BERTMAN 40 1 Cars Posted August 30, 2006 a mate of mine has just had his car 'live remaped' and claims that he has had a 17bhp and 12lb ft increase in power from a standard 206Xsi with an air filter and a backbox, so pretty much standard... is this aload of bull or can this be acheived? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d-9 0 Posted August 30, 2006 It sounds a lot like bullcrap, thou the 106gti commonly gets 20bhp more than the book figure with a filter and decat so its not impossible. Ask to see the graph Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BERTMAN 40 1 Cars Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) ok it seems as if hes telling the truth heres the graph... graph i dont understand how he can get such a massive improvment with a remap, an air filter, and a baclbox (not a decat, or cat back, just a backbox!!!) Edited August 31, 2006 by BERTMAN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Garry 1 Posted August 31, 2006 Seems a bit dodgy to me, the tyre reading which i am assuming is the wheel power goes only goes up 3.8hp (which is what I would expect given the mods). The only major change I can see is the correction factor between the readings, which I think is why the power at the fly wheel goes up so much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smckeown 1 Posted August 31, 2006 plus power and torque curves don't meet at 5252 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonmurgie 2 Posted August 31, 2006 If ever there was a clear case of a dodgy rolling road centre it's there... just LOOK at the differnce between the 'wheel' figures between the runs! The wheel figure should at least be around the same no matter how 'inaccurate' the dyno... People seem to like slating the PowerStation dyno for giving low whlee figgures and hig drag figures but at least run after run month after month the figures are consistant, that dyno is clearly being run badly Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anthony 1,003 Posted August 31, 2006 plus power and torque curves don't meet at 5252 The scales aren't the same, that's why - if you look at the figures it looks like they roughly match up Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BERTMAN 40 1 Cars Posted August 31, 2006 If ever there was a clear case of a dodgy rolling road centre it's there... just LOOK at the differnce between the 'wheel' figures between the runs! The wheel figure should at least be around the same no matter how 'inaccurate' the dyno... People seem to like slating the PowerStation dyno for giving low whlee figgures and hig drag figures but at least run after run month after month the figures are consistant, that dyno is clearly being run badly what do you mean, do you think the figures are completly wrong? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonmurgie 2 Posted August 31, 2006 What I'm saying is that in the graph it shows a 3.8bhp increase at the wheels with a 19.5bhp increase in the level of drag, giving the second run a 23bhp increase overall... If that really were a back to back before/after test on those mods then the drag figure should be almost identical while the wheel figure should increase, and therefore the flywheel figure. This is assuming the following: Power = Flywheel Figure Power Tyre = Wheel Figure Dispersed Power = Drag If he was getting a proper 23.5bhp increase then the second set of figures should really read: Power = 127.1 Power Tyre = 104.4 Dispersed Power = 22.7 See what I'm getting at here? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
calvinhorse 870 Posted August 31, 2006 its probly just a photocopied graph they give all there customers! or witchcraft Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kyepan 291 Posted August 31, 2006 Photoshop wizardry at its best... give the guy an A for effort but a D for attention to detail.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BERTMAN 40 1 Cars Posted August 31, 2006 i dont mean to sound thick but what do you mean my drag? LOL... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BERTMAN 40 1 Cars Posted September 4, 2006 just out of interest the comany that did it was called chippeduk, does anyone have any experiences with this company, good or bad? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pdd144c 0 Posted September 4, 2006 (edited) plus power and torque curves don't meet at 5252 Scales aren't the same. (as Anthony said earlier!) Edited September 4, 2006 by pdd144c Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d-9 0 Posted September 4, 2006 just out of interest the comany that did it was called chippeduk, does anyone have any experiences with this company, good or bad? I think the graph you posted shows pretty clearly theyre a bunch of ripoff merchants, I wouldnt trust them to work on my car thats for sure! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ada205 2 Posted September 6, 2006 lol..never knew any of those mod's had such an effect on drive train! The transmission's losing nearly 22 horses more on the 2nd run! All this reminds me of a mate a few years back who took his astra gte to a complete crook. The car was running a little rough, and was booked in for a "tune!" After refusing to let us hang around while he worked his magic, we returned an hour later to find spectacular results, with horse power up by iirc 30 to 159 on the 2nd run, and torque figures showing in the 200 region on the graph! Funny thing was, the car felt exactly the same on the way home as it did on the way to the RR. I've also seen this disgrace to the tuning industry doing RR sesions at many shows, and if anyones planning an RR session in the Walsall area, i'd recommend you do your homework first! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DesMi16 Posted September 8, 2006 I've also seen this disgrace to the tuning industry doing RR sesions at many shows, and if anyones planning an RR session in the Walsall area, i'd recommend you do your homework first! I think I know the exact individual you're on about! Would rather go 8 miles to a professional rr than take a car 1/2 mile to this particular one. Back when he was in Tamworth, my Uno came back with the most unbelievable flywheel torque figure I think I 've ever seen although, as said, it felt the same as before. On the original subject, definitely not correct as power losses are total fiction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ada205 2 Posted September 8, 2006 (edited) I think I know the exact individual you're on about! Would rather go 8 miles to a professional rr than take a car 1/2 mile to this particular one. Back when he was in Tamworth, my Uno came back with the most unbelievable flywheel torque figure I think I 've ever seen although, as said, it felt the same as before. That's the one mate, and your right, his trademark seems to be astonishing torque figures. I'm sure there was a few xr2 owners a few years back confident they could out torque a cossie after a tune & RR at his place! The handy thing about when he was in Tamworth was his location, which was right next door to Bennets, so when he f***ed your car up, at least you didnt have to walk far for a taxi! BTW DesMi16, if you are who i assume your are, as in DES developements, then good to see you on here mate. I've spoken to you guys quite a few times by phone, and you've been very helpfull. I've heard nothing but good things about you. You'd think the lads in mpc would recommend the mechanic behind their shop, but they actually recommend you! Edited September 8, 2006 by ada205 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
