The art of Chip Tuning.

[foggyjames]

Is 14.7 AFR up to 4000rpm at 18-20psi dangerous? That's a tricky question to answer without having the engine under some very close supervision. I'd not like to make such a call. As long as you're below the detonation threshold (i.e. where the combustion chambers would be greatly heated very rapidly), you *may* be able to run that lean for relatively short periods without destroying anything.

Is there any good reason why you'd do this? I think not...for a start, you'd have to run so little ignition advance that the enigne would make less power than it would with more timing at only a handful of pounds of boost (where close-to-stoic AFRs are fairly acceptable for an economy orientated tune).

The thing which is stopping me from slamming this as "plain stupid" is the claim that (all examples of) some cars leave the factory like this. I honestly don't know if this is true....but it's plausible enough for me to reserve judgement until I know better. Some "lean burn" engines run quite a bit leaner than this on light load...and special combustion chamber design can do amazing things. It's a very complex and specialist area...

...however, I'm *suspicious* that it's plain BS that some Volvos are designed that way, and mapping to run that lean in boost was a mistake.

cheers

James

[Nuisance]

Originally Posted by CTCNetwork

And also, any claims made by commercial tuners etc need to to be backed up with some form of proof - preferably independent.

Des. . .

That's a dificult one Des.

It's a very compex system that is being tuned, and there are massive variations from case to case, so any proof of performance gains is nigh on impossible.

Even Volvo don't turn out T5's that can be proven to generate exactly the specified power, as individual cars can be so diferent.

As the tuners are working to small diferences in figures, on vastly diferent setups, and there is no offcial BS or CE dyno calibration in the UK, then it's all arbitary figure wise.

How could a site verify all claims, and how could the site be sure that the verification is correct?

It is easier to take the route another site has taken and warn the users about the risks in each traders section.

If a simple table of results could be produced then 75% of the posts in theis section of the forum would be redundant.

Just my take on it.

[CTCNetwork]

Hi,

Indeed. Two same age T5R's with similar mileage are going to vary in condition and wear.
Anything done to one, even if replicated in the other, will give a different result.

If rumours are correct, even the set up and configuration of Dyno kit can vary and some tuners may use this to their advantage.
Hence the idea of the test on some other Dyno to get a balanced view.

People should not be allowed to make claims they cannot substantiate in some independent way. That is my view, of course.
It may well stop this "My tune-up is better than his tune-up" knife fights and bitching.
And it is the bitching, infighting and unsubstantiated claims that put people off the whole scene.....
And poor service that's sometimes gets reported..

Des. . .

[carpy]

I'd have to agree that it must be difficult for remap providers to give people a definitive figure of what power / torque they will achieve after a remap. Each car being so different & weaker in some areas than others etc.

I would have thought it would be fairer if the figures claimed are based on the mean average of completed remaps for a particular model. Not exactly achievable in real life and would be open to tinkering if the results are taken from an in-house dyno.

[CTCNetwork]

Hi,

Another word worth bandying about is "Clarity" (and maybe even "Honesty").

It would be good when people put themselves (and their cars) up for a tune-up that their expectations are brought back down to reality.
I know that peoples expectation are raised by what are sometime pretty optimistic figures and results from others cars.
They need to know that x power may not be achievable in their car, that getting their car to x performance could possibly be done but may damage the long term life of the engine (the lean burn as mentioned above perhaps?).

An honest reality check and a lowering of expectations and the disadvantages of this performance route needs to be made clear.

I am sure there are people who have got blown engines or other major issue may not fully have been in receipt of all the facts and information, or that maybe to satisfy their expectations, the tuner has gone over and above that which would be safe to run? Maybe I am wrong, but with people hiding facts and information no one will ever find out.. That is the sad part...

I'll shut my mouth now..

Des. . .

[RiPsTa33]

I have said it before, but why dont all the tuners get together and put there maps on my car on an indie RR, on the same day and i would assume the evidence would be conclusive? And which ever map is the best gets to leave it on my car! ;-)

[PNuT]

its not in the interest of them to have a direct comparison.... unless they come out on top

think of the consequenses to the tuner that comes out bottom of the pile

[CTCNetwork]

Hi,

Originally Posted by PNuT

its not in the interest of them to have a direct comparison.... unless they come out on top

think of the consequenses to the tuner that comes out bottom of the pile

Not necessarily as their map may be on the bottom of the pile in this comparison, but in another it will be on top...

Not every solution is the correct one for every car.

Des. . .

[pigapumbu]

Personally, I feel tuners ought to quote increase in percentage rather than figures. That way, if my car was already 10% below official volvo figures, if the tuner claims to increase by 35%, then I can roughly (as I lick my thumb and stick in the air ), work out if I am getting it or not.

I would like the forum to be open to members giving their view points without getting banned or locked. Whats the point then of a forum thats supposed to share info? But that say, any one being offensive or rude that can't put their company facts forward in an adult way, then they don't need to be around. I rather not read a post that attacks a person and not being constructive of the info.

Last but not least, which tuner is also a personal taste. Much like how I love BMW but many here would hate the car. So if someone likes to use a RICA its up to them. Someday the truth will hit and they will then know what it means to take the car to a tuner that knows what they are doing. In the end, you get what you pay for.

cheers

[PNuT]

Originally Posted by CTCNetwork

Hi,

Not necessarily as their map may be on the bottom of the pile in this comparison, but in another it will be on top...

Not every solution is the correct one for every car.

Des. . .

whilst i agree.... unfortuantly to most the 299bhp verses 288bhp figure is the one thats going to sell remaps....