Remapping for economy

Victor_M

..Instead of performance. Are there any cars out there that have multiple maps that can be switched between by the driver?

At the moment my car is designed with performance as its priority and no concern for the fuel economy, it would be nice to be able to switch it into eco mode the odd time when I'm not driving it hard and get a more fuel efficient drive, albeit with a performance reduction.

I saw a V16 prototype by Cadillac a few years back that could shut 8 of the valves off to make it more fuel efficient.

So my question is.. is it possible (only hypothetically I'm not planning on actually trying, it's more just curiosity) and has anyone any idea what type of economy/performance trade off's you would have to make.

My car for example M3 343Bhp 20.5 Mpg if I had a switch that could toggle to say a modest 200 Bhp, still plenty of poke for day to day stuff has anyone any ideas what sort of consumption figures you could return.

I think it would be a good Idea for car manufacturers to build into their cars given the Eco focus they are under at the moment, I don't want to sacrifice out and out performance and get a slow economical car, but it would be nice to have the best of both worlds.

sogood

You could always re-boot. That is, wear a lighter boot on your right foot?

Bluefoam

The alfa mito has a 3 way switch that chages between allWeather, economy and dynamic. All new alfas will have it. Dynamic turns it into a rocket !

sogood

sogood wrote: »

You could always re-boot. That is, wear a lighter boot on your right foot?

you could attempt to respect the OP who is clearly thinking of more than a lighter foot. nice pun though, i'm sure it's the reason you posted.

Victor_M

I've given the lighter boot a try and it makes an almost insignificant difference and requires so much concentration and effort it's not worth it.

Victor_M

Bluefoam wrote: »

The alfa mito has a 3 way switch that chages between allWeather, economy and dynamic. All new alfas will have it. Dynamic turns it into a rocket !

Cool have you noticed much of a difference in performance in eco mode and vice versa?

Mr Benevolent

It's a bit rich expecting to get better economy out of an M3 imo. The car was designed for power and handling. And even if you managed to eke another 2-3mpg out of it I'm sure you can afford it at the current mpg. The tax alone is ridiculous, so how could you possibly care about paying a few less cents per tank?

Victor_M

Confab wrote: »

It's a bit rich expecting to get better economy out of an M3 imo. The car was designed for power and handling. And even if you managed to eke another 2-3mpg out of it I'm sure you can afford it at the current mpg. The tax alone is ridiculous, so how could you possibly care about paying a few less cents per tank?

I know, as I said it's more hypothetical than anything but would it be possible to have one map returning in my cars example 35-40 mpg in one mode and 20 mpg in another, that would make big difference in the daily running costs and still allow for blasting around when you wanted to, stuck in traffic on the Quays its returning around 12-14Mpg, just seems like a waste. As I said it just in general, not specifically aimed at my car as it designed with performance in mind.

sogood

Deleted User wrote: »

you could attempt to respect the OP who is clearly thinking of more than a lighter foot. nice pun though, i'm sure it's the reason you posted.

Point taken and humour was the only intent. I appreciate that with a car of this ilk, a lighter foot wouldn't make a huge difference and would also negate the very reason for owning such a motor.:o

Bluefoam

Victor_M wrote: »

Cool have you noticed much of a difference in performance in eco mode and vice versa?

The difference is very noticeable, I had the car on loan for a week and stuck it in dynamic quite a bit. It gets very good results in economy and tbh the mpg isn't too bad in dynamic. Should be even better with the new range of multi air engines they are getting. There's a 170bhp clover leaf on the way.

JHMEG

Several cars are automatically both ways. E.g. a few manufacturers have V6 engines which deactivate one bank of cylinders when cruising. So in effect a 3.0 V6 becomes a 1.5L, sort of.

EPM

It is possible to remap cars for economy and i'd assume it would probably be possible on yours but i couldn't imagine a big difference when running on 8 cylinders. If it were possible to shut some off on a cruise or something it should make a decent difference

JHMEG

One thing tho: a big engine will never produce small engine economy. This is due to pumping losses whereby a barely open throttle lets in such a small amount of air that big pistons have trouble sucking air in on the intake stroke. This wastes energy and affects economy. Cylinder deactivation is the only solution to this, but if your engine has no hardware to do cylinder deactivation then a remap won't do you much good. (Co-incidentally my engine has deactivation hardware called VPS or valve pause system - it deactivates the valves on 3 out of cyls 4 in certain circumstances)

unkel

Victor_M wrote: »

I saw a V16 prototype by Cadillac a few years back that could shut 8 of the valves off to make it more fuel efficient.

Cadillac managed this decades ago with their flagship car (DeVille?) which could run its V8 engine on 8, 6 or 4 cylinders. I can't remember how it was activated and I don't know if any other manufacturer has done much with this technology. Interesting technology though...

JHMEG

Cylinder deactivation is in use today (as I said above), some manufacturers calling it variable displacement. Particularly on V6s.

I got the impression that Victor was talking about valve deactivation whereby a 4-valve cylinder becomes a 3-valver and goes lean burn. Or in effect a 16-valve 4-cyl becomes a 12-valve temporarily, but all cylinders are in operation. The EK Civic 1.5iLS (jayok on here had one) had such an engine. The "Econo" light on the dash indicated 12-valve operation.

unkel

JHMEG wrote: »

I got the impression that Victor was talking about valve deactivation whereby a 4-valve cylinder becomes a 3-valver and goes lean burn.

It would be a bit weird though if only half of the cylinders would lose a valve in the V16 (presumably 4 valves per cylinder) he is talking about though?

JHMEG

Could be! You have to admit that doing fuel economy stuff on a V16 is weird!

JHMEG

I should add that afaik there has never been a production V16. Someone did two I8s stuck together tho, and technically that's what the engine was, as opposed to a V16. (A bit like what went on in the He-177)

Senna

JHMEG wrote: »

The EK Civic 1.5iLS (jayok on here had one) had such an engine. The "Econo" light on the dash indicated 12-valve operation.

Drove one of them for a few weeks, i was quite impressed with the system, in 12 valve state it was returning high 40's mpg (i had a regular 1.5 Lsi and 35mpg was average) and in normal mode it that 125bhp so was descent enough for overtaking. Wonder why the system didn't make it into more cars?

Didn't they do a 3 stage Vtec for economy also.

Victor_M

THIS is the Cadillac 16 I was talking about it is a 16L 32valve which can operate on as little as 4 cylinders when the power reserves weren't fully needed.

E39MSport

JHMEG wrote: »

One thing tho: a big engine will never produce small engine economy. This is due to pumping losses whereby a barely open throttle lets in such a small amount of air that big pistons have trouble sucking air in on the intake stroke. This wastes energy and affects economy. Cylinder deactivation is the only solution to this, but if your engine has no hardware to do cylinder deactivation then a remap won't do you much good. (Co-incidentally my engine has deactivation hardware called VPS or valve pause system - it deactivates the valves on 3 out of cyls 4 in certain circumstances)

unless its a VTEC?

E39MSport

I had a switcahable solution from evolveyourcar.co.uk which allowed me to switch between maps but it involved a bit of manual effort to load the maps.

JHMEG

Senna wrote: »

Drove one of them for a few weeks, i was quite impressed with the system, in 12 valve state it was returning high 40's mpg (i had a regular 1.5 Lsi and 35mpg was average) and in normal mode it that 125bhp so was descent enough for overtaking. Wonder why the system didn't make it into more cars?

Didn't they do a 3 stage Vtec for economy also.

The 3-stage had economy, normal, and performance, all off a SOHC(!), and it was this model (Japan-only) that was 125bhp. The variant in the 1.5iLS was 114bhp, and had a 12-valve economy mode as well as (slightly highly tuned) normal 16-valve mode. A friend currently has a saloon one and he averages 52 mpg on a run.

JHMEG

Victor_M wrote: »

THIS is the Cadillac 16 I was talking about it is a 16L 32valve which can operate on as little as 4 cylinders when the power reserves weren't fully needed.

An extreme case of variable displacement!

There is a car on the US market that switches between 6, 4 and 3 cyls. (EDIT: it's the 2008 Accord) Most just switch between "all" or "half" afaik.

JHMEG

2010 Chevy Camaro will have variable displacement when fitted with an L99 engine:

http://paultan.org/2008/07/23/2010-chevrolet-camaro-details-and-hi-res-photos/

colm_mcm

betafrog wrote: »

eg I know the Hyundai Coupe's engine will adjust itself to be more aggresive if the driver has a particularly heavy foot and a bit softer if they're not...

Where did you hear that?

cantdecide

.............

JHMEG

^ All ECUs do that as all sensors do not all read exactly the same in the same conditions, and therefore the ECU needs to calibrate against them. I don't think they do it to adapt to driving styles (altho some automatic gearboxes do).

2 Espressi

Talk to Joe at Chipped Ire, he'll know what's possible with eco maps for your M3. I haven't used them yet myself, but they are highly recommended.

http://www.chippedire.com/

robtri

interesting topic...

not sure if it can be retro fitted but as stated above some cars already seem to be doing it...

And don't forget the M3's big brother , the M5.... normal driving 400BHP ... press that small M button and 500BHP.... so it can done... but not sure if it can be retro fitted.

s14 silvia

Victor_M wrote: »

..Instead of performance. Are there any cars out there that have multiple maps that can be switched between by the driver?

At the moment my car is designed with performance as its priority and no concern for the fuel economy, it would be nice to be able to switch it into eco mode the odd time when I'm not driving it hard and get a more fuel efficient drive, albeit with a performance reduction.

I saw a V16 prototype by Cadillac a few years back that could shut 8 of the valves off to make it more fuel efficient.

So my question is.. is it possible (only hypothetically I'm not planning on actually trying, it's more just curiosity) and has anyone any idea what type of economy/performance trade off's you would have to make.

My car for example M3 343Bhp 20.5 Mpg if I had a switch that could toggle to say a modest 200 Bhp, still plenty of poke for day to day stuff has anyone any ideas what sort of consumption figures you could return.

I think it would be a good Idea for car manufacturers to build into their cars given the Eco focus they are under at the moment, I don't want to sacrifice out and out performance and get a slow economical car, but it would be nice to have the best of both worlds.

Why buy an M3 sport model then complain about fuel consumption??

Victor_M

s14 silvia wrote: »

Why buy an M3 sport model then complain about fuel consumption??

If you had read my post correctly you would have realised that I'm not actually planning to remap my car I'm just curious, just because I own an M3 doesn't mean that I'm not concious of where my money goes. If I'm sitting in rush hour traffic 2 hours a day it would be nice to be able to stick my car (or any car for that matter) into Eco mode whereby you are only using 50% of the fuel you'd use in normal/sport mode.