Extra 45bhp at the push of a button

Firestar_3x · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:23

Bear said:
Ive got a button in my car that makes about 70-100bhp and it genuinely works aswell

Since the word in the picture i want to post is being blocked, wtf is with that?

N O S at a guess?

Bear · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:27

Firestar_3x said:
Since the word in the picture i want to post is being blocked, wtf is with that?

N O S at a guess?

Nah its the boost controller. Off button gives about 200bhp, when on, low is set to about 230bhp and hi is about 300bhp

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:28

paradigm said:
Most cases the "chips" (or resistors in most cases) fiddle with the readings from MAF sensors or similar, tricking the ECU into thinking its being given more air than it actually is, and hence increasing fueling to compensate.

Result: Increased MPG, coked up plugs, and naff all gains.

Actually not true, on a turbocharged engine it will give quite a significant gain. Needless to say its completely the wrong way to go about it and its not a long term solution, but tricking the fuel regulator does work. Why anyone would spend more than 20p doing this mod though is beyond me as thats what a pot costs.

tom_e · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:36

But theyl even refund your postage if you dont like it so it must be true :eek:

Boycie · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:45

If they're that good, i'll get two

paradigm · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:49

Jez said:
Actually not true, on a turbocharged engine it will give quite a significant gain. Needless to say its completely the wrong way to go about it and its not a long term solution, but tricking the fuel regulator does work. Why anyone would spend more than 20p doing this mod though is beyond me as thats what a pot costs.

How is it "not true". The ECU is still receiving a false Mass Air reading, regardless of if this fake air is forced induced or not. The ECU will therefore still be simply overfueling for the amount of air.

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:50

paradigm said:
How is it "not true". The ECU is still receiving a false Mass Air reading, regardless of if this fake air is forced induced or not. The ECU will therefore still be simply overfueling for the amount of air.

Indeed

But you said that it produced naff all gains. That part was the bit i was saying is not true.

paradigm · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:51

Jez said:
Indeed But you said that it produced naff all gains. That part was the bit i was saying is not true.

How can it produce gains on a Turbo'd car but not on a N/A though? It can't.

Firestar_3x · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:52

Jez said:
Actually not true, on a turbocharged engine it will give quite a significant gain. Needless to say its completely the wrong way to go about it and its not a long term solution, but tricking the fuel regulator does work. Why anyone would spend more than 20p doing this mod though is beyond me as thats what a pot costs.

How can that be right, by definition, overfuling meaning getting more fuel than the engine requires means it won't be operating the optimum AFR hence not going the best performance.

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:56

paradigm said:
How can it produce gains on a Turbo'd car but not on a N/A though? It can't.

Because as standard most production turbocharged cars overboost (run lean) in order to maximise fuel economy and emmisions. Causing the ECU to shovel more fuel into thre mix will therefore result in more power.

The amount obviously depends on the setup of the car but if you take my 90hp turbodiesel company hack as an example the "trick" results in a very significant change in performance.

Agreed a crap way of doing it, but a reversable and cheap way none the less.

paradigm · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:58

Jez said:
Because as standard most production turbocharged cars overboost (run lean) in order to maximise fuel economy and emmisions. Causing the ECU to shovel more fuel into thre mix will therefore result in more power.

The amount obviously depends on the setup of the car but if you take my 90hp turbodiesel company hack as an example the "trick" results in a very significant change in performance.

Agreed a crap way of doing it, but a reversable and cheap way none the less.

So where you say "on a Turbocharged car", you actually meant to say "on a badly set-up diesel turbo".

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 20:58

paradigm said:
So where you say "on a Turbocharged car", you actually meant to say "on a badly set-up diesel turbo".

Yeah

Although i see no reason why the same would not apply to anything which is set up to run lean.

MrSix · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:03

Looks like my car they've got on the rollers

Pants · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:04

I think my car would stall with this mod, it already gets such a ridiculous amount of fuel! :eek:

paradigm · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:06

Jez said:
Yeah Although i see no reason why the same would not apply to anything which is set up to run lean.

You do realise that a Turbo set up to run lean would be a stupid stupid idea.

As we all know, the air forced into an engine by a turbo is getting quite warm, warmer than normal N/A intakes. We also know that running lean is a damn fine way of getting a chamber to be stupidly hot, not enough fuel to quench the o2 in the chamber.

Why oh why would ANY manufacturer who wants their cars to be reliable forcibly choose to make their cars run stupidly hot?

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:11

I have no idea on the technicalities, ive no interest in the car

It is set up lean from the factory to gain low emmisions and maximise fuel economy (so i have read) and therefore doesent get enough fuel as standard.

Ive only experimented on VAG diesels where it makes a markable difference in all cases, but i am led to believe that the same applies to pretty much all turbocharged or lean running vehicles.

Firestar_3x · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:25

Right, first things first, the car doesn't run lean, lean means its not getting enough fuel, rich means its getting too much fuel.

If it was running lean from the factory it would detonate and the engine would be no more very quickly.

If it was running rich it would kill the NBO2 sensor and your cat quickly.

The car is set to run as close to stoich as possible out of the factory, Stoich on petrol is 14.7 or lambda 1, however the stock ecu is thick and oftern the *** map (The point at which it doesn't look at the MAF or AFR) on them aint so good, so aftermarket ecu's be it full or piggyback allow you to change the fuel and ignition maps to better optomise th fueling when *** and usually past 4k.

BigglesPiP · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:25

paradigm said:
How is it "not true". The ECU is still receiving a false Mass Air reading, regardless of if this fake air is forced induced or not. The ECU will therefore still be simply overfueling for the amount of air.

For a week yes.

But the lambda probe in the exhaust senses the over-fueling and the ECU starts re-mapping itself to the correct mixture.

When you're travelling at a constant RPM the lambda probe determines the mixture real-time, not the ECU map.

Even my Uno is constantly tweaking it's ECU map (albeit only about a 7 axes graph, modern stuff having a lot more variables).

Firestar_3x · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:28

BigglesPiP said:
For a week yes.

But the lambda probe in the exhaust senses the over-fueling and the ECU starts re-mapping itself to the correct mixture.

When you're travelling at a constant RPM the lambda probe determines the mixture real-time, not the ECU map.

Even my Uno is constantly tweaking it's ECU map (albeit only about a 7 axes graph, modern stuff having a lot more variables).

Thats true but it doesn't change the map most stock ecu's cant, until W O T its not using any maps as such just base values and the realtime data.

Jez · 17 Oct 2006 at 21:28

Firestar_3x said:
Right, first things first, the car doesn't run lean, lean means its not getting enough fuel, rich means its getting too much fuel.

If it was running lean from the factory it would detonate and the engine would be no more very quickly.

If it was running rich it would kill the NBO2 sensor and your cat quickly.
.

I doubt there is anyone here that doesnt already know this.

The car obviously runs lean from the factory, why else would tricking more fuel into the system result in such a dramatic increase in peformance, and why do so many trained VW mechanics and people on VW forums seem to think that they are set up lean?

Anyway, i couldnt care less. I simply posted that "naff all gains" is NOT true.