Considering getting superb mapped

[chimaera]

1 hour ago, TasMan said:

 

Your remap sounds like a good result...!  I assume your car is 2WD ?  If I go down the route of remap I will definitely be wanting before and after dyno runs.

Probably a silly question:-

Most companies claim improved MPG and most folk who have had a remap report this to be the case.....will any improvement be reflected on the readings on the MFD, or will this only be apparent by actual measurement of fuel used V mileage ?  Given the fuel is being metered by the ECU, I can only assume the MFD will reflect the revised MPG after remap ?

 

 

 

 

Yes, the MFD gets its data from the ECU to calculate fuel usage and therefore economy. The general experience with VAG cars is that the MFD is always optimistic. On my Superb it's showing economy about 14 % better than actual (I reset the MFD 2 every time I refill and compare the average from that to the brim-brim calculation from the refill). On my old Passat, stock it was about the same. After I had the Passat remapped the error went out to about 35 % - whatever the remap changed had an effect on the data reported to the MFD.

That being said, actual economy did improve under light load conditions. How much of an improvement you see will depend on how much of the extra power you use - it can be hard not to use it

 

47 minutes ago, Zukabak said:

I got the standard 'Awesome TDI - Stage 1' map with dyno runs before/after included on my CR170 DSG..either Awesome's dyno is under reading a little, or my car was pushing out less than expected as stock.. which is possible, but VAGs normally achieve a little more than advertised 'out of the box'.

Even so my results were:

Stock: 161bhp @ 4.2k   -  266ftlb @ 1.9k
Mapped: 196bhp @ 3.9k  - 305ftlb @ 2.3k 

So a 35bhp & 39ftlb torque increase.. I'm not one for 'number chasing, but I must admit, I was expecting a little bit more torque out of the remap. It's certainly made a nice difference though, seems a lot smoother to drive, which is quite impressive considering it was pretty bloody smooth to begin with!

Also had a Whiteline ARB fitted too, which has really improved the handling.. removed the 'wallowing' feeling when pushing the ol' boat into corners!

 

It used to be that VAG always quoted power outputs at the axle in their literature which lead to the belief that they produce more that advertised - axle figures are going to be lower than crank, so when a dyno measures at the crank it'll be higher. Anecdotally in recent years it seems like they've moved towards crank figures or something inbetween in the literature, leading to dyno results that may be less than expected.

 

Are your figures at the crank or the wheels/axle? For an off-the-shelf remap those figures are quite good. Custom would get you a little bit more, and more control over how it changes. If you have the dyno plot, would you mind posting the before/after here? It would be interesting to see how it changed throughout the rev range.

[chimaera]

27 minutes ago, TLV said:

Surely the DPF gets more of a load with a remap since the fueling with a remap is made richer. I'm thinking of remapping my 105, but thought if I had that done, perhaps get rid of the DPF and EGR at the same time. Haven't had problems with either, never even an active regen. I live quite far from everywhere, so all my drives are long and I rarely sit in traffic. Should be quite healthy for the car. Have you guys had any issues in that department?

A good remap shouldn't create any additional smoke, so there shouldn't be any extra load on the DPF. Your driving sounds like there's plenty of opportunity for passive regens so you shouldn't run into trouble.

[Zukabak]

27 minutes ago, chimaera said:

It used to be that VAG always quoted power outputs at the axle in their literature which lead to the belief that they produce more that advertised - axle figures are going to be lower than crank, so when a dyno measures at the crank it'll be higher. Anecdotally in recent years it seems like they've moved towards crank figures or something inbetween in the literature, leading to dyno results that may be less than expected.

 

Are your figures at the crank or the wheels/axle? For an off-the-shelf remap those figures are quite good. Custom would get you a little bit more, and more control over how it changes. If you have the dyno plot, would you mind posting the before/after here? It would be interesting to see how it changed throughout the rev range.

Thanks Chimaera, useful info.

Photo's below, apologies for the quick 'n dirty shot but I was outside in the sunshine

According to Awesome, their dyno output's measured at the wheels. No idea if that's good/bad etc, but from reading your post it means it might explain why they don't show as 'high' as expected, if figures being banded about are usually at the crank?

[chimaera]

That looks pretty good. Aside from the peak gains, your torque curve is smoother now so the power delivery will be a bit more progressive.

 

When I had my old car remapped, the peak power only went up 11 bhp but it developed more power across a much wider rev range than before which made the car much more flexible on the road.

[psycholist]

The remap figures for my 2011 car are flywheel figures and it was, IIRC delivering 169 bhp (Slightly better than the 170 PS (167.7 bhp) it's officially rated at - this is another source of confusion PS and bhp are very similar units, but not the same) before any update. My previous 2005 Octavia 105 PD was at 122 bhp before remapping, so 105 PS at the wheels is believable. Both cars were remapped by the same person and tested on the same rolling road. The rolling road was calibrated for driveline losses by driving the car to a set speed and then letting the speed freewheel down to measure the deceleration due to the components between the engine and the rollers.

 

Based on other posts I've seen, 200 bhp at the flywheel can end up being more like 170 at the wheels, so if your figures power and torque at the wheels you've done extremely well. Since the legend on the graph says max clutch power and I've never seen anyone claim to get significantly beyond 100 bhp/litre without swapping out turbos or other hardware on the CR170 engine though, I suspect you're looking at flywheel figures.

Edited 24 March, 2017 by psycholist

[Zukabak]

14 minutes ago, psycholist said:

The remap figures for my 2011 car are flywheel figures and it was, IIRC delivering 169 bhp (Slightly better than the 170 PS (167.7 bhp) it's officially rated at - this is another source of confusion PS and bhp are very similar units, but not the same) before any update. My previous 2005 Octavia 105 PD was at 122 bhp before remapping, so 105 PS at the wheels is believable. Both cars were remapped by the same person and tested on the same rolling road. The rolling road was calibrated for driveline losses by driving the car to a set speed and then letting the speed freewheel down to measure the deceleration due to the components between the engine and the rollers.

 

Based on other posts I've seen, 200 bhp at the flywheel can end up being more like 170 at the wheels, so if your figures power and torque at the wheels you've done extremely well. Since the legend on the graph says max clutch power and I've never seen anyone claim to get significantly beyond 100 bhp/litre without swapping out turbos or other hardware on the CR170 engine though, I suspect you're looking at flywheel figures.

I'll drop them an email and check.. as I say, I'm not really bothered about the actual numbers (although obviously I want to see an improvement for my cash!), so I wasn't chasing figures, just a more 'drivable' car.

[psycholist]

Looking at the torque curve in particular, I reckon you won't be disappointed with driveability . Once you're over 2000 rpm it should pull like a train - it will spin the wheels in 2nd and even 3rd in wet conditions (1st is a dead loss for hard acceleration wet or dry even without the remap) if you're not paying attention pulling hard away from a stop or through roundabouts. It's well worth getting the limited slip differential (XRD in VW abbreviation speak I think) activated with VCDS if you don't have it on already as it reduces the problem of one tyre breaking traction and all the acceleration being lost. With nothing done but the remap and with very good tyres I'd need to change to a 4WD Superb before any further power increases are justified.

Edited 24 March, 2017 by psycholist

[Zukabak]

Update - Mailed Awesome for clarification re: the output.

Their dyno can output either wheel or flywheel (referred as 'clutch' on the Dynojet) power depending on the customer's request.
I didn't specify a preference, so was given the default flywheel option.

XDS, Hill-Hold and Big MPH are options I'll be looking to enable this weekend!

[TLV]

The only way to get real engine power figures is to do an engine dyno, which involves taking the engine out of the car. When remapping, power is measured off the wheels with rollers. Dynos display both engine and wheel power, but it calculates engine power by deducting drivetrain losses from the dyno result. How much is deducted is a generic percentage, different dynos may use slightly varying numbers. The approximation is considered accurate enough. Since 4WD cars have more drivetrain thus more drivetrain losses, they end up with less power reaching the wheels compared to a 2WD car from the engine. How much gets to the ground through the tires is a separate topic.

 

Universally given figures are off the engine, not the wheels because the numbers are bigger and bigger means better. If anyone asks how much horsepower your car makes, you'd rather tell them it makes 200hp rather than 160hp.

[Joelliott]

Most of the responses are about the diesel Bs. What about the petrol 1.8s?

 

im picking a 2012 tsi and would love to have it tuned. I'm going from a smaller Nissan w 205 hp to a heavier B w the standard 160. A quick google search shows a good tune can get the tsi up to 205hp. And I'm hoping for a bit more tq off the line. Any tips?

[TLV]

Turbo petrols gain around as much as turbo diesels gain from remapping. Check with your favored remapper for dyno graph examples.

[Jonny5ive]

On 18/03/2017 at 19:54, Fishcann said:

Looking for someone to do a remap in the SW and I noticed TSR Performance are just 5 minutes away and have a good reputation but they only do REVO maps and I've never heard of them before, has anyone had any experience of them? Think that I'll end up travelling to have it done but I'd be happier if it were somewhere local in Somerset,Devon area.

If they're still about, check out Turner Race Developments in Stroud. They built and mapped my mk1 Fabia after standard turbo went pop. 

[Kiwi 5UPERB]

On 3/18/2017 at 18:57, Wile7 said:

I want to do this (remap) on my 3.6 petrol....anyone reading this recommend any tuning firms in the south of the UK (sorry lads, driving over from Switzerland so as much as that Glasgow fella sounds brilliant it's just too far for me.....).

 

Dave 

I had a DNA Greenline stage 1 several years ago on the 3.6 - made a massive difference to driveability.  www.dnatuning.com   Torque was the most notable difference - happily sits in 6th all day, but if you need to put your put down the power difference is VERY noticeable.  Driving the remap car back to back with a standard is chalk and cheese.

[psycholist]

On 3/24/2017 at 16:10, TLV said:

The only way to get real engine power figures is to do an engine dyno, which involves taking the engine out of the car. When remapping, power is measured off the wheels with rollers. Dynos display both engine and wheel power, but it calculates engine power by deducting drivetrain losses from the dyno result. How much is deducted is a generic percentage, different dynos may use slightly varying numbers. The approximation is considered accurate enough. Since 4WD cars have more drivetrain thus more drivetrain losses, they end up with less power reaching the wheels compared to a 2WD car from the engine. How much gets to the ground through the tires is a separate topic.

 

Universally given figures are off the engine, not the wheels because the numbers are bigger and bigger means better. If anyone asks how much horsepower your car makes, you'd rather tell them it makes 200hp rather than 160hp.

Most dynos do better than just deducting an arbitrary percentage to convert wheel power to flywheel power. On the dyno my cars were tested on the car is first driven to a speed requested by the dyno, then it is taken out of gear and allowed to coast. The rate it loses speed gives a pretty good measure of the drivetrain loss.

[Fishcann]

Got a rather pleasant surprise when I rang my insurers today (LV) to see what the increase in my premium would be once it's remapped and they said no change!

On reflection the warranty runs out in June but I don't think I'm going to wait till then, it's last trip to the dealers is next week then I'm getting it done. Only troubling thing that I've heard is that Skoda may have locked my OBD port when the did the 'FIX' and that means ECU out and an extra £100 for the pleasure. Seems a few cars in the VAG group have suffered the same fate, thanks Skoda, for making my car worse and costing me more to rectify it! 

[jafo]

Do you have 3 or 5 years warranty? If only 3 - you should be able to buy extra 2.

[zice]

I remapped mine and totally happy with it. It feels like a different car, not just pulling away (pure torque), but also feels more solid for some reason. Gear changes seem faster too.

Due to high torque i find myself really fast in 6th gear in city driving. Highway acceleration almost skips 5th gear, revs 4th almost to redline, changes 5th for a short bit and straight away to 6th, don't feel an interruption in pulling though...

 

It's a 4x4 DSG 140PS/320NM, now supposedly around 177PS/395NM. Done by Upsolute ECU remap.

Joy to drive.

Edited 10 May, 2017 by zice