Why are remap prices so secretive?

[Alex225]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to tune a car? Surely factory power is enough

Fun maybe? Haha

Not all mappers are secretive but I guess it depends on the ones live mapping or applying a generic one. In that a generic map is applied and that’s that, unless there’s problem it’s a standard process. A live map is more involved to I guess can take longer and may be priced differently.

 

[ringway]

I had my re-map done by Charles Atlas.

No one kicks sand in my face now.

 

[Gazwould]

He's a wimp , try Big Ramy .

 

[400ixl]

Having done ODB, custom ECU mapping (including for a manufacturer and race teams) and written my own pretty much from scratch.

For a road car, can you remap and ECU via an ODB port as well as ripping it open and writing it directly to the chip. Well in many cases yes you can, the days of non changing ECU's are long gone. Its usually only where the manufacturer has looked to apply security measures does this become hard or even impossible.

For live mapping, can you do this via an ODB port. Not as much as with a custom ECU, but you can follow the same principle which is what it is about. You can run a data logger that is looking at all of the parameters live and then make adjustments. Rarely even on custom ECU's would you do that whilst the vehicle is still moving. So time is the real difference. Its quicker to change a parameter on a custom map than change and reload a full map, so the process is slower and usually means less tweaking is done. But for a standard car that isn't really an issue.

Custom map developers who modify the pre-defined maps to suit the individual car actually probably do a better job than those who just load a pre-defined map. Provided they know what they are doing of course.

There are those who just buy maps off the internet and throw them on a car with little to no customisation or actual knowledge of what the map is doing are pretty dangerous. Those who have developed base maps and then push them to cars without individualisation (the Brabus, Kleeman etc) are pretty good and will have put a lot of hours in to making it safe, but it won't take into account anything else you have done or the individual car. You then have the likes of GAD etc who have developed a base map and then tweak it for your car.

Basically avoid the first type of internet mappers. Either of the other two will be fine, you will get a more performance manufacturer level from the big boys, but the smaller companies will probably get you more power unique to your car.

As for why they don't advertise pricing, well its a competitive world, they are always adjusting prices per car based on the work they have done, how difficult or easy it is, how long it will take (can be anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 hours to just load a map) and they are reacting to their competitors pricing.

As for why they don't tell you in detail what they do, its hard to put it into layman's terms and you then get threads full of misinformation. So better to not say anything then have the punter just get it all wrong.

 

[Alex]

Rarely even on custom ECU's would you do that whilst the vehicle is still moving.

Good input. I can't help but notice however that "live tuning" in this thread (and forum for that matter) is used to describe a job of adjusting the map. Not the actual live tuning the engine whilst it's running. Which is how it's done in motorsport or will all modern standalone ECUs. With the latter the car rolls on the dyno and adjustments are done in real-time with immediate effect. Provided you have a base map, which I agree is the bit that takes time and is done before starting the engine.

 

[400ixl]

Some ECU's allow you to do real time mapping, many don't. In both cases you use a live data logger to inform you of what is going on, for example the air / fuel ratio across the rev range. Whether you make adjustments in real time, or have to alter the map on a laptop and re-upload them, its the same outcome, one is just faster than the other. Both are a form of "live" mapping.

Outside of motorsport (and even then) few will try to be making changes whilst it is actually running. The main difference is some maps you can change parameters directly in isolation which takes seconds, others you have to update the parameter offline and reload the full recomplied map, which can take a couple of minutes to half an hour.

 

[Bellow]

Having done ODB, custom ECU mapping (including for a manufacturer and race teams) and written my own pretty much from scratch.

Given you are that rare beast - someone knowledgeable and willing to share.... i have a couple of questions you maybe know the answers to.
Not 'mapping' in the discussed context but mapped into an ECU controlling a FBW throttle.
Do you know if A) when the driver releases the throttle pedal, the throttle butterfly is closed in sync with the pedal, left open (and fuel cut) or something/somewhere in between and B) on flooring the throttle at low rpm, is the butterfly opened wide immediately or progressively in accordance with the increased air demand as the rpm rises? Any ideas? TIA.

 

[Alex]

Given you are that rare beast - someone knowledgeable and willing to share.... i have a couple of questions you maybe know the answers to.
Not 'mapping' in the discussed context but mapped into an ECU controlling a FBW throttle.
Do you know if A) when the driver releases the throttle pedal, the throttle butterfly is closed in sync with the pedal, left open (and fuel cut) or something/somewhere in between and B) on flooring the throttle at low rpm, is the butterfly opened wide immediately or progressively in accordance with the increased air demand as the rpm rises? Any ideas? TIA.

Not a rare beast (sorry) but if I may. In my ECU the throttle pedal is fully synced with the butterfly. Both butterflies (I run a twin TB intake) are in fact synced too - master and slave. Because they are synced to the pedal, the opening is instant when floored and closed when released.

 

[Bellow]

Thanks Alex. Is that a standard from the factory set-up you are describing, a completely custom set up, or a modified standard set up?
(I should have been clearer in that my questions relate to road cars as set up by the manufacturers. I'm keen to know the strategies the OEMs employ. I'm just wondering if this kind of thing is noticed by you mapping types and/or modified by you).

 

[Alex]

Thanks Alex. Is that a standard from the factory set-up you are describing, a completely custom set up, or a modified standard set up?
(I should have been clearer in that my questions relate to road cars as set up by the manufacturers. I'm keen to know the strategies the OEMs employ. I'm just wondering if this kind of thing is noticed by you mapping types and/or modified by you).

No, not a standard setup. I've replaced the OE ECU with a standalone unit and wired it up to the OE components (like throttle bodies, accelerator pedal, sensors, etc.). I don't think strategies as such are possible here as everything works in unison like the old fashioned throttle cable, just more precise. Both the accelerator and throttle body use two potentiometers to confirm the opening/voltage (6-wire plugs on all of them these days). Standalone ECUs allow to set a throttle opening limit which I know is not possible with the OE ECUs. So if anything, you'll have less freedom with the standard control unit.

Stu (400ixl) above may know more about it as my experiece is mostly standalone/aftermarket.

 

[st13phil]

Depending upon engine mode (you can select Rain, Road or Dynamic), the FBW throttle doesn't directly follow the twistgrip on my K1600 bike so I'd expect that to be the case for cars too. In Dynamic mode, those who have used data logging on the same model on a dyno say that the butterfly more closely tracks the twistgrip, while in Road mode it trails throttle opening to give a softer feel. Although I haven't verified this with data, in either mode if you snap the throttle open at low RPM it certainly feels & sounds as though the butterfly opens progressively according to increasing air demand from the engine rather than directly tracking the twistgrip.

From a car manufacturer's point of view, it's certainly much easier to flatter a hamfisted drivers foot by managing tip in / tip out (for example) with software than it used to be with a carburettor.

 

[400ixl]

Most OEM maps use a closed loop system at low rev's and idle (so low throttle position). It hasn't really changed between the old days of wired throttle butterfly's or modern fly by wire. What has changed is the number of sensors and parameters that are used to inform the closed loop and thus optimise mapping, you now have far more than just the Throttle Position Sensor to work with. They also use adaption tables as a result.

You have to consider things like whether the car has wide or narrow band lambda's, how many CATS, does it have a DPF and EGR valves, swirl flaps etc.

All of this means that the butterfly, injector cycles etc are all controlled in both synchronicity with the physical pedal and in isolation to control the efficiency etc of the engine and all of the components around it. So when you lift the default is to shut the butterfly, but then closed loop controls it as required. The aim is to keep the air fuel ratio as close to 14.7:1 as possible.

 

[400ixl]

Depending upon engine mode (you can select Rain, Road or Dynamic), the FBW throttle doesn't directly follow the twistgrip on my K1600 bike so I'd expect that to be the case for cars too. In Dynamic mode, those who have used data logging on the same model on a dyno say that the butterfly more closely tracks the twistgrip, while in Road mode it trails throttle opening to give a softer feel. Although I haven't verified this with data, in either mode if you snap the throttle open at low RPM it certainly feels & sounds as though the butterfly opens progressively according to increasing air demand from the engine rather than directly tracking the twistgrip.

From a car manufacturer's point of view, it's certainly much easier to flatter a hamfisted drivers foot by managing tip in / tip out (for example) with software than it used to be with a carburettor.

Pretty good description of the closed loop system and adaptive table in use. Full throttle uses open loop which basically then just uses a small number of sensors, so is must more in syncricity mode than adaptive.

 

[ToeKnee]

@Alex which stand alone ecu are you using?

 

[Bellow]

Thanks Phil - that's the kind of info I'm chasing.

Depending upon engine mode (you can select Rain, Road or Dynamic), the FBW throttle doesn't directly follow the twistgrip on my K1600 bike so I'd expect that to be the case for cars too. In Dynamic mode, those who have used data logging on the same model on a dyno say that the butterfly more closely tracks the twistgrip, while in Road mode it trails throttle opening to give a softer feel. Although I haven't verified this with data, in either mode if you snap the throttle open at low RPM it certainly feels & sounds as though the butterfly opens progressively according to increasing air demand from the engine rather than directly tracking the twistgrip.

I can see the 'softening' effect from Road mode - but there it would be (very) slightly lagging behind the air flow requirement of the engine. Somewhere slightly quicker than that but not wham bam fully open in a nano second is a rate of opening that exactly matches the increased air flow requirement with rising rpm. The only benefit though would be possibly higher air velocity in the vicinity of the injector to aid fuel atomisation. Doubt that that though is anything like as critical as with...

From a car manufacturer's point of view, it's certainly much easier to flatter a hamfisted drivers foot by managing tip in / tip out (for example) with software than it used to be with a carburettor.

.....carbed set ups as you allude, where snap throttle openings at low rpm can kill the thing stone dead. Especially 2T that really does prefer to be 'fed' its throttle.

Also curious as to over-run strategies ie, immediately close the butterfly or leave open and cut fuel.

 

[Alex]

@Alex which stand alone ecu are you using?

Link Thunder. It's a wire-in ECU, not plug 'n play unfortunately so a lot of work to integrate.

Also curious as to over-run strategies ie, immediately close the butterfly or leave open and cut fuel.

Depending on the age of the ECU and power of the car it is likely that OE ECU acceleration is scaled differently low to top end. E.g. Mercdedes would use smaller increments at 0-2000rpm to achieve finer cruising vs bigger increments at high end where throttle can jump, say 10% without much noticeable effect. I have it in my own car so there's no neck snapping action and cruising is very refined. And this is all with linear dependancy between the gas pedal and butterfly.

 

[st13phil]

.....carbed set ups as you allude, where snap throttle openings at low rpm can kill the thing stone dead. Especially 2T that really does prefer to be 'fed' its throttle.

I learnt throttle control on slide carburettor 2T’s and still habitually operate a throttle in a progressive manner - even though I know modern engine management systems can cope with a throttle position that would, for a carburetted engine, just over supply air.

Can’t help on the overrun strategy, other than to say that watching the instantaneous fuel consumption meter on my new A-Class would suggest that fuel is not cut instantly when you come off the throttle.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[400ixl]

Closed loop will keep the optimal AFR ratio as the revs are dropping through the table. Just shutting off one or the other will result in massive engine braking which you may want on a race car, but not on a road car.

 

[Bellow]

Depending on the age of the ECU and power of the car it is likely that OE ECU acceleration is scaled differently low to top end. E.g. Mercdedes would use smaller increments at 0-2000rpm to achieve finer cruising vs bigger increments at high end where throttle can jump, say 10% without much noticeable effect. I have it in my own car so there's no neck snapping action and cruising is very refined. And this is all with linear dependancy between the gas pedal and butterfly.

Slipped my mind that even with the butterfly perfectly synched to pedal/twistgrip, the rate of area opening is unlikely to be linear with a butterfly (as it is with a slide carb/throttle body). I keep meaning to plot it as a curve but not quite got around to it....

 

[Bellow]

I learnt throttle control on slide carburettor 2T’s and still habitually operate a throttle in a progressive manner - even though I know modern engine management systems can cope with a throttle position that would, for a carburetted engine, just over supply air.

Likewise - even though the days of the air picking up fuel three times are behind us now.

Can’t help on the overrun strategy, other than to say that watching the instantaneous fuel consumption meter on my new A-Class would suggest that fuel is not cut instantly when you come off the throttle.

Also slipped my mind that the ECU has to keep the cat happy. Dropping fuel but giving it air is probably not what it wants.