Remapping

[gazzz]

Right... I'll give it a go.

OK, let me play it back to see if I've understood

Chipping is generic and isn't mapped against the unique engine characteristics of an individual engine? Yep, get that. And if I've understood things correctly, often just increases the fuel pressure. I can see why that might improve power but economy too seems a stretch.

Remapping is (or should be) specific to an individual engine. Remapping works round power and economy limiting factors inherent with complying with EU regulations - particularly regarding catalysers ? OK. Does that mean a remapped engine is likely to be "illegal" if it doesn't conform to EU rules? If not, again I have to wonder why the manufacturers wouldn't use the same mapping?

Additionally, remapping optimises each individual engine rather than a generic "best fit" against a whole range of engines? Yep, get that too, but I'm quite surprised that on an individual basis there could be such a significant improvement. Does that imply that in a run of x engines, there must be a significant fraction of x which are really poor i.e. lowest common denominator determining standard engine map? And if that's true then by implication those "poor" engines wouldn't benefit from a remap (as then again, surely the manufacturers would use the same mapping)?

Thanks for your explanation so far

 

[flango]

Took the Hirsched Saab out for a blast this afternoon, and yes, the auto box doesn't down shift as often to accelerate and the take off is much more immediate. When really pushing, when 2000 rpm is hit it bolts forward like a guided missile! And, according to the computer, at no detrement to mpg (unless the computer is being tricked somehow..)

I've got 14 days to decide whether to keep the remap or not - and the big thought is whether the gains (very real I might add) are actually worth what it cost....

Not sure what you paid and I don't blame you for not telling us, but often you pay for the name not the map Brabus, Kleeman etc. Even a real sophisticated map which would include live mapping ie the mapper sits in the passenger seat lap top connected whilst you drive your car would cost no more than £500 absolute max. You pays your money takes your choice, generic mapping cheap one size fits all, Dynamic Mapping Rolling road runs more expensive, Live mapping best but dearest.

 

[bpsorrel]

Well....full price it would have been a total no-no! But, thanks to the fact that one of my clients is a Saab dealer, I got it cheaper! Still more than a "mapper" such as E-Maps, but as the car still has a year remaining of warranty I decided to play safe and go with Hirsch. The price? An eye watering £459, which is over £300 off normal retail!!!! But, as I said before, I've got 14 days to decide if it's worth it....

 

[wemorgan]

^ on Elk Parts a more generic chip costs £550, so that Hirsch seems OK value relatively.

 

[bpsorrel]

Value isn't necessarily a word I'd use to describe my Hirsch remap, but it certainly is fun! Seriously, I've been toying with this idea for several months now and as is inevitable when my wife goes away (she's in Russia for a month), I take the plunge with mucho spending!! I've emailed her about it, we'll see what she says...

 

[bpsorrel]

reminds me, the last time she went away on her own, she came back to the S211...

 

[martin_a]

OK, let me play it back to see if I've understood

Chipping is generic and isn't mapped against the unique engine characteristics of an individual engine? Yep, get that. And if I've understood things correctly, often just increases the fuel pressure. I can see why that might improve power but economy too seems a stretch.

Good point here on N/A engines, much harder to get additional power from unless you make mechanical changes. Generally a map will go much better on a turbo car where you can play with boost pressures etc.

Usually you can up the boost and lower the point at which it comes in so you have more power available for more of the rev range. As I said before a lot of the savigns come from not having to use as much power but also from flattening out the power curve to get the best from a particular engine. You'll find it will be more efficient across the range (Mapping can be done for efficiency as well as power too)

Remapping is (or should be) specific to an individual engine. Remapping works round power and economy limiting factors inherent with complying with EU regulations - particularly regarding catalysers ?

OK. Does that mean a remapped engine is likely to be "illegal" if it doesn't conform to EU rules? If not, again I have to wonder why the manufacturers wouldn't use the same mapping?

Some do and have had trouble. I'll go back to subaru here who have a Prodrive Performance Pack (PPP) available for most cars. This includes a back box slightly louder than standard. Some people have actually been prosecuted for an 'illegal exhaust' despite it being a factory option.

Some manufacturers now have the flaps in the exhaust which only open on certain throttle/revs to get round the noise laws (Porsche are one).

Factory maps are becoming more common. The new Focus RS500 has a Ford supported re-map to get 350bhp from the 2.5lt motor and as above, Saab seem to do one too.

Great example here from the bike world. RiDe took a brand new CBR600 off the shelf, fitted a dynojet kit, full stainless exhaust and a powercommander to control the air/fuel mix. They got an extra 15bhp, 20 miles more out of the tank and still made the emissions. With an N/A engine the quicker you can get the exhaust gas out the better (generally) but EU rule declared that all bikes must be fitted with a Cat... So it makes more noise (just) but if a bunch of journalists can get better mpg with a few hours in a garage imagine what Honda could do if they were allowed to meet emissions targets however they pleased?

Additionally, remapping optimises each individual engine rather than a generic "best fit" against a whole range of engines?

Yep, get that too, but I'm quite surprised that on an individual basis there could be such a significant improvement. Does that imply that in a run of x engines, there must be a significant fraction of x which are really poor i.e. lowest common denominator determining standard engine map? And if that's true then by implication those "poor" engines wouldn't benefit from a remap (as then again, surely the manufacturers would use the same mapping)?

Thanks for your explanation so far

Back again to the N/A issue I think. Huge power gains to be made through some engines. Remember, many use the same basic parts and design... A Subaru WRX has almost the same motor as the STI version but produces a lot less power. It isn't that it isn't capable of doing it it is simply that if it was too good there would be no point in making two different cars. Manufacturers will throttle back a car in order to create a bigger market for themselves.

As for lowest common denominator, that's true but it will be rare to find a duff one. Those will be in cars which get dubbed as lemons and given the number produced, are not common. Likewise, it could be possible to find a car which produces more than the claimed power. I think Alpina fettled BMWs are renowned for having more go than they should have!

A lot of things will also determine the reliability and power of the engine including wear, how it was run in initially, servicing etc.

m.

 

[flango]

Well....full price it would have been a total no-no! But, thanks to the fact that one of my clients is a Saab dealer, I got it cheaper! Still more than a "mapper" such as E-Maps, but as the car still has a year remaining of warranty I decided to play safe and go with Hirsch. The price? An eye watering £459, which is over £300 off normal retail!!!! But, as I said before, I've got 14 days to decide if it's worth it....

No thats a good deal for a Hirsch re map, depends on how many miles you do but if its a lot then the extra mpg created would contribute to part payment of the map

 

[gazzz]

Manufacturers will throttle back a car in order to create a bigger market for themselves.

Yes, good point, I'd forgotten about that. I think my own car is an example

Thanks again for your explanations - they make a lot of sense. I'm still just a little uncomfortable though with why manufacturers (other than for the above reason) aren't able to significantly improve their cars with a bit of software tweaking at the point of manufacture, without falling foul of EU rules if that's the main reason, if after market remapping can work such wonders.

 

[martin_a]

Its time intensive and requires each cat to be 'given a bit' to get the right map if you do live mapping (which is what i had). As Flanaia said it is upwards of £500. The software license alone isn't cheap (ECUTek for the Subaru is £350 alone and you need the license, its the same as running an application on a computer if you will) and you do not want some halfwit screwing up your engine! Tops guys get top money.

The Focus RS is a good example of manufacturer limits imposed on a car. Just over 200bhp at launch, Now pushing 300bhp and with the new Ford backed map 350bhp on the same engine. The potential is there but manufacturers need to be really careful about how far a warrenty will go, especially with 20,000 mile services etc.

m.

 

[horsesuitedfool]

I know that when i traded in my M3 a couple years ago the BMW sales guy said he had loads of M5 owners bringing their cars in to trade them in for the new 535D as it was so quick yet so good on fuel compared to the M5, and if remapped could be as quick as an M5!! Now if BMW made that 535D as quick as a remapped one from stock it would probably dent their top end M sales..... If i could buy a 350 BHP E Class Coupe CDI i would possibly buy it over an E63 Coupe too for the fuel savings etc....

 

[alanuk400]

In my STAR system I can adjust the fuel mixture and such, but I don't know if this would correspond to re-mapping, which I'm sure it doesn't?

I would be very interested to know anyone who has re-mapped a MB using STAR or any other software?

Thanks Martin...

This guy did something like that here
Chiptuning through SDS - MBWorld.org Forums

Alan

 

[horsesuitedfool]

I had a Audi TT 225 Quattro and changed the DV Valve, exhaust, cats, air filter, amongst a few other things and then had it live mapped while driving etc and got it up to 290 BHP. It flew after that, it was no longer style over substance!!

 

[flango]

Its time intensive and requires each cat to be 'given a bit' to get the right map if you do live mapping (which is what i had). As Flanaia said it is upwards of £500. The software license alone isn't cheap (ECUTek for the Subaru is £350 alone and you need the license, its the same as running an application on a computer if you will) and you do not want some halfwit screwing up your engine! Tops guys get top money.

The Focus RS is a good example of manufacturer limits imposed on a car. Just over 200bhp at launch, Now pushing 300bhp and with the new Ford backed map 350bhp on the same engine. The potential is there but manufacturers need to be really careful about how far a warrenty will go, especially with 20,000 mile services etc.

m.

Got an ECUtek map on my Scooby done at TSL, top guys.

 

[camerafodder]

You can safely take that car to 277 bhp with a neck snapping 680 Nm of torque

I've done this and whilst I have not had it tested on a dyno it certainly 'feels' right. Very quick indeed! Quite startling for an oil burner.

 

[The Pan Man]

Originally Posted by flanaia1

Today, 05:32 AM #35 camerafodder
Hardcore MB Enthusiast



Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Lakes
Car: S211 320CDi Estate Sport
Posts: 336


Quote:
Originally Posted by flanaia1
You can safely take that car to 277 bhp with a neck snapping 680 Nm of torque

I've done this and whilst I have not had it tested on a dyno it certainly 'feels' right. Very quick indeed! Quite startling for an oil burner.
__________________
All pigs fed and ready to fly...

You can safely take that car to 277 bhp with a neck snapping 680 Nm of torque

3000 - 4000 miles out of you rear tyres will offset any fuel saving. If you wnat power for fun, it's the only way to go.

 

[bigyin1]

Just to clarify : A chip is a re-map although not necessarily vice-versa.

Back in '85 when BMW and Porsche first used the Bosch Motronic ECU system you'd de-solder a chip, read, re-map, program a new chip, and put back in the car. That was then classified as "chipping". You'd have many ECU numbers and within each number many different chip calibrations. If you had two cars with the same ECU number and Chip number then you could use the same re-map on them both, providing the cars were both original, as the ECU was the same.

Forward to 2010 and ECU's don't have chips to read. They either have to be done diagnostically or with the ECU removed on a bench. Either way you're reading information, re-mapping, then programming back in. Basically the same as you did in '85, only difference being you don't physically remove a chip, plus it's a bit more complicated. Equally you have many different ECU numbers and Chip numbers but if you have two cars with the same ECU/Chip calibration then you can use the same re-map on them both. Either way you're getting a re-map for your car.

"live mapping" - In the old days this was easy, plug in, drive the car on a dyno, modify in real time, piece of cake. However this isn't possible with todays ECU's, they're too complicated. You need to use experience to know what information to change to gain the power/torque you need, or to custom map based on the parts fitted to a car based on logs taken from the car on a dyno or up the road with something like VAGCOM. You can then program, re-test and re-modify if necessary.

Hope this helps.

 

[flango]

J

"live mapping" - In the old days this was easy, plug in, drive the car on a dyno, modify in real time, piece of cake. However this isn't possible with todays ECU's, they're too complicated. You need to use experience to know what information to change to gain the power/torque you need, or to custom map based on the parts fitted to a car based on logs taken from the car on a dyno or up the road with something like VAGCOM. You can then program, re-test and re-modify if necessary.

Hope this helps.

This isn't true all my cars have been mapped live and has been previously posted by others its the only exact way of doing it. You can do it as you suggest but the results won't be as good you need to adjust the parameters under load at different speeds in different gears at different revs etc, something that cannot be accurately replicated on a dyno. My scooby being a race car permanently records to a data logger we then compare the performance data to what we actually want and adjust fuelling / boost etc on the ECU map accordingly. Modern ECU's aren't that complicated the hardest part of doing this is establishing a reliable and continued connection to the ECU, out of Interest all our local Police road crime unit cars ( Evo, Scooby and Focus RS) are all mapped live the new map for the Ford RS is absolutely awesome.

 

[martin_a]

Got an ECUtek map on my Scooby done at TSL, top guys.

Andy Forrest for me but then he's only down the road. Good laugh booting the car down the A1 (2nd and 3rd to keep speeds down officer) with Andy doing his magic in the passenger seat.

 

[flango]

Andy Forrest for me but then he's only down the road. Good laugh booting the car down the A1 (2nd and 3rd to keep speeds down officer) with Andy doing his magic in the passenger seat.

Yep I know Andy well from the Scooby shoot outs at York raceway, again top guy when it comes to mapping, Rich Bulmer who was at TSL and mapped my Scooby now has his own Company, Tractive Solutions who are based not too far from us so I think if any further work is needed it will be off there. Yep live mapping Its good fun I remember my RS Cosworth hurtling through country lanes with the mapper trying to use a laptop