Hi guys,

Just wondering if any of you 1.8 TSi owners remapped with Shark software could share your views on the economy changes of the car since the remap?

I fully appreciate that when you put your foot down, the economy will be worse than the standard car will achieve but my interest lies with steady, relaxed driving on the motorway. Does the remap improve this type of driving in terms of achievable economy?

Thanks in advance.

I doesn't get worst. Maybe a little better on city driving if driving normally I would guess because of a better fuel management, but on motorways it's the same but nonthelessthe sheer pleasure of driving makes economy secondary issue

Hi guys,

Just wondering if any of you 1.8 TSi owners remapped with Shark software could share your views on the economy changes of the car since the remap?

I fully appreciate that when you put your foot down, the economy will be worse than the standard car will achieve but my interest lies with steady, relaxed driving on the motorway. Does the remap improve this type of driving in terms of achievable economy?

Thanks in advance.

In the words of Montgomery Scott " You canne change the laws of physics".

The TSIs are direct injection and use stratified combustion technology. You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption. I have an honour degree majoring in Thermodynamics and these laws simply say you cannot get something for nothing.

You can get a EMU remap which will affect boost pressure, ingnition point and a few other variables which will give you more torque and horsepower after the turbocharger (or supercharger/turbo combo) has reached its original full boost pressure but that wiill shortern the life of the engine and possibly powertrain.

VAG spend billions of Euros designing their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

1st law (there is a zeroth, second and third law but this one is most important in this case)

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

save you money for your next car.

Edited 7 December, 201015 yr by lol

So in one word go for remap and enjoy it as life is too short to deal with german doctors and physics saving 300 quid for next a car and rob your self a few years of pleasure driving is the worst investment in current global crisis

Edited 6 December, 201015 yr by CEPi

Mine has stayed roughly the same although I do drive quicker as all that power is quite addictive. My average is 33mpg but that is mostly town driving. On a recent motorway trip from Essex to Gatwick I managed 46mpg.

Thanks very much for the input guys.

In the words of Montgomery Scott " You canne change the laws of physics".

The TSIs are direct injection and use stratified combustion technology. You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption. I have an honour degree majoring in Thermodynamics and these laws simply say you cannot get something for nothing.

You can get a EMU remap which will affect boost pressure, ingnition point and a few other variables which will give you more torque and horsepower after the turbocharger (or supercharger/turbo combo) has reached its original full boost pressure but that wiill shortern the life of the engine and possibly powertrain.

VAG spend billions of Euros designi

ng their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

1st law (there is a zeroth, second and third law but this one is most important in this case)

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

save you money for your next car.

Now there's an amusing post. TSIs do not use stratified combustion (it was dropped ages ago, circa 2006/2007) so all direct injection petrols run in homogeneous mode only.

Secondly, wouldn't you agree that using a higher octane fuel and advancing the timing can give better economy? Obviously not by a massive amount, but it's there.

In the words of Montgomery Scott " You canne change the laws of physics".

The TSIs are direct injection and use stratified combustion technology. You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption. I have an honour degree majoring in Thermodynamics and these laws simply say you cannot get something for nothing.

You can get a EMU remap which will affect boost pressure, ingnition point and a few other variables which will give you more torque and horsepower after the turbocharger (or supercharger/turbo combo) has reached its original full boost pressure but that wiill shortern the life of the engine and possibly powertrain.

VAG spend billions of Euros designing their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

1st law (there is a zeroth, second and third law but this one is most important in this case)

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

save you money for your next car.

A lot of what you say is sound theoretical thermodynamics but you have missed a few important real world effects:

1) Car makers leave power in reserve so that the next model year can have a bit more to give those who stick with the same model a reason to change or to give perceived added value to other models in the range.

2) Energy can neither be created nor destroyed but it can be converted more efficiently - chemical energy in fuel => heat + kinetic energy. If you can reduce the heat generation then you get more kinetic energy from the fuel which means better economy and/or greater performance. Or if you can burn more efficiently you can approach 100% extraction of the chemical energy. Engines are tuned for a particular market by the manufacturer to give the best performance figures in that particular zone's fuel economy tests. So it is enirely feasible that a remap will change the profile so it gives better fuel economy in the real world albeit at the expense of worse economy in the "standard" tests.

VAG spend billions of Euros designing their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

Very interesting view.

If what you say is correct then why have manufacturers (including the VAG group cars) had identicle engines running different levels of power and torque controlled simply by ECU software changes? Look at cars that run the 1.8T unit for example - these were available with 150bhp and 180bhp. The only difference was that VAG saw fit to give the prestige badges an additional 30bhp!

Can a guy with a rolling road and a computer do better than VAG? Firstly, I dont think Ben has a rolling road and secondly, from experience of my last five remaps - I'd have to say very clearly; YES, they can!

VAG may do a good job on the baseline map that is primarily concerned with achieving good fuel economy, low emissions and allowing for different environmental issue ie poor grade of fuel but if you want to make the most of whats under the hood then take it to a reputable mapper.

If you go to a reputable mapper the engine will still have its safety systems enabled and there should be no issues whatsoever. And I havent even touched upon the manufacturers playing extra safe by pulling back the engines capabilites further to avoid any warranty claims/failures within the first 60-100,000 miles. :p

Edited 7 December, 201015 yr by FocusZtec

Very interesting view.

If what you say is correct then why have manufacturers (including the VAG group cars) had identicle engines running different levels of power and torque controlled simply by ECU software changes? Look at cars that run the 1.8T unit for example - these were available with 150bhp and 180bhp. The only difference was that VAG saw fit to give the prestige badges an additional 30bhp!

Can a guy with a rolling road and a computer do better than VAG? Firstly, I dont think Ben has a rolling road and secondly, from experience of my last five remaps - I'd have to say very clearly; YES, they can!

VAG may do a good job on the baseline map that is primarily concerned with achieving good fuel economy, low emissions and allowing for different environmental issue ie poor grade of fuel but if you want to make the most of whats under the hood then take it to a reputable mapper.

If you go to a reputable mapper the engine will still have its safety systems enabled and there should be no issues whatsoever. And I havent even touched upon the manufacturers playing extra safe by pulling back the engines capabilites further to avoid any warranty claims/failures within the first 60-100,000 miles. :p

+1

There are people on here with cars with 100k plus miles with a remap who have no problems whatsoever.

It boils down to not how much power the car is necessarily producing, but how you drive it on a daily basis IMO. Most times my car gets driven respectfully and carfully, and mostly just up and down the motorway. I do put my foot down but not for long periods of time so its not exactly going to ruin the engine. Obviously if you flog the tits of it anywhere and everywhere you may encounter come problems but you would really have to kill it!

Secondly you are correct, if you go to a good tuner who have spent some time developing their software to match the engine you should encounter no problems. I think my car runs better under normal driving conditions with the Shark map that it did with the factory one!

Just my opinion of course people

A lot of what you say is sound theoretical thermodynamics but you have missed a few important real world effects:

1) Car makers leave power in reserve so that the next model year can have a bit more to give those who stick with the same model a reason to change or to give perceived added value to other models in the range.

2) Energy can neither be created nor destroyed but it can be converted more efficiently - chemical energy in fuel => heat + kinetic energy. If you can reduce the heat generation then you get more kinetic energy from the fuel which means better economy and/or greater performance. Or if you can burn more efficiently you can approach 100% extraction of the chemical energy. Engines are tuned for a particular market by the manufacturer to give the best performance figures in that particular zone's fuel economy tests. So it is enirely feasible that a remap will change the profile so it gives better fuel economy in the real world albeit at the expense of worse economy in the "standard" tests.

Sorry don't believe it. Torque can be tweaked via playing with mapping to increase boost pressure here and there. Those VAG engine that quote 210 hp (Audii, SEAT, VW) instead of 200 hp (Skoda) is so small to matter. Those 2 litre TSIs engine that produce 265hp etc are different than this EA888 engines. But it is deviating from VAG spec. Octavia FL TSi has higher top speed than A3, Golf and Leon.

If the engine is burning the fuel completely ie low CO then it is as effeceint as it can get. I am wondering if I anyone has done remapping on the 1.8 TSI DSG to keep with 250 MN that 7 speed gearbox is limited to. But probably will never do it. Rather change the car and keep to the manufactures spec, I just feel safer that way than tinkering with perfection!

Edited 7 December, 201015 yr by lol

While I am pro remaps and will probably get a Shark one myself once my car is out of warranty, there can be more than just an ECU change involved by the manufacturer for different power levels. I believe the 170 bhp tune of the 2 litre diesel has a better turbo than the 140 bhp version, for example.

Sorry don't believe it. Torque can be tweaked via playing with mapping to increase boost pressure here and there. Those VAG engine that quote 210 hp (Audii, SEAT, VW) instead of 200 hp (Skoda) is so small to matter. Those 2 litre TSIs engine that produce 265hp etc are different than this EA888 engines. But it is deviating from VAG spec. Octavia FL TSi has higher top speed than A3, Golf and Leon.

If the engine is burning the fuel completely ie low CO then it is as effeceint as it can get. I am wondering if I anyone has done remapping on the 1.8 TSI DSG to keep with 250 MN that 7 speed gearbox is limited to. But probably will never do it. Rather change the car and keep to the manufactures spec, I just feel safer that way than tinkering with perfection!

But the engine doesn't burn the fuel completely - if it did we wouldn't need a catalytic convertor in the exhaust to remove CO and unburnt Hydrocarbons.

Very interesting view.

If what you say is correct then why have manufacturers (including the VAG group cars) had identicle engines running different levels of power and torque controlled simply by ECU software changes? Look at cars that run the 1.8T unit for example - these were available with 150bhp and 180bhp. The only difference was that VAG saw fit to give the prestige badges an additional 30bhp!

Can a guy with a rolling road and a computer do better than VAG? Firstly, I dont think Ben has a rolling road and secondly, from experience of my last five remaps - I'd have to say very clearly; YES, they can!

VAG may do a good job on the baseline map that is primarily concerned with achieving good fuel economy, low emissions and allowing for different environmental issue ie poor grade of fuel but if you want to make the most of whats under the hood then take it to a reputable mapper.

If you go to a reputable mapper the engine will still have its safety systems enabled and there should be no issues whatsoever. And I havent even touched upon the manufacturers playing extra safe by pulling back the engines capabilites further to avoid any warranty claims/failures within the first 60-100,000 miles. :p

I'd like to make a point from another perspective and ask why you would need the extra power when driving on a public road?

A more powerful engine will only only improve in two areas: maximum speed and acceleration. All Octavias are easily capable of speeds well in excess of what's safe on a public road, so that only leaves acceleration.

Ask yourself, how often do I need to use that acceleration? If the answer is, quite a lot, then might I suggest that you need to look at your driving style. Excessive acceleration is a close relative of excessive braking. Better observation and anticipation will improve both of these to the point they make less of a difference to overall progress - if you don't slow down as much, you don't need to accelarate as hard. In other words: poor drivers need more powerful cars to make up for their shortcomings. If you really want to enjoy your driving more, you need to look at tweaking the most important bit of any car - the driver.

Harsh, but true.

In the words of Montgomery Scott " You canne change the laws of physics".

The TSIs are direct injection and use stratified combustion technology. You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption. I have an honour degree majoring in Thermodynamics and these laws simply say you cannot get something for nothing.

You can get a EMU remap which will affect boost pressure, ingnition point and a few other variables which will give you more torque and horsepower after the turbocharger (or supercharger/turbo combo) has reached its original full boost pressure but that wiill shortern the life of the engine and possibly powertrain.

VAG spend billions of Euros designing their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

1st law (there is a zeroth, second and third law but this one is most important in this case)

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

save you money for your next car.

What a load of tosh!....emissions standardisation across ranges, government interference, legislation and crappy fuel in barely civilised nations....that's what drives the factory maps! 200K miles on 2 remapped cars and not so much as a squeak from the effects of mapping, only things replaced were the usual, mafs and temp sensors....never so much as a coil pack replaced

Oh and far as the Drs in Wolfsburg...they got it wrong me fine tune with the DPF on the PD170's....even re-thinking the mapper the fact and ( sneakily) applying mapping mapping 'fixes' to reduce the power to 155bhp your boffins don't look so clever now do they!

Edited 7 December, 201015 yr by The Skud

In the words of Montgomery Scott " You canne change the laws of physics".

The TSIs are direct injection and use stratified combustion technology. You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption. I have an honour degree majoring in Thermodynamics and these laws simply say you cannot get something for nothing.

You can get a EMU remap which will affect boost pressure, ingnition point and a few other variables which will give you more torque and horsepower after the turbocharger (or supercharger/turbo combo) has reached its original full boost pressure but that wiill shortern the life of the engine and possibly powertrain.

VAG spend billions of Euros designing their engines. If they want more power they design more in to it like the TSI Audi engines with variable valve timing. Please think it through; can guys with a rolling road and a computer do better than the Drs of engineering at Wolfsburg? Yes you can get a few more hp but at what cost? Want a quicker VAG car buy a Cupra R etc. I love our 3 Octys but remapping is playing Russian roulette with your engine unless you are as very very knowledgable and get truly understand what the mapping is doing pyscially to the engine designed to do ie work within set parameters and not be being messed with. You get out what you put in, especially in a standard condition ie same engine.

1st law (there is a zeroth, second and third law but this one is most important in this case)

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

save you money for your next car.

Interesting post, unfortunately I have to disagree with most of it.

These engines use homogenous injection, and not stratified injection. VAG quit using stratified injection almost immediately after TFSI engines were launched, about 2005 or 2006. Stratified injection works very well in theory, but unfortunately reality gets in its way (mostly fuel quality issues and NOx emissions).

As you must know, the thermodynamic efficiency of burning fuel in an Otto cycle is very very poor, so there is plenty of space for improvement. Did you know, that at some points, the theoretic optimum ignition angle is almost 15 degrees more than actual used ignition angle. There are plenty of reasons for this, mostly they are emissions related.

When you say boost pressure, ignition point and "few other variables" it seems clear that you dont really appreciate the complexity of a modern engine controller. TSI controller has a TC1796 TriCore processor with a built-in physics model, and has over 9000 maps and variables it uses. Just the technical documentation for MED17 controller is almost 14000 pages of flowcharts. I dont think that counts as a "few variables". There's no such thing as a boost map on these cars.

Thats why choosing if and where to get your car remapped is a big decision. God doesn't throw dice (A. Einstein), and neither should you. I'm more than comfortable on explaining the physics behind our remaps, and how it really does improve your fuel efficiency.

Also, when you compare our work to the engineers at Wolfsburg (actually, most R&D for the engine management systems isn't done there...), you forget that they have the laws of economics to understand as well. Early 1.4TSI engines have over 15 software update revisions by the manufacturers, all of them are just bug fixes.

But, to get back to the point. You said, "You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption.". Are you saying that the efficiency of the burning process is constant?

The changes we do with our remaps produce the same torque output with less amount of load, because we optimise the burning process on low/middle throttle inputs by changing the ignition point, changing the enrichment factors for throttle pedal position, modifying spark intensity, just to give a few examples. Less amount of load means less fuel injected, and less fuel injected means less fuel consumed. This means, that the efficiency(I'm talking about burnt fuel->travelled distance efficiency...) is better. With our burning process, more energy is transformed into kinetic energy (that is, moving the piston), and as you pointed out, amount of energy is constant, it just changes form, it means that there's less heat produced as well. So on normal driving, the thermal load of the combustion chamber is actually lower.

There are plenty of reasons why the manufacturer don't do this.

First of them are emissions. To meet up the very very strict emissions norms, you have to keep the catalyst above a certain temperature. Thats why they sacrifice a bit of that potential kinetic energy into thermal energy. These emissions aren't measured on the normal MOT test, they are mostly NOx emissions.

Second reason I might use as an example is the average user. Manufacturers need to make sure, that even the cars with worst possible maintenance still can run day in day out. We assume people will take normal care of their car according to the maintenance program after a remap, use good quality oils and fuel, and generally look after their car, as they should.

We have spent very very long hours on developing the modifications we do for these cars. You have to remember when comparing the billions used by VAG at initial development, we are modifying the original data, we don't have to develop it from scratch. But when doing these modifications one must fully understand the control system, the engine, and laws of physics, "For nature cannot be fooled" (Richard P. Feynman).

Edited 7 December, 201015 yr by shark_tech

Superb explanation. Well done!

Interesting post, unfortunately I have to disagree with most of it.

These engines use homogenous injection, and not stratified injection. VAG quit using stratified injection almost immediately after TFSI engines were launched, about 2005 or 2006. Stratified injection works very well in theory, but unfortunately reality gets in its way (mostly fuel quality issues and NOx emissions).

As you must know, the thermodynamic efficiency of burning fuel in an Otto cycle is very very poor, so there is plenty of space for improvement. Did you know, that at some points, the theoretic optimum ignition angle is almost 15 degrees more than actual used ignition angle. There are plenty of reasons for this, mostly they are emissions related.

When you say boost pressure, ignition point and "few other variables" it seems clear that you dont really appreciate the complexity of a modern engine controller. TSI controller has a TC1796 TriCore processor with a built-in physics model, and has over 9000 maps and variables it uses. Just the technical documentation for MED17 controller is almost 14000 pages of flowcharts. I dont think that counts as a "few variables". There's no such thing as a boost map on these cars.

Thats why choosing if and where to get your car remapped is a big decision. God doesn't throw dice (A. Einstein), and neither should you. I'm more than comfortable on explaining the physics behind our remaps, and how it really does improve your fuel efficiency.

Also, when you compare our work to the engineers at Wolfsburg (actually, most R&D for the engine management systems isn't done there...), you forget that they have the laws of economics to understand as well. Early 1.4TSI engines have over 15 software update revisions by the manufacturers, all of them are just bug fixes.

But, to get back to the point. You said, "You put so much fuel in and so much air in and get so much power out. Mapping does and cannot do anything to improve fuel consumption.". Are you saying that the efficiency of the burning process is constant?

The changes we do with our remaps produce the same torque output with less amount of load, because we optimise the burning process on low/middle throttle inputs by changing the ignition point, changing the enrichment factors for throttle pedal position, modifying spark intensity, just to give a few examples. Less amount of load means less fuel injected, and less fuel injected means less fuel consumed. This means, that the efficiency(I'm talking about burnt fuel->travelled distance efficiency...) is better. With our burning process, more energy is transformed into kinetic energy (that is, moving the piston), and as you pointed out, amount of energy is constant, it just changes form, it means that there's less heat produced as well. So on normal driving, the thermal load of the combustion chamber is actually lower.

There are plenty of reasons why the manufacturer don't do this.

First of them are emissions. To meet up the very very strict emissions norms, you have to keep the catalyst above a certain temperature. Thats why they sacrifice a bit of that potential kinetic energy into thermal energy. These emissions aren't measured on the normal MOT test, they are mostly NOx emissions.

Second reason I might use as an example is the average user. Manufacturers need to make sure, that even the cars with worst possible maintenance still can run day in day out. We assume people will take normal care of their car according to the maintenance program after a remap, use good quality oils and fuel, and generally look after their car, as they should.

We have spent very very long hours on developing the modifications we do for these cars. You have to remember when comparing the billions used by VAG at initial development, we are modifying the original data, we don't have to develop it from scratch. But when doing these modifications one must fully understand the control system, the engine, and laws of physics, "For nature cannot be fooled" (Richard P. Feynman).

===========================================================================================================================

Very length sales blurb and without a single fact pertaining to engine data backing up claims of ability to improve thermal effeciency without side effects Burning effeciency is almost 100% efficeint across all the useable engine range. There are issues of setting up engine on test beds and rolling roads as they are in lab conditions and not real road conditions ie often the Cat is running at a far lower temperature than normal operating conditions and hence emmissions are not what they should be when you are crawling on the M25 at 5 mph.

You may be able to convince some of the people some of the time with the smoke and mirrors but not me I am convince one bit. I use to work for Piper in the eighties and also hold an honours BSc at 2:1 level. You did not mentioned your qualifations. You are clear not dim though. Improving the Otto engine can be achieved by higher temperatures and/or higher compression ratio, as in a diesel has but I am no diesel fan in performance cars. Thanks for taking the time to write the above, I am sure it was not for my benefit but for others. If I can be so bold as to offer some advice. I suggest you focus on off road vehicles ie production racing or the like as I am almost certain that the EU will eventual make road car mapping difficult if not impossible. Having spent some time investigating road accidents car moding has been one of the contributing factors and subsequently affected people's licences and lives. What you do is no doubt fun and profitable but personally I would prefer it is left to automotive designers and not aftermarket sales for road cars and mcs where my family and I are driving on the same roads and walking on the pavements. As i said when I was in my twenties I modified motorcycles and did a degree placement at an aftermarket rolling road engineers but the vehicles are more complex now and the roads busier so best leave these things alone IMHO.

Edited 9 December, 201015 yr by lol

===========================================================================================================================

Very length sales blurb and without a single fact pertaining to engine data backing up claims of ability to improve thermal effeciency without side effects. Burning effeciency is almost 100% efficeint across all the useable engine range. There are issues of setting up engine on test beds and rolling roads as they are in lab conditions and not real road conditions ie often the Cat is running at a far lower temperature than normal operating conditions and hence emmissions are not what they should be when you are crawling on the M25 at 5 mph.

You may be able to convince some of the people some of the time with the smoke and mirrors but not me, I am not convinced one bit. I used to work for Piper in the eighties and also hold an honours BSc at 2:1 level. You did not mentioned your qualifations. You are clearly not dim though. Improving the Otto engine can be achieved by higher temperatures and/or higher compression ratio, as in a diesel, has but I am no diesel fan in performance cars. Thanks for taking the time to write the above, I am sure it was not for my benefit but for others. If I can be so bold as to offer some advice. I suggest you focus on off road vehicles, ie production racing or the like as I am almost certain that the EU will eventually make road car mapping difficult if not impossible. Having spent some time investigating road accidents, car modifying has been one of the contributing factors and subsequently affected people's licences and lives. What you do is no doubt fun and profitable but personally I would prefer it is left to automotive designers and not aftermarket sales for road cars and mcs where my family and I are driving on the same roads and walking on the pavements. As i said when I was in my twenties I modified motorcycles and did a degree placement at an aftermarket rolling road engineers but the vehicles are more complex now and the roads busier so best leave these things alone IMHO. Also, did i mention i have a degree

Im bored, noticed you were being pretty pedantic, and couldn't help noticed you were bigging yourself up about your 2-1 degree, obviously its not in English, so i took the liberty of just highlighting some(not all) of your basic grammatical errors in the above post. Obviously you were to busy informing people of your academic superiority over them.

No more replies from me now.

Good night, much love

Terry tibbs

Edited 10 December, 201015 yr by janner_Sy

All I can say is "I have an headache" from reading this thread and all he asked 'did anybody have a remap'

Edited 10 December, 201015 yr by DLW

===========================================================================================================================

You may be able to convince some of the people some of the time with the smoke and mirrors but not me I am convince one bit. I use to work for Piper in the eighties and also hold an honours BSc at 2:1 level. You did not mentioned your qualifications.

We don't use smoke or mirrors. You will find if you cared to look that we are infact probably the most open tuner on the market. We're happy to show what we're doing and why, perhaps if you'd like to come and see us we could go through your ECU map with you and explain how it works, where we modify it and why.

I am quite offended by your approach and suggesting we use "smoke and mirrors" is not a fair statement at all.

What you do is no doubt fun and profitable but personally I would prefer it is left to automotive designers and not aftermarket sales for road cars and mcs where my family and I are driving on the same roads and walking on the pavements. As i said when I was in my twenties I modified motorcycles and did a degree placement at an aftermarket rolling road engineers but the vehicles are more complex now and the roads busier so best leave these things alone IMHO.

If anyone calls us from Worcestershire I'll be sure to tell them that we can't remap their car, because someone with a degree would prefer it if we didn't.

'Anyone had 1.8 TSi much past 140 mph on speedo/GSP? Mine is a DSG ie tall geared in 7th, is it better in 6th?' Quote from lol's last post on here and numerous posts about remaps so why clutter the OP's thread with what amounts to trolling? as far as LOL's comments regarding driving at over 140mph, be it in the UK or Germany are you sure that your driving abilities / reaction times match that of the car? .....having investigated accidents you will know that the major cause of accidents is driver error and /or inexperience and I'm guessing that your experience of controlling a car moving at twice the UK limit is somwhat limited........

My Past experience of remapped cars though, not the 1.8TSI unfortunately, they are heavier on fuel when you boot it, when up to speed and on the motorway ( at 70MPH) they tend to be the same or marginally better as you don't often need to drop down a gear due to the extra torque available also around town you'll tend to find that you will hold a lower gear as again the extra torque allows you to drive it a bit like a diesel even though it's a petrol, one thing you will fiat the smiles per gallon go up 10 fold!!

Hope that this helps, as most of this thread has been little help to you

===========================================================================================================================

As i said when I was in my twenties I modified motorcycles and did a degree placement at an aftermarket rolling road engineers but the vehicles are more complex now and the roads busier so best leave these things alone IMHO.

If vehicles have become more complex since you did your degree placement then clearly they are more complex than when you did your degree. I agree - you had best leave them alone as by your own admission you don't understand them now.

LOL - when you find yourself in a hole, the best thing to do is to stop digging.

'Anyone had 1.8 TSi much past 140 mph on speedo/GSP? Mine is a DSG ie tall geared in 7th, is it better in 6th?' Quote from lol's last post on here and numerous posts about remaps so why clutter the OP's thread with what amounts to trolling? as far as LOL's comments regarding driving at over 140mph, be it in the UK or Germany are you sure that your driving abilities / reaction times match that of the car? .....having investigated accidents you will know that the major cause of accidents is driver error and /or inexperience and I'm guessing that your experience of controlling a car moving at twice the UK limit is somwhat limited........

My Past experience of remapped cars though, not the 1.8TSI unfortunately, they are heavier on fuel when you boot it, when up to speed and on the motorway ( at 70MPH) they tend to be the same or marginally better as you don't often need to drop down a gear due to the extra torque available also around town you'll tend to find that you will hold a lower gear as again the extra torque allows you to drive it a bit like a diesel even though it's a petrol, one thing you will fiat the smiles per gallon go up 10 fold!!

Hope that this helps, as most of this thread has been little help to you

Thank you!

I only asked about fuel consumption on a mapped car

As someone who isnt even currently a customer of Bens, I also dislike the 'smoke and mirrors' comment.

Ive spoke to two tuners who specialise in remaps over the last two weeks. One of them is very big, the other was Ben @ Shark (Ben, sorry if that makes you sound like the new boy on the block) :p

One of them spent their time slating their competition and gave out a rather 'holier than though' attitude, along the way making several incorrect assumptions about their competitors equipment and its abilities (or lack of!) and making several incorrect statements as to what their software actually did to my cars ECU and how it worked generally!

On the other hand, Ben spent time asking me about the vehicle, answering specific questions about the vehicle and the maps *realistic* abilities, why they map the car like they do and how they map ie how they get the gains.

Ive spent plenty of time PM'ing, forum searching and talking to people with first hand experience of both the above tuners on a few different forums now and even though Shark are a three hours drive for me (the other tuner is 50 mins away), the product prices are comparable and Sharks figures are somewhat more 'realistic', should we say, I would still wholeheartedly go with Shark now.

So far, Ive gathered that technically they know what they are doing and secondly; the customer is king! Those to me are the two most important ingredients for a company to be a very succesful one!

Edited 10 December, 201015 yr by FocusZtec

Nice to have some lively debate.

Good to hear people say Shark is the best in the UK, not sure a very good choice of a business name but there you go. Need to update you website as still showing Top Gear show, perferred the Bike Show myself.

If I was going to get a remap, though as said I would probably change the car to achieve that rather than remap so the brakes and suspension matched the increased power, I would probably get it done in Germany where I find the information provided by the remappers is more informative. German mappers for a German engine.

Apologies for the earlier spelling mistakes, English was not my degree, English is an Arts degree not a Science degree. Arts degrees available of a roll on the wall in the smallest room for wiping one's A"".

Keep up the passion, a few more facts would be nice though rather than hyperbole!

Edited 12 December, 201015 yr by lol