View The Full Version : Remapping, performance or consumption
Hearing about the programming of ecus, mi ? happened to pi? times of hearing that, according to the requests of the client, you can create mappings to give priority to the power increase or the reduction of energy consumption.
I never figured out if this ? an urban legend or if there are actually two completely different ways to change the ecu.
Someone can? give me explanations and possibly confirmations on this?
Thanks! :)
msport (exil77grande)
29-11-2012, 15:37
Hearing about the programming of ecus, mi ? happened to pi? times of hearing that, according to the requests of the client, you can create mappings to give priority to the power increase or the reduction of energy consumption.
I never figured out if this ? an urban legend or if there are actually two completely different ways to change the ecu.
Someone can? give me explanations and possibly confirmations on this?
Thanks! :)
well let's just say that ottimizando the parameters in a targeted manner you can create a map, soft and at the same pace as compared to the original configuration would definitely have a drop in consumption, apart from a provision more pleasant,instead, in the case of a request by the customer of a mapping more powerful certainly will not preserve any consumption but have consistently superior performance and drive much more aggressive in all situations,it is only to change the map according to what you want to achieve.
but even with the map soft when you push on the accelerator, the fuel consumption will always be higher than the original??or no??
msport (exil77grande)
29-11-2012, 21:33
but even with the map soft when you push on the accelerator, the fuel consumption will always be higher than the original??or no??
of course, but also from the original if it stresses the machine consumes more or no?
you may not have the barrel full and the wife drunk.
but then the story with a mapping of the consumption decrease is not ? true 100%
and of course it always depends on who's driving the car to know how to manage it with the foot, but if one, like me, that c'? the heavy
a remap will not improve things indeed.
magi1984
29-11-2012, 23:20
in principle, if not crushing it has a slight savings. Certain ? that, a priori, the car should not smoke, the black smoke ? diesel fuel unburned, then gi? what ? symptom of consumption is high according to me!
To me have explained cos?, take it with pliers:
The ragioanmento me ? seemed correct, even if they have not been considered in the enormit? of parameters, and variables, to find a map or in the same path! It is very ideal as a concept but according to me makes the idea.
I don't think you reduce everything to a question of "load" also, if a given relationship to those laps and with those horses are tot km-h invariando all the factors, relationships, and the engine rpm because with more hp should do more km-h? and at the same time consume less?
I'll explain better if in the fifth to 2000 rpm I do 140km-h with 150 hp
what will change if I have 180 hp always at 2000 rpm? fifth, always 140km-h to??
not ? that is the speed? you create from nothing, then, to equal the speed and rpm but with piucavalli how does the motor consume less??spiegatemelo please because I don't get it
Eh, in effect, you've made me reflect on one thing, the speed? of the exchange are the same as those, then all my reasoning goes by the wayside; For? pu? perhaps, following the line of logic that I have given, that in parit? load reaches a pi? easily a speed? higher than that of a car stock! What I wonder ?: to obtain this result, not ? still need a quantity of fuel greater? Perhaps the reduction in fuel consumption is achieved because? through a good map, it improves the volumetric efficiency and combustion.
well let's just say that ottimizando the parameters in a targeted manner you can create a map, soft and at the same pace as compared to the original configuration would definitely have a drop in consumption, apart from a provision more pleasant,instead, in the case of a request by the customer of a mapping more powerful certainly will not preserve any consumption but have consistently superior performance and drive much more aggressive in all situations,it is only to change the map according to what you want to achieve.
But then, you could make a map mixed? For example, the map performance when you are traveling at full load and soft in the other conditions?
From what we hear, it seems instead that the coexistence of the two situations it is not possible to... Is it really cos
To me have explained cos?, take it with pliers:
What you are saying, do you ? exactly what I always thought too! The Cio?: if the same car has more? power, then in order to have the same performance in the same conditions, sar? need to insist less on the accelerator pedal, so less load = less fuel consumption.
This? according to me, exactly when it happens on some cars is mounted on is a motor "undersized", this consumes significantly more? of the same model with an engine of larger displacement and more power...
I don't think you reduce everything to a question of "load" also, if a given relationship to those laps and with those horses are tot km-h invariando all the factors, relationships, and the engine rpm because with more hp should do more km-h? and at the same time consume less?
I'll explain better if in the fifth at 2000 rpm I do 140km-h with 150 hp what will change if I have 180 hp, always at 2000 rpm? fifth, always 140km-h make??
not ? that is the speed? you create from nothing, then, to equal the speed and rpm but with piucavalli how does the motor consume less??spiegatemelo please because I don't get it
You are confusing things a bit! According to me the speech ?: to proceed for example at 100Km/h with the original map, you have to hold the throttle to 45%! With a modified map, and thus more power will we need? keep the accelerator to 35%.
Then, in parit? performance, you'll need a 10% less of the accelerator, and since this ? closely linked to the quantity? diesel fuel is injected, as a result will consume less!
Reverse speech: a parit? of the accelerator (so considering even 45%), in terms of series we were driving 100Km/h, while with greater power, travel at 110Km/h. Then in parit? of consumption, we will go to pi? strong...
In the end I answered... :D
perhaps I have not explained well what does it change in consumption with the same speed and rpm with the car is the same but with different power to understand this better, for example we put the same identical car but with a different horse that s? an alfa 156 2.4 mjet from 175cv:
ori,then with 175cv,at 2000 rpm in sixth we travel to 140 km-h
from the mod,and then with 350cv,at 2000 rpm in sixth we travel 140 km-h? or not?
the rpm, and then the quantity of the pedal that we squeeze them are always the same the same? or not?
what changes in consumption??
bart reply please.
perhaps I have not explained well what does it change in consumption with the same speed and rpm with the car is the same but with different power to understand this better, for example we put the same identical car but with a different horse that s? an alfa 156 2.4 mjet from 175cv:
ori,then with 175cv,at 2000 rpm in sixth we travel to 140 km-h
from the mod,and then with 350cv,at 2000 rpm in sixth we travel 140 km-h? or not?
the rpm, and then the quantity of the pedal that we squeeze them are always the same the same? or not?
what changes in consumption??
bart reply please.
Of course, at 2000rpm, we'll always 140Km/h (if we do not do mechanical work, and then the transmission ? the same), regardless of the power of the engine!
The difference is in the torque demand, which we do via the accelerator pedal: then with 175CV we will be with the throttle to 45%, while with 350CV us we need? instead of the 30%...
I know that don't you understand... you can also get a 6-million-billion-nm torque but to go to 140km-h with the same car, we will want to always 2000 rpm and 45% of the pedal!
the rpm, and then the speed is not created from nothing by crushing, less the accelerator!!
magi1984
30-11-2012, 15:51
not ? as you say McJTD... having more torque, equal? speed? and engine rpm to the pedal-the crush of less
to understand the concept you should understand how to interpret a map
from the original, to go to 140km/h at 2000rpm you have a signal of the load of the accelerator pedal equal to 40%, and ask to the controller, a value of 1000
be mapped, to go to 140km/h at 2000rpm you have a signal load of the accelerator pedal equal to 35%, why? having mapped the value to 1000 you do not find the pi? 40% of the pedal, but for 35% of the pedal, while 40% of the pedal you have now as the value of torque 1050
the numbers are taken completely at random, just as an example
guys I know that here the numbers in case you give right!!no offense ?!!
we put the case that in the map the pedal to 2000 rpm and 50% of the required angle pedal load chiametelo as you want, and we gave a million litres of diesel fuel, where before there was only one gram,in those rides, and the percentage of the billions diesel pedal the car will make more speed or not?I say firmly no!!
if the car and always the same, and change only the cavalry has the required rpm and the required foot pedal travel at the same speed!if you say the contrary, and as to say that revolutions are born from nothing, ie with less pedal obvious menogiri and less load has always the same speed? if not more so. guys do you hear from a ingegnre mechanical understanding you f? the black eyes!! or can you? be that li f? to me!! but I strongly doubt!!
among other things, in the forum non c'? no one titrated the ncodesto so that it can shed light on this strange phenomenon??
In fact I think the speech to make concerns more? factors: com'? true that with the increase in torque decreases the load on the pedal, ? altres? true that the speed? of the exchange, and then the ratio of Rpm/V-Eff (Schemes & Speed?) remain unaffected because of the gear ratios of the gearbox that ? to be considered a constant; therefore, it is necessary to consider the best volumetric efficiency, which is reflected in a reduced loading on the pedal to reach and maintain a given speed (Rpm) and, therefore, a particular fast? (V-Eff), which as mentioned above ? the result of a constant ? the gear ratios of the transmission. A higher efficiency in parit? load.
But not limited to:
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 50% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Then,
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 4200Rpm & 120Km/h
And this, according to me, determines the true reduction of the power consumption of a comparison between car stock and mapped: in parit? load a drive mapped to develop a regime more, and then a speed? greater or equal? regime and speed? ? need to less because of better volumetric efficiency.
I hope I've explained!
I'm not convinced...eliminamo reasoning for a moment, the control units and the percentage of the working engine and load pedal angle and ragionamo for a moment, no-frills electronic means.
if I have a car with 175cv at 2000 rpm say 2000 rpm and then assumes that in order to have these 2000 rpm and I have to mash the pedal a number,let's say a quarter of the race,I have a speed? that ? a constant,you said you, too, of 140km-h if I in this car dont make the engine and the port to 350cv and leave all the rest unchanged to have the same speed? 140 km-h 2000 rpm, do I need to do to my engine, and always a quarter of the accelerator, do I need to give to get those rides! the only thing that will change? sar? the acceleration and in a blink of an eye with that pedal schiaccito the same way to me, porter? a 140km-h...
with the ecu of a half hour, and worse, because if no electronic control I can give a quarter of gas plus a quid for the car viaggera more quickly, but with electronics this is not the case because the ecu ? a German of the pipe and not cheating on your regimen!
if 50% pedal gives you 2000 rpm with any other sw from super cv at 50% of pedal always 2000 rpm do you give? you can not escape.
then you can create all the formulas you want, but if the speed to the revs of the engine ? a constant does not there are means to do it vary
sportknight
18-12-2012, 22:31
sorry,I usually remap from 70% throttle...
if I press the accelerator to the 50% constant why? there should be a drop in consumption?
this ? the thing that I can not explain
it may be that under a 50% load engine smagrisce lamappa in order to inject less fuel? I see, so,on the contrary,so we require engine load from 50% to on the map to give more fuel or more an overboost pressure,more torque and performance....don't kill me if I say nonsense he :D
sportknight
19-12-2012, 23:53
I believe that it is docuto pi? to the fact that usually we increase a bit the turbine, which tends to lean the fuel mixture because? increases the flow of air
but you want to increase an overboost or the constant pressure?
sportknight
20-12-2012, 09:07
constant pressure the an overboost not touch him, almost none of the
ingmodena
11-01-2013, 14:59
hello all, I am new to the forum and I was reading some of the discussions, even the old
according to me, after mapping the ecu ? pretty unlikely to speed? constant with a given gear (V-type to 100km/h) it is possible to reduce the power consumption when the surrounding conditions remain the same (friction, aerodynamics, etc...). the load on the pedal will be? pi? low but only because? the new map injects the same fuel flow rate, e.g. at 30% load instead of 35% of the golds.
then there are tricks that make you consume less, in any condition (type deleting the DPF/EGR) and operating conditions of ir? favourable for the reduction in the consumption of
E92_mpower
11-01-2013, 19:27
In fact I think the speech to make concerns more? factors: com'? true that with the increase in torque decreases the load on the pedal, ? altres? true that the speed? of the exchange, and then the ratio of Rpm/V-Eff (Schemes & Speed?) remain unaffected because of the gear ratios of the gearbox that ? to be considered a constant; therefore, it is necessary to consider the best volumetric efficiency, which is reflected in a reduced loading on the pedal to reach and maintain a given speed (Rpm) and, therefore, a particular fast? (V-Eff), which as mentioned above ? the result of a constant ? the gear ratios of the transmission. A higher efficiency in parit? load.
But not limited to:
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 50% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Then,
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 4200Rpm & 120Km/h
And this, according to me, determines the true reduction of the power consumption of a comparison between car stock and mapped: in parit? load a drive mapped to develop a regime more, and then a speed? greater or equal? regime and speed? ? need to less because of better volumetric efficiency.
I hope I've explained!
quoto all pi? I do not believe that c'? an explanation of pi? clear and I believe that the key of the mapping and the least consumption is in less request, to the accelerator
In fact I think the speech to make concerns more? factors: com'? true that with the increase in torque decreases the load on the pedal, ? altres? true that the speed? of the exchange, and then the ratio of Rpm/V-Eff (Schemes & Speed?) remain unaffected because of the gear ratios of the gearbox that ? to be considered a constant; therefore, it is necessary to consider the best volumetric efficiency, which is reflected in a reduced loading on the pedal to reach and maintain a given speed (Rpm) and, therefore, a particular fast? (V-Eff), which as mentioned above ? the result of a constant ? the gear ratios of the transmission. A higher efficiency in parit? load.
But not limited to:
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 50% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Then,
Car Stock -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 3800Rpm & 90Km/h
Drive Mapped -> 3^ Gear - 80% Load - 4200Rpm & 120Km/h
And this, according to me, determines the true reduction of the power consumption of a comparison between car stock and mapped: in parit? load a drive mapped to develop a regime more, and then a speed? greater or equal? regime and speed? ? need to less because of better volumetric efficiency.
I hope I've explained!
Quoto! Everything is according to me in being able to make ends meet, the increase in mg of oil with a value slightly higher to make the most of the engine, but not so high as to consume still more the engine...I am talking about the map soft..
In my opinion, I could even say a joke, the fuel savings you have in the acceleration time, let me explain,
if a car is the original, and 100% engine load takes 10 sec and 1000 meters to reach 100 km/h consumes hypothesis-10cl of fuel,while a car rimapata with the same load takes 8 sec and 800 meters, with a consumption of 12cl
This means that if you drive into the street where, either for traffic or for the limits of speed? or else, you go at the same speed? both with a car golds that mapped, but with a mapped you would need less time and less meters to get to the same speed? then alzereste before your foot from the accelerator, with a consequent saving of fuel, multiply that by the number of times you have to reach your speed? and there risulter? with the car mapped you will have fuel savings,
this for? only takes place at equal speed, logical that if you increase the speed? and from there, the acceleration times you will have a higher consumption.
For example, while one traffic light to another, there are 1000m, and you will reach 100km/h with a original consumereste 10cl, but with a mapped consumereste of pi? for the first 800m, but the remaining 200 you would make them with a motor load is very low why? you would have gi? reached 100km/h with the result that in the equal way on your machine avr? consumed 8cl.
I hope to be able to make the idea
pabloescobar
25-01-2013, 12:05
If a horse(the Engine) pulls a ton(Car) and is 50 km return 4 hours after the sar? very tired and avr? need to eat(Diesel), if we put the other three horses instead to help percoreranno the same path and the weight will be? divided by 4 (25kgx4). With less effort ? path to the same section in less time and without eating they will be ready to start again, to redo, re the same stage. A good mapping if it is gritty it should give the same fuel consumption that was the car before you mod it, and if you bring gently why? once ? been mod. not c'? need accellerarla as before why? this ? the point:eat less with more? pair.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.