to get another 1-2mpg on the average but perhaps I'm getting a bit better at not using my right foot so much.
It also ironed out a dip in the power curve.
I'd also say my economy is slightly up - I seem to be able to get another 1-2mpg on the average but perhaps I'm getting a bit better at not using my right foot so much.
So far i've test driven 2 x 4.3's.
1st....standard 4.3 and my 1st ever drive of an Aston having jumped straight out of an Elise. Was a little disappointed, felt big and heavy and not very nimble, but the car did pull quite heavily to the left which may have marred the experience and jumping straight out of the Elise I just put it down to it being a bigger car and bound to feel heavier.
2nd....about a week later was a standard 4.3 with sports pack (wheels & suspension) and power upgrade and it felt much more responsive and sportier, the throttle responded straight away for that 'blip' of power (not quite Elise but good enough), the handling felt better as well, but as only my second dealer test drive it may have been me getting used to the car as well. I would agree though that the extra 20bhp made no significant difference to the feel of accelerative power.
3rd...this Friday, N400, I'll let you know....
1st....standard 4.3 and my 1st ever drive of an Aston having jumped straight out of an Elise. Was a little disappointed, felt big and heavy and not very nimble, but the car did pull quite heavily to the left which may have marred the experience and jumping straight out of the Elise I just put it down to it being a bigger car and bound to feel heavier.
2nd....about a week later was a standard 4.3 with sports pack (wheels & suspension) and power upgrade and it felt much more responsive and sportier, the throttle responded straight away for that 'blip' of power (not quite Elise but good enough), the handling felt better as well, but as only my second dealer test drive it may have been me getting used to the car as well. I would agree though that the extra 20bhp made no significant difference to the feel of accelerative power.
3rd...this Friday, N400, I'll let you know....
Edited by Mr Overheads on Wednesday 4th May 15:11
All im saying is that 20bhp to me dosent alter the outright performance ...its not like "wow" its 1 second faster to 60, or sub 9 secs to a ton...it is not perceivably faster at all...
yes I understand the throttle response is changed, and many people want that alone, regardless of horsepower claims
you can remap any engine and make it feel different ...hey, why not map into it a stepped change at 5k revs, so you get a surge of power, and that variable valve timing buzzy feel...it always helps give the perception of more power too ...jeez Porsche seem to make tens of thousands selling their owners on 20bhp "transformational" upgrades
the 40bhp/40lb of torque you get from increasing the capacity of the engine is different and yes the 4.7 did feel better to me, so I will be upgrading in the future sometime
what im really saying in a cynical way is "dont expect 20bhp to be life changing"
now if someones bolting on 100-150bhp with a blower, I would expect to read a song and dance about it
yes I understand the throttle response is changed, and many people want that alone, regardless of horsepower claims
you can remap any engine and make it feel different ...hey, why not map into it a stepped change at 5k revs, so you get a surge of power, and that variable valve timing buzzy feel...it always helps give the perception of more power too ...jeez Porsche seem to make tens of thousands selling their owners on 20bhp "transformational" upgrades
the 40bhp/40lb of torque you get from increasing the capacity of the engine is different and yes the 4.7 did feel better to me, so I will be upgrading in the future sometime
what im really saying in a cynical way is "dont expect 20bhp to be life changing"
now if someones bolting on 100-150bhp with a blower, I would expect to read a song and dance about it
Mine (DB9) has had / is having a re-map at DMS now.
Talked to Rick and of course I wanted the headline power figure to compare to my mates Lambo and so on. Rick persuaded me it's much more about the useable torque and midrange punch and in fact he lowers the rev limit by 300rpm instead of raising it as an easy route to a higher power figure!
How often do you get your car to 7000rpm? How often do you drop a gear and pass someone from 4k through to 6k though, a lot more. So the entire experience will be altered, my headline bhp may rise by 20bhp or so but the car will drive very differently and be much far more responsive. That's why I had a re-map, cats and QS SS back box.
Talked to Rick and of course I wanted the headline power figure to compare to my mates Lambo and so on. Rick persuaded me it's much more about the useable torque and midrange punch and in fact he lowers the rev limit by 300rpm instead of raising it as an easy route to a higher power figure!
How often do you get your car to 7000rpm? How often do you drop a gear and pass someone from 4k through to 6k though, a lot more. So the entire experience will be altered, my headline bhp may rise by 20bhp or so but the car will drive very differently and be much far more responsive. That's why I had a re-map, cats and QS SS back box.
I still hanker after better response from the engine at the bottom end of the rev range. It’s fast enough once you rev it though.
I did speak to Rick at DMS and the first thing he suggested was to clean the throttle body, which I did and I did notice some improvement but not much.
I considered the AM official upgrade but feel it’s a lot of money for potentially not much gain, however if I got a chance to drive a modified 4.3 I may change my mind.
So that makes me wonder what the DMS re-map is like. Has anyone done it who can report of the difference?
I did speak to Rick at DMS and the first thing he suggested was to clean the throttle body, which I did and I did notice some improvement but not much.
I considered the AM official upgrade but feel it’s a lot of money for potentially not much gain, however if I got a chance to drive a modified 4.3 I may change my mind.
So that makes me wonder what the DMS re-map is like. Has anyone done it who can report of the difference?
ive seen independant dyno charts of the DMS remap and was impressed by what it looked like on paper....it was not like some of the early offerings where theyve just lifted the rev limit 500rpm and mapped it onto 97RON
as others have said , 20-25bhp/lbft of torque from low down and all the way through to 7K revs is a lot more useful than 40bhp made in the last 500 revs ....
as others have said , 20-25bhp/lbft of torque from low down and all the way through to 7K revs is a lot more useful than 40bhp made in the last 500 revs ....
1st_petrolhead said:
I still hanker after better response from the engine at the bottom end of the rev range. It’s fast enough once you rev it though.
I did speak to Rick at DMS and the first thing he suggested was to clean the throttle body, which I did and I did notice some improvement but not much.
I considered the AM official upgrade but feel it’s a lot of money for potentially not much gain, however if I got a chance to drive a modified 4.3 I may change my mind.
So that makes me wonder what the DMS re-map is like. Has anyone done it who can report of the difference?
If you want to have a go in mine you are more than welcomeI did speak to Rick at DMS and the first thing he suggested was to clean the throttle body, which I did and I did notice some improvement but not much.
I considered the AM official upgrade but feel it’s a lot of money for potentially not much gain, however if I got a chance to drive a modified 4.3 I may change my mind.
So that makes me wonder what the DMS re-map is like. Has anyone done it who can report of the difference?
You guys are having a great discussion here, and I didn't want to butt in to disturb the flow....but I think i can offer an insight....
I will always remember a drive event on DBS which I conducted. The factory could not commit to the capitol investment required to make a particular engine part which I wanted. So, I had my team build and dyno three cars; one was made at 'full fat spec', the next 'semi skinned' and the next the 'skinny', graduations of 10BHP in 510, so steps of more-or-less 2%.
In absolute vehicle accel times there was next to nothing discernable between the three, So... Mr B.... what you say is true. DBS and 10 BHP in 500, Veyron and 20 BHP in 1000 = nothing discernable, but 10 BHP in 100 = game-changing. So it really does depend on where on that scale you rest. Therefore V8 at 380 BHP, 20 BHP is certainly closer to the discernable end. Back to the DBS story, in terms of how the driver perceived each engine accelerated, or the rate of change of engine speed, was distinctly different between the three. You could see the needle move quicker between each engine and the urgency could be felt in the neck muscles as the drivers head was pushed back into the seat more convincingly with each graduation. And the big point here is that little mod, after little mod, after little mod, each in a sequential / logical stage, you arrive at, say, 550 BHP, which I have driven in that chassis, and then all of a sudden - game changing grin factor..! So if you piece together all of your arguments here, you are all correct in your own way..!
By the way.... they went for the skinny
I will always remember a drive event on DBS which I conducted. The factory could not commit to the capitol investment required to make a particular engine part which I wanted. So, I had my team build and dyno three cars; one was made at 'full fat spec', the next 'semi skinned' and the next the 'skinny', graduations of 10BHP in 510, so steps of more-or-less 2%.
In absolute vehicle accel times there was next to nothing discernable between the three, So... Mr B.... what you say is true. DBS and 10 BHP in 500, Veyron and 20 BHP in 1000 = nothing discernable, but 10 BHP in 100 = game-changing. So it really does depend on where on that scale you rest. Therefore V8 at 380 BHP, 20 BHP is certainly closer to the discernable end. Back to the DBS story, in terms of how the driver perceived each engine accelerated, or the rate of change of engine speed, was distinctly different between the three. You could see the needle move quicker between each engine and the urgency could be felt in the neck muscles as the drivers head was pushed back into the seat more convincingly with each graduation. And the big point here is that little mod, after little mod, after little mod, each in a sequential / logical stage, you arrive at, say, 550 BHP, which I have driven in that chassis, and then all of a sudden - game changing grin factor..! So if you piece together all of your arguments here, you are all correct in your own way..!
By the way.... they went for the skinny
However - and I thought it important to separate this post from the last.
The attempts and comments I see regarding remaps and the path to more power, torque and driveability leaves a lot to be desired in my humble opinion.... and that is no slight on you, it is the folk that inform you.
Yeti - have you really been advised that lowering the speed will increase the power?? there are mathematical laws that says that ain't so....! and think about it, if you drop into the next gear at lower engine speed your engine will return less torque than it did when it used to drop into the same gear at the higher speed.
Petrol head - lightweight flywheel is the only way to get the rate of change of engine speed you desire, what I call 'Wappability'.
And in terms of ECU re-flash, especially on DB9 - which is a quirky little engine... it doesn't exhibit detonation at low / mid range engine speeds (peak torque region), so the mapped ignition angle is set to MBT (maximum best torque), further ignition actually reduces torque. The throttle is programmed fully open at these conditions and the fuelling has no temperature constraints to over enrich for. Meaning fuelling, spark and throttle angle are all FULLY optimised - just where the extra torque comes from after an ECU reflash is a real mystery to me???? which nobody will categorically explain to me, even when I ask - funny that..!
And as for dyno runs - not that i'm casting any aspersions here. You really have to watch out. It is very easy for the operator to dab the breaks on the way down making the coast down curve calculate higher power figures... There are numerous other tricks of the trade.
There is so much ... bull... out there in those that dabble in the 'aftermarket' it's untrue...!
Ok, off my soap box and i will continue the rant from the soap box i pay for...
The attempts and comments I see regarding remaps and the path to more power, torque and driveability leaves a lot to be desired in my humble opinion.... and that is no slight on you, it is the folk that inform you.
Yeti - have you really been advised that lowering the speed will increase the power?? there are mathematical laws that says that ain't so....! and think about it, if you drop into the next gear at lower engine speed your engine will return less torque than it did when it used to drop into the same gear at the higher speed.
Petrol head - lightweight flywheel is the only way to get the rate of change of engine speed you desire, what I call 'Wappability'.
And in terms of ECU re-flash, especially on DB9 - which is a quirky little engine... it doesn't exhibit detonation at low / mid range engine speeds (peak torque region), so the mapped ignition angle is set to MBT (maximum best torque), further ignition actually reduces torque. The throttle is programmed fully open at these conditions and the fuelling has no temperature constraints to over enrich for. Meaning fuelling, spark and throttle angle are all FULLY optimised - just where the extra torque comes from after an ECU reflash is a real mystery to me???? which nobody will categorically explain to me, even when I ask - funny that..!
And as for dyno runs - not that i'm casting any aspersions here. You really have to watch out. It is very easy for the operator to dab the breaks on the way down making the coast down curve calculate higher power figures... There are numerous other tricks of the trade.
There is so much ... bull... out there in those that dabble in the 'aftermarket' it's untrue...!
Ok, off my soap box and i will continue the rant from the soap box i pay for...
Edited by BamfordMike on Wednesday 4th May 22:36
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff