Bought a C250CDi and it feels slow

[HumberMart]

Some of these comments on remaps don't add up.

A 250 CDI is nothing more than a remapped 220.

The torque and power figures are much higher on the 250 but the economy and CO2 figures are the same.

I've had enough remaps to know that in real world driving, a remapped car not only performs better but gives better economy if driven the same as before. And I mean economy measured brim to brim not by computer.

A lot depends on the quality of the map of course.

 

[Dieselman]

The torque and power figures are much higher on the 250 but the economy and CO2 figures are the same.

Only because on the test cycles the torque required is the same. Once more torque is called for more fuel is used.

 

[wemorgan]

The test cycles are described here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1991:242:0001:0106:EN:PDF

When you look at the acceleration phases it's clear these are for economy driving, which is why in part so many people fail to achieve the test mpg

0-15kph 5s
15-32kph 5s
15-35kph 9s
35-50kph 8s
50-70kph 13s
70-100kph 35s
100-120kph 20s

 

[steve_w]

Some of these comments on remaps don't add up.

A 250 CDI is nothing more than a remapped 220.

...

The 250 CDI and 220 CDI use different injectors.
Latest fitments are A 6510702887 and A 6510704987 respectively.

 

[Steve C250]

I am posting a picture i have taken today as i was nearing the end of a journey, the picture speaks for it self in regards to what my car is achieveing.

I have to say, some of the comments about my remap and remapping in general are both nieve and uninteligent, i mean no disrepsect to those who are saying my remap will burn out injectors etc, but unless you know what the remap is and the stats, how can you make such rediculous assumptions when you know nothing about what ive had done.

Sorry, just annoys me, as i have nothing to prove by Lying on here about anything, as was implied by one of the posts.

Will i now be posting again after such a series of mindless and pointless reactions of what i thought was a quality forum, no, no way.

Very dissapointed MD member.

 

[Steve C250]

Picture, as promised.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/members/steve-c250-albums-fuel-economy-picture.html

Thanks

 

[Rory]

I am posting a picture i have taken today as i was nearing the end of a journey, the picture speaks for it self in regards to what my car is achieveing.

Well, it might not. Do you know how the car measures its MPG?

 

[st4]

Picture, as promised.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/members/steve-c250-albums-fuel-economy-picture.html

Thanks

Measure it brim to brim. If its close to that figure well done its a good job, and if it isn't then....

At least your car goes faster

 

[BigSilverEstate]

Where does anyone say the remap WILL burn out your injectors, and what is the point in responding to scepticism about OBD fuel economy readings on remapped cars with a picture of yours?

These grand exits are getting pretty regular on here

 

[wemorgan]

Sorry, just annoys me, as i have nothing to prove by Lying on here about anything, as was implied by one of the posts.

I feel you may have misread that post. I read it more like the car OBD was lying to you ie. giving false readings post remap.

Anyway, most posts you read on the forum are just opinions, no more or less valid that your own. Hard facts are few and far between, so best not take anything you read so personally

 

[st4]

I love these threads...

 

[V12]

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using MBClub UK

 

[HumberMart]

Some so called experts on here seem to confuse a proper ecu remap with a plug in device designed to fool the ecu. Then a wave of false ridicule builds up that could be regarded as cyber bullying.

It is true that posts should be treated as opinions and not fact. But when they come from members with thousands of posts they can be treated with more respect than they actually deserve.

 

[NISFAN]

Some so called experts on here seem to confuse a proper ecu remap with a plug in device designed to fool the ecu. Then a wave of false ridicule builds up that could be regarded as cyber bullying.

It is true that posts should be treated as opinions and not fact. But when they come from members with thousands of posts they can be treated with more respect than they actually deserve.

Like wolves they pack together

 

[gIzzE]

I have had nearly every diesel I have owned remapped and they all give better true mpg returns.

No different to when the manufacturer ups the power and better then mpg.

Manufacturers only need to better the competition when it comes to figures, whether that be power or mpg/co2, they always hold loads back in reserve for the 'facelift'.
Anyone who thinks any different is very naive.

 

[Dieselman]

A remap works by altering the base reference table, not the calculation tables.
Once the base reference table is altered the ECU can no longer accurately calculate the volume of fuel used per injection pulse because it no longer has the standard reference to work to.
The injection pressure will have been altered and maybe the pulse duration, but as the ECU is calculating off standard values it will always give and over-read situation because the injectors are now injecting more fuel than they were, but the ECU doesn't know that.

Brim to brim figures are the only way to accurately tell how much fuel is being used.

 

[Dieselman]

Some so called experts on here seem to confuse a proper ecu remap with a plug in device designed to fool the ecu. Then a wave of false ridicule builds up that could be regarded as cyber bullying.

It is true that posts should be treated as opinions and not fact. But when they come from members with thousands of posts they can be treated with more respect than they actually deserve.

Like wolves they pack together

I am posting a picture i have taken today as i was nearing the end of a journey, the picture speaks for it self in regards to what my car is achieveing.

I have to say, some of the comments about my remap and remapping in general are both nieve and uninteligent, i mean no disrepsect to those who are saying my remap will burn out injectors etc, but unless you know what the remap is and the stats, how can you make such rediculous assumptions when you know nothing about what ive had done.

Sorry, just annoys me, as i have nothing to prove by Lying on here about anything, as was implied by one of the posts.

Will i now be posting again after such a series of mindless and pointless reactions of what i thought was a quality forum, no, no way.

Very dissapointed MD member.

Picture, as promised.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/members/steve-c250-albums-fuel-economy-picture.html

Thanks

I await your figures appearing HERE.

 

[gIzzE]

A remap works by altering the base reference table, not the calculation tables.
Once the base reference table is altered the ECU can no longer accurately calculate the volume of fuel used per injection pulse because it no longer has the standard reference to work to.
The injection pressure will have been altered and maybe the pulse duration, but as the ECU is calculating off standard values it will always give and over-read situation because the injectors are now injecting more fuel than they were, but the ECU doesn't know that.

Brim to brim figures are the only way to accurately tell how much fuel is being used.

Agreed.
However, some remappers, DMS Automotive for one, take this into account.

The way to tell is brim to brim and miles per tank if it is very obvious.


Fiona's 120d was very obvious, always used to get around 370-400 miles a tank as standard, then once mapped we used to see 430-460 miles a tank.
The OBC used to show 34mpg and once mapped used to show 42mpg.
Doing the maths it may have been a little more optomistic but not far out at all.


Our 123d used to return 410-430 all the time, and show 44mpg. We put on a tuning box at first and it suddenly showed 50-55mpg, but it was only returning 420-440.

 

[Dieselman]

Fiona's 120d was very obvious, always used to get around 370-400 miles a tank as standard, then once mapped we used to see 430-460 miles a tank.
The OBC used to show 34mpg and once mapped used to show 42mpg.
Doing the maths it may have been a little more optomistic but not far out at all.

Diesel Car magazine once had a BMW remapped and sure enough the fuel economy improved, so the took the car back to standard without telling the Woman driver...and sure enough the economy stayed improved.

What was happening? She was short shifting working on the assumption that the engine had more low down torque.

With no mechanical modifications to the engine it needs more fuel to make more torque...Fact.

 

[gIzzE]

Fiona didn't even know I had had it mapped.

Oh, and it was an auto.