|
|
18-10-2006, 03:53 PM
|
#41
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 277
|
I have a brand new fuel line magnet, Where do you want me to send it?
__________________
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 04:54 PM
|
#42
|
hello
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,739
|
Stick it to your fridge door and see if it cuts your electricity bill in half!!!
__________________
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 05:19 PM
|
#43
|
hello
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,739
|
As for K and N's, I had a replacement panel filter when I was 17 and it did nothing other than boost my ego and most of that was down to the sticker!!!
In more recent years I've had a K and N cone filter (with cold air kit), all that did was solve the problem of my continually braking airbox mount (feckin thing bolted onto the exhaust manifold) and made alot of noise. It may have gained or lost me a few bhp but its near impossible to feel a difference that small anyway. Either way it was worth it for the induction roar which I thought was cool!!!
The old bolt on filters that replaced the pan on old carb motors would gain you reasonable power asuming the mixture was re-setup correctly. But on modern cars where science has been employed in the development of the air induction system its more likely that you will just feck it all up by changing it from the manufactures specifications. There is a big grey area inbetween the old pan filters and the modern computer designed pulse tuned air boxes of today (my 80's peugeot for example) where its anybodys's guess as to whether they will work or not!!! However an increase in induction roar is pretty much garanteed!!!
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 05:31 PM
|
#44
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,891
|
On my mini, after I rejetted it to suit the filter, it added 5mph and accelerated noticeably quicker (noticeable enough in that I could then beat my mate whereas we were even stevens before). Before I rejetted, after I added the filter, it it lost 10mph - the increased flow allowed by the filter made the carbn too lean.
It was a 1978 1100cc mini clubman saloon and it did 92 mph - verified by Mr Plod.
I imagine most newer cars have an adequately size filter to start with, so the performance benefit is less noticeable.
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 08:22 PM
|
#45
|
Registered User
Country: UK
Location: Weston Super Mare
Occupation: Electrical Engineer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Weston Super Mare
Posts: 6,351
|
anything you do to increase a cars performance is only good for a couple of days till you get used to it again than its back to square one and other mods are required for a 48hour grin
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 08:53 PM
|
#46
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,724
|
well for all you doubting thomas's!
i aquired a magnetic back support....
i suffer quite badly with muscle spasm in my lower back, have done for the last decade...
anyway i normally get some form of back pain every day, wether it be in my lower back or in the form of sciatica in my legs, i have been wearing the back support with 16 high power magnets in all day and feel fecking great, no pain ..... and thats not bullshit either!
i'm amazed
|
|
|
18-10-2006, 09:38 PM
|
#47
|
hello
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,739
|
I never doubted the medical effects of magnets. To be honest I have no opinion on this area at all as I'm not a doctor and I've never tried them.
I only doubted the fuel magnets as I am an engineer and to me things just don't add up!!!
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 07:19 PM
|
#48
|
Registered User
Country: England
Location: Hertfordshire
Occupation: Airline Operations.
Interests: Rum. Pirates. And West Cornwall pasties.
Boat name: Any suggestions?
Boat make: Ring 18
Engines: Mercury 200 Black Max
Cruising area: The Bay of 'E'
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 369
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Gav
well for all you doubting thomas's!
i aquired a magnetic back support....
i have been wearing the back support with 16 high power magnets in all day and feel fecking great, no pain ..... and thats not bullshit either!
i'm amazed
|
Just don't walk too close to either the fridge door or your video collection though!
K&N stickers? They only add 5bhp, whereas as any ChavRacer knows, all the pro's are installing 'NOS' stickers on Peugeot 106 bootlids now, as this adds 50-100 BHP.
__________________
Boat: (Noun) - A hole in the water, lined with fibreglass, into which you pour money.
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 08:32 PM
|
#49
|
Registered User
Country: England
Location: Plymouth
Boat make: Fletcher Arrowflyte
Engines: Mercury 75
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 402
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Gav
well for all you doubting thomas's!
i aquired a magnetic back support....
i suffer quite badly with muscle spasm in my lower back, have done for the last decade...
anyway i normally get some form of back pain every day, wether it be in my lower back or in the form of sciatica in my legs, i have been wearing the back support with 16 high power magnets in all day and feel fecking great, no pain ..... and thats not bullshit either!
i'm amazed
|
I think the operative words here are 'back support'
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 08:42 PM
|
#50
|
Registered User
Country: England
Location: Plymouth
Boat make: Fletcher Arrowflyte
Engines: Mercury 75
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 402
|
On the subject of tuning methods & their non-applicablilty to modern cars, what do the panel think of this:
I can spend £450 & get my car 're-mapped' to give an extra 35ish BHP.
Proven, possible or BS.
If this is the case, why don't the manufacturers fit the remap chip as standard? Especially on a 'performance' version of their cars?
I 'believe' in re-maps; I'm just a bit sceptical of some of the big gains I've seen mentioned without any mechanical changes
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 09:04 PM
|
#51
|
numbskull
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
|
probably fkks the emissions right up
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 09:31 PM
|
#52
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,724
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TheOrs
I think the operative words here are 'back support'
|
its not like a proper back support, its just a strap to hold the magnet patch on my back, the strap is only 2" wide!
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 09:33 PM
|
#53
|
Registered User
Country: England
Location: London
Interests: Extreme Sports, Cars, Boats
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 503
|
is this not similar to boats - why do some companies say they will blueprint it for you when shouldnt it have been made right when you bought it?
|
|
|
21-10-2006, 10:06 PM
|
#54
|
Registered User
Country: England
Location: Hertfordshire
Occupation: Airline Operations.
Interests: Rum. Pirates. And West Cornwall pasties.
Boat name: Any suggestions?
Boat make: Ring 18
Engines: Mercury 200 Black Max
Cruising area: The Bay of 'E'
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 369
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TheOrs
On the subject of tuning methods & their non-applicablilty to modern cars, what do the panel think of this:
I can spend £450 & get my car 're-mapped' to give an extra 35ish BHP.
Proven, possible or BS.
If this is the case, why don't the manufacturers fit the remap chip as standard? Especially on a 'performance' version of their cars?
I 'believe' in re-maps; I'm just a bit sceptical of some of the big gains I've seen mentioned without any mechanical changes
|
No, not BS, but not as good as it sounds.
Car ECU mapping is carefully worked out to provide a good spread of power across all driving conditions and with good fuel economy. It's also carefully calculated to not stress the engine or cause 'fouling' type problems or rough running at certain points in the rev range. Auntie Ethel may not appreciate the extra 15bhp at 5000rpm if her car judders and sputters like crazy on her way to the bowls club.
Re-mapping the ECU simply squeezes more grunt into a narrower rev range, so you can for example have more top-end grunt if you don't mind having no bottom-end acceleration. Fine for the track on a small engine where you're mainly in the top half of the rev range, but crap for the roads.
The emissions don't suffer too badly, as the ECU will constantly monitor the various parameters and adjust accordingly, but manufacturers don't do it because they want their engines to last until the warranty expires, and squeezing more grunt out of them will stress components to a higher level than leaving it stock.
If you do go this route, increasen the frequency of your servicing and for God's sake use decent oil!
To see just how far you can push a roadgoing engine, take a look at Nelson Piquet's Brabham BMW F1 from the early 80s. 1200 BHP from a road-going 4 cylinder 316 BMW block!*
What always amazes me is these twats who buy 'power boost' resistors from Ebay.
It's just a 1/4watt resistor that is inserted into the ECU loom and so 'fools' the engine management into believing that it's running lean and so needs more fuel. The ECU adds more air to compensate, and hey presto! More power. And more fuel consumption. You could of course just save yourself the bother, and put your foot on the pedal harder in the first place.
I 'believe' in re-maps - something good in everything I see'
Abba, wasn't it?
* Linky if you're interested in that kind of thing:
http://www.research-racing.de/bmwturbo.htm
__________________
Boat: (Noun) - A hole in the water, lined with fibreglass, into which you pour money.
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 12:18 AM
|
#55
|
Registered User
Country: UK
Location: Weston Super Mare
Occupation: Electrical Engineer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Weston Super Mare
Posts: 6,351
|
I had my M3 evo chipped and the only thing i noticed was it removed the speed limiter
IMO just having a re map will not have any noticable difference unless of course its a turbo'd motor
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 11:23 AM
|
#56
|
Registered User
Location: Scotland
Interests: Hole maker
Boat make: Humber Ocean Offshore
Engines: KAD 300/DPX
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 958
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Gav
...i suffer quite badly with muscle spasm in my lower back, have done for the last decade...
|
Gav, buy this book. You can also likely get it from a book store near you. The best tenner you'll spend this week.
__________________
JW.
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 11:38 AM
|
#57
|
Registered User
Country: Job Centre
Location: In a box
Occupation: Chaos's gofer
Interests: Skiving
Boat make: Spectre 30
Engines: 2 x Promax 225
Cruising area: In the bath
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a box
Posts: 5,201
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Burnett
To see just how far you can push a roadgoing engine, take a look at Nelson Piquet's Brabham BMW F1 from the early 80s. 1200 BHP from a road-going 4 cylinder 316 BMW block!*
|
They used to use high mileage road car blocks, so's the stresses had been removed!
__________________
Chaos for Moderator.
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 11:43 AM
|
#58
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,891
|
Not sure I agree. A "good" remapping should not have any detriment to the mid range - it's a computer, there's no need to lose on the midrange solely by a software change since yuo don't have any need to adjust the mid points - unless of course, you want to. It's not like the old days of carbs.
Quote:
Originally posted by Burnett
No, not BS, but not as good as it sounds.
Car ECU mapping is carefully worked out to provide a good spread of power across all driving conditions and with good fuel economy. It's also carefully calculated to not stress the engine or cause 'fouling' type problems or rough running at certain points in the rev range. Auntie Ethel may not appreciate the extra 15bhp at 5000rpm if her car judders and sputters like crazy on her way to the bowls club.
Re-mapping the ECU simply squeezes more grunt into a narrower rev range, so you can for example have more top-end grunt if you don't mind having no bottom-end acceleration. Fine for the track on a small engine where you're mainly in the top half of the rev range, but crap for the roads.
The emissions don't suffer too badly, as the ECU will constantly monitor the various parameters and adjust accordingly, but manufacturers don't do it because they want their engines to last until the warranty expires, and squeezing more grunt out of them will stress components to a higher level than leaving it stock.
If you do go this route, increasen the frequency of your servicing and for God's sake use decent oil!
To see just how far you can push a roadgoing engine, take a look at Nelson Piquet's Brabham BMW F1 from the early 80s. 1200 BHP from a road-going 4 cylinder 316 BMW block!*
What always amazes me is these twats who buy 'power boost' resistors from Ebay.
It's just a 1/4watt resistor that is inserted into the ECU loom and so 'fools' the engine management into believing that it's running lean and so needs more fuel. The ECU adds more air to compensate, and hey presto! More power. And more fuel consumption. You could of course just save yourself the bother, and put your foot on the pedal harder in the first place.
I 'believe' in re-maps - something good in everything I see'
Abba, wasn't it?
* Linky if you're interested in that kind of thing:
http://www.research-racing.de/bmwturbo.htm
|
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 12:56 PM
|
#59
|
hello
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,739
|
Can someone explain to me how re mapping a NA car makes more power. Re-mapping can't get any more air into the engine so assuming the manufacturers got the fuel air mix correct across the rev/load range and the knock sensor keeps the ignition timing at its optimum how can changing these fuel and ignition parameters make any more power. The only way I can see is if the manufacturer built in some restriction in the first place and the only way I can think that they would be able to do this is by imposing a rev limit before the maximim power is achieved (Mercury 200XS?). Surely you can't limit power by changing the fuel map as this would make the engine lean or rich. Retarding the timing would work but this would just reduce engine efficiency so with the decrease in power you would get an increase in fuel consumption. Why would any manufacturer do that, the less powerfull models should burn less fuel not more. Less powerfull models would also require some sort of mechanical change such as a smaller throttle housing or a change in cam profile. Again a smaller throttle would limit power but make no difference to fuel economy (other than at WOT) so whats the point. A change in cam profile would move the torque down the rev range increasing efficiency at low revs thus increasing fuel economy and causing the torque to tail of earlier thus reducing maximum power, ideal!!! I've heard people say that their engine is exactly the same as the blah blah blah bhp model just with a different chip, but with the exception of turbo motors (less boost different mapping) I don't generally believe them!!!
|
|
|
22-10-2006, 01:02 PM
|
#60
|
hello
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,739
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Burnett
What always amazes me is these twats who buy 'power boost' resistors from Ebay.
It's just a 1/4watt resistor that is inserted into the ECU loom and so 'fools' the engine management into believing that it's running lean and so needs more fuel. The ECU adds more air to compensate, and hey presto! More power. And more fuel consumption. You could of course just save yourself the bother, and put your foot on the pedal harder in the first place.
|
Those "Power Boosting" resistors just wire in series with the ECU engine temp sensor and so make the ECU think the engine is cold not lean. Cold engines require more fuel (choke) and so the ECU goes into (or rather never gets out of) fuel enrichment mode. So in short it doesn't add more air it just makes the engine run rich. Great if you want it to idle like a bag of poo, pop, bang and burn lots of fuel but shite if you want it to do anything else.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|