Re mapping

Jasonn said:
If I can ask a slightly tangential question, does the performance remap significantly affect the emissions to the point where it could cause an MOT fail?

This is assuming all other engine components are in good order.

I have been a bit scared with the insurance quotes up from £350 per year (unmodded with Hastings) to circa £1200 on the comparison sites
Click to expand...

The simple answer is no..

The exhaust emission tests are run with the car at idle or very small throttle settings..most of the re-map changes occur much further away with combinations of throttle position and engine rpm that the MOT does not measure/use

As ususal this assumes a pukka remap and the rest of the pollution control equipment still in place..

My last test on a Celtic tune re-map of 20i N20 stated

Fast idle
CO 0.04 limit 0.2 %
HC 39 limit 200 ppm

Slow idle
CO 0.02 limit 0.3 % :thumbsup:
 
enuff_zed said:
R.E92 said:
Leaner mixtures produce more power until you go past the 14.7:1 stoichiometric ratio. More fuel than that will mean there is insufficient air for the complete combustion.
Click to expand...

Will that actually reduce power? Or just mean you are sending some of the fuel through the system without extracting the power from it?
Click to expand...

Having too much fuel reduces performance in a few ways. I think the main one is that effects combustion speed.
 
Jasonn said:
Thank pbondar - now to find an insurance company that doesn't want a kidney as payment
Click to expand...
LV were good for me as a mature citizen..
 
Pbondar said:
Jasonn said:
Thank pbondar - now to find an insurance company that doesn't want a kidney as payment
Click to expand...
LV were good for me as a mature citizen..
Click to expand...

+1 for LV including other disclosed mods
 
I used Chris Knott insurance (the sponsored one on this page) as they accepted the following mods for £20 less than the best quote I can pick up on compare the market.

- Smart top module
- strut brace
- winter tyres
- 370bhp remap.

I also have a dashcam but don't want that included in the insurance as any saving may come back to bite me as it will require me to provide proof or I may not be insured if anything happens (eg. if my dashcam is off or recorded over footage etc). Not worth the risk so I have left it out.
 
ihadablackdog said:
Back in 2011 when I had my first e89, LV wouldn’t insure me unless I had a tracker fitted (to the car, not me).
Click to expand...

9 years seems an adequate period of time to either redeem yourself or LV to get its act together? :thumbsup:
 
Pbondar said:
ihadablackdog said:
Back in 2011 when I had my first e89, LV wouldn’t insure me unless I had a tracker fitted (to the car, not me).
Click to expand...

9 years seems an adequate period of time to either redeem yourself or LV to get its act together? :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Haha fair point. They lost two customers that day though cos obviously I had to go elsewhere and we moved Deb away from them when her renewal came.

I guess having Liverpool in their name made them over sensitive to car theft!
 
Smartbear said:
enuff_zed said:
brillomaster said:
260bhp is a bit optimistic, 240 i could believe. mpg gains are even harder to come by realistically.
Click to expand...

I'm sure both Smartbear and Pbondar are seeing in the region of 280bhp from their mapped 20i's?
I also think Mr Bear mentioned at least as good fuel consumption, due to the increased torque, but 6.5mpg may be a little optimistic?
Click to expand...

Yep, fuel economy is unchanged from previous. No issues with that as it’s still good :)
Rob
Click to expand...

Fuel consumption is a tricky one with remaps. You're correct in that under certain circumstances it should remain unchanged e.g. 'normal' driving.
But more power comes at a price. In very basic terms, a remap will increase boost (more air). The increased air in the cylinders requires more fuel to maintain the stoichiometric ratio. So if you drive 'foot to the floor' you will certainly be using more fuel.

It's not possible to significantly increase power (boost) without also increasing fuelling.
 
Nick9one1 said:
Smartbear said:
enuff_zed said:
I'm sure both Smartbear and Pbondar are seeing in the region of 280bhp from their mapped 20i's?
I also think Mr Bear mentioned at least as good fuel consumption, due to the increased torque, but 6.5mpg may be a little optimistic?
Click to expand...

Yep, fuel economy is unchanged from previous. No issues with that as it’s still good :)
Rob
Click to expand...

Fuel consumption is a tricky one with remaps. You're correct in that under certain circumstances it should remain unchanged e.g. 'normal' driving.
But more power comes at a price. In very basic terms, a remap will increase boost (more air). The increased air in the cylinders requires more fuel to maintain the stoichiometric ratio. So if you drive 'foot to the floor' you will certainly be using more fuel.

It's not possible to significantly increase power (boost) without also increasing fuelling.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with physics.
But for me, the main attraction is the added torque (as I don't tend to sit around in bars discussing bhp :wink: )
Particularly on some of Norfolk's roads, the ability to get past someone quickly makes progress from A to B much faster, without ragging it along.
The extra torque at lowish revs also means less need to row it along on the gearbox, which I suspect is where the fuel economy comes in.
 
Nick9one1 said:
Smartbear said:
enuff_zed said:
I'm sure both Smartbear and Pbondar are seeing in the region of 280bhp from their mapped 20i's?
I also think Mr Bear mentioned at least as good fuel consumption, due to the increased torque, but 6.5mpg may be a little optimistic?
Click to expand...

Yep, fuel economy is unchanged from previous. No issues with that as it’s still good :)
Rob
Click to expand...

Fuel consumption is a tricky one with remaps. You're correct in that under certain circumstances it should remain unchanged e.g. 'normal' driving.
But more power comes at a price. In very basic terms, a remap will increase boost (more air). The increased air in the cylinders requires more fuel to maintain the stoichiometric ratio. So if you drive 'foot to the floor' you will certainly be using more fuel.

It's not possible to significantly increase power (boost) without also increasing fuelling.
Click to expand...

On the local roads i tend to drive on it’s not possible to drive foot to the floor for more than a handful of seconds without going through a hedge or getting arrested :o
On the rare occasions i travel on motorways i still sit at between 70/80mph to avoid points on my licence.
Due to these real world constraints my average economy has remained the same :thumbsup:
Rob
 
Oh I completely agree. I'm not saying you shouldnt remap, quite the opposite!

I drive fairly hard and my mpg is ~25
 
Smartbear said:
Nick9one1 said:
Smartbear said:
Yep, fuel economy is unchanged from previous. No issues with that as it’s still good :)
Rob
Click to expand...

Fuel consumption is a tricky one with remaps. You're correct in that under certain circumstances it should remain unchanged e.g. 'normal' driving.
But more power comes at a price. In very basic terms, a remap will increase boost (more air). The increased air in the cylinders requires more fuel to maintain the stoichiometric ratio. So if you drive 'foot to the floor' you will certainly be using more fuel.

It's not possible to significantly increase power (boost) without also increasing fuelling.
Click to expand...

On the local roads i tend to drive on it’s not possible to drive foot to the floor for more than a handful of seconds without going through a hedge or getting arrested :o
On the rare occasions i travel on motorways i still sit at between 70/80mph to avoid points on my licence.
Due to these real world constraints my average economy has remained the same :thumbsup:
Rob
Click to expand...

I find that I'm getting 3 weeks to the gallon at the moment
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom