Remapping implications

amf78

Hi,

I'm considering getting my car remapped but before doing that I would like to know if there are any adverse implications or legal issues involved.
I'm not talking about voiding the warranty (no longer relevant anyway), increasing fuel consumption or even shortening the engine lifetime.
I'm wondering about potential NCT issues, insurance, road tax and the ability to have it serviced.
Any advice is much appreciated.

Cheers!

joujoujou

You must inform your insurer about that.

Silane

It will affect your insurance if you declare it. That's about it. Tax, servicing, NCT, and everything else is unaffected

Limbo123

Best of luck finding a company in Ireland that will insure you with a remap.

selectamatic

To my knowledge there isn't an insurance company in Ireland that can check if a car has been remapped or not. There's well known cases of tuning boxes causing issues after an assessor has found them but for a remap there is no physical evidence.

dar83

selectamatic wrote: »

To my knowledge there isn't an insurance company in Ireland that can check if a car has been remapped or not. There's well known cases of tuning boxes causing issues after an assessor has found them but for a remap there is no physical evidence.

I think this way of thinking is outdated by now. Yes if it's a standard looking car with no other visual modifications and/or the issue an insurance assessor is looking into was clearly not caused by speed etc... then most likely it will go unnoticed. However, there are assessors out there now that aren't stupid and they have been known to checking ECU's and what not to see if they're in a standard configuration, so I wouldn't go down the road of thinking that it's hidden and will never be found.

It is extremely difficult here to get insured with modifications, including remaps, but not impossible. The best method is to be with one of the bigger insurers and have a history with them. They're a lot more open in that case to allow you have modifications declared on your policy, but be prepared for a premium hike if it's anything that increases power by more than 5% or so. You've also got a much better chance of getting cover if the car you drive also comes in a configuration with more power that is already in their systems and that your remapped version would match more closely (this is the easier way!).

Limbo123

Axa wanted a full engineers report stating my catback did not increase power before they would even give me a quote and I had been with them for 6 years.

selectamatic

The parameters of the various readings from ecu's can change for a variety of reasons though and also many manufacturers have and still are making changes mid year and mid production therefore there isn't really any set criteria to go off.

I've never heard of a case where a remapped ecu has been flagged and I've never seen a story about it causing any issues in the media so is there any evidence to suggest otherwise?

mikeecho

OSI wrote: »

I've not heard of any. Although I would say it's probably easier now for insurers to know than ever, I know for example that VAG cars have a very simple flag on the ECU that tells anyone that's looking that the map has been unofficially modified, so no need to go comparing map figures.

And then you have the likes of BMW who will do an official remap, that they stand over.

grogi

mikeecho wrote: »

And then you have the likes of BMW who will do an official remap, that they stand over.

But that leaves too much paper trail IMHO.

Henry Ford III

selectamatic wrote: »

The parameters of the various readings from ecu's can change for a variety of reasons though and also many manufacturers have and still are making changes mid year and mid production therefore there isn't really any set criteria to go off.

I've never heard of a case where a remapped ecu has been flagged and I've never seen a story about it causing any issues in the media so is there any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Are you suggesting that it's okay to just say nothing to your insurer because of the unlikely chance of a remap being discovered?

That would be pretty blatant non disclosure I'd have thought.

selectamatic

mikeecho wrote: »

And then you have the likes of BMW who will do an official remap, that they stand over.

Didn't Volvo do one for the d5 engine too.

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Are you suggesting that it's okay to just say nothing to your insurer because of the unlikely chance of a remap being discovered?

That would be pretty blatant non disclosure I'd have thought.

I didn't suggest anything. I simply stated a remapped ecu generally isn't an issue flagged by assessors.

Henry Ford III

selectamatic wrote: »

...I didn't suggest anything. I simply stated a remapped ecu generally isn't an issue flagged by assessors.

I think I'd agree that is most likely.

If they really want to dig in though and thoroughly investigate a claim I'm pretty sure they have the ability to open an ecu and see if it's in standard form or been messed with.

It'd be very unwise from an insurance perspective not to disclose such a material modification.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Silane

OSI wrote: »

I've not heard of any. Although I would say it's probably easier now for insurers to know than ever, I know for example that VAG cars have a very simple flag on the ECU that tells anyone that's looking that the map has been unofficially modified, so no need to go comparing map figures.

I don't think the TD1/2/3 flags work that way. The car has to be connected to Audi in Germany by an Audi dealership, then Audi compare the car's original ECU settings to what is currently on it, if it's changed they put the TD1 flag on it. So if you remap your car, and it never goes to Audi, it never gets a TD1 flag.

There's also the bluefin option, where you can remap the ECU, and in the event of an accident reset the ECU to original settings, there's no way an insurance assessor can see that (Without bringing the car to Audi).

grogi

Isn't there a flash counter as well? If the number of flashes doesn't match the number of authorised flashes, the car might get flagged too...

amf78

Thanks lads!
Reading you comments and digging deeper into this, it seems there 2 ways to achieve this: by re-programming the ECU (e.g. superchips) or by adding a chip which can be removed at any time without ever leaving a trace of its existence (chip express). Hmm...
Any idea about which to go for?

grogi

amf78 wrote: »

Thanks lads!
Reading you comments and digging deeper into this, it seems there 2 ways to achieve this: by re-programming the ECU (e.g. superchips) or by adding a chip which can be removed at any time without ever leaving a trace of its existence (chip express). Hmm...
Any idea about which to go for?

What happens if following an event you cannot remove the box from the engine? Many reasons for that - the access is removed (smashed bonnet, moved components in the engine bay etc) or you need to stay in hospital.

amf78

grogi wrote: »

What happens if following an event you cannot remove the box from the engine? Many reasons for that - the access is removed (smashed bonnet, moved components in the engine bay etc) or you need to stay in hospital.

Good question. But when asking which option to go for, I mainly had in mind performance/safety/horsepower boost rather than ability to hide it from insurer/manufacturer.

grogi

amf78 wrote: »

Good question. But when asking which option to go for, I mainly had in mind performance/safety/horsepower boost rather than ability to hide it from insurer/manufacturer.

Direct flash will be better if the above are your concerns.

vectra

amf78 wrote: »

Hi,

I'm considering getting my car remapped but before doing that I would like to know if there are any adverse implications or legal issues involved.
I'm not talking about voiding the warranty (no longer relevant anyway), increasing fuel consumption or even shortening the engine lifetime.
I'm wondering about potential NCT issues, insurance, road tax and the ability to have it serviced.
Any advice is much appreciated.

Cheers!

What car is it?
Some map great.
Other not much improvements can be had.

amf78

vectra wrote: »

What car is it?
Some map great.
Other not much improvements can be had.

Mercedes C-Class Coupe C220 CDI 2006 (automatic). BHP is currently 150 (148 actually).

Henry Ford III

Silane wrote: »

I don't think the TD1/2/3 flags work that way. The car has to be connected to Audi in Germany by an Audi dealership, then Audi compare the car's original ECU settings to what is currently on it, if it's changed they put the TD1 flag on it. So if you remap your car, and it never goes to Audi, it never gets a TD1 flag.

There's also the bluefin option, where you can remap the ECU, and in the event of an accident reset the ECU to original settings, there's no way an insurance assessor can see that (Without bringing the car to Audi).

Are you advocating fraud there?

bmstuff

amf78 wrote: »

Mercedes C-Class Coupe C220 CDI 2006 (automatic). BHP is currently 150 (148 actually).

I can remap your car safely to about 182Hp/403Nm (Stock 150Hp/340nm).
Nice difference, while not huge, you will definitely feel the difference.

Yes you are supposed to tell your insurance. Now there is virtually no way they can know. Connecting to ECU requires seriously specialised tools.

As for fuel economy usually around the city you won't see any difference (Depends of the car), but around motorway almost every time you will save between 1 to 5 Mpg on long runs.

As for wear and tear, usually those engines run at 60 to 80% of their capacity from factory for a few reasons, meet emissions regulations, noise, warranty on parts etc

Now remapping will ad turbo pressure, higher fuel flow, different timing etc, so engine will run more efficiently from a mechanical point of view within manufacturing tolerances (For those doing remaps properly).

Different components will wear out quicker over the course of a few years but also depending on your driving habits, like tyres if you like to floor it regularly, clutch will wear quicker if you drive like you stole it etc.
But that is true for any car, remapped or not.

But most cars when remapped properly will just behave better, no lag when driving off, have a kick when you need it, save you a bit of gas on the long runs, and put a smile on your face and offer happy motoring for several years.

Several cars will get an 40-50hp and 100Nm extra torque will be a lot faster though, so as usual when planning to get it remapped, make sure you car is in good condition, no oil leak, service performed regularly before and after, brakes and tyres in good condition.

Titzon Toast

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Are you advocating fraud there?

When did you turn into Ned Flanders?!
Lighten up man, he's not talking about swapping the engine or nailing an extra turbocharger to it.

@ the OP, get a remap and say nothing, they're great fun.

mikeecho

Nothing wrong with a reputable remap, just ensure that its served on time, every time. Or if you want to be a super caution Ned Flanders like me.. have oil and filter changed at half intervals.

30k between oil changes is far too long.. 15k.. i'm happy with that , especially if you have a reliable, dependable, cost effective mech

PrzemoF

/thread hijacked
Anyone recommended for mapping SLK200 2004 in Munster?

bear1

Here's an idea, call your insurer beforehand and ask them what their position is on this.
Saying it will affect your premium is not a given - the insurer may be fine with it or they will say well that will be an extra xxx euro or we will void you insurance policy if you do it.
You can either go the road where you tell them nothing and hope nothing happens or go the other road and declare all up front.

kirving

Directly from my car's manual below. Almost a 14 year old design as this stage but has 39 ECU's of different complexities around the car.

Even if the ECU is reset back to original, the fuel pump for example may log that a higher pressure than the original factory limit was requested. The only explanation for that would be a non-factory map. (maybe not, an example for this discussion).

I work in automotive electronics and this kind of stuff is routinely logged for warranty and debug purposes. The Tier 1 suppliers ensure this is stored so that they can properly diagnose faults and root cause the fault for the manufacturer (and avoid paying warranty cost if not at fault).

Don't believe for a second that Garda collision investigators won't rip out the ECU and bring it back to the manufacturer in the event of a serious collision.

One or more of the computers in your Volvo
are capable of recording detailed information.
This information is intended for use in
research to enhance safety and for diagnosing
faults in some of the in-car systems. The
data may include details regarding seatbelt
use by the driver and passengers, the functions
of various vehicle systems and modules,
and status information about the
engine, throttle, steering, brakes and other
systems. This data can also include details of
the way the car is driven. This type of information
can include, without being limited to,
specific details such as vehicle speed, the
use of the brake and accelerator pedals and
steering wheel position. This latter type of
data can be stored for a limited period while
the car is being driven and subsequently
during a collision or a near-collision. Volvo
Car Corporation will not disclose the stored
information without consent. However, Volvo
Car Corporation may be forced to disclose
the information due to national legislation.
Volvo Car Corporation and authorised Volvo
workshops may also read and use the information.

selectamatic

PrzemoF wrote: »

/thread hijacked
Anyone recommended for mapping SLK200 2004 in Munster?

Think you need to swap to a smaller kompressor (supercharger) pulley to make it worthwhile as this will increase boost slightly a freer flowing exhaust would help too. I think a remap on its own would only see very marginal gains.

amf78

Thanks to all for the useful information.
I do have one final question which might sound naive or beside the point but here it is.
Considering the fact that there are quite a few road worthy, perfectly legal cars in Ireland with more than 300 bhp under the bonnet, an increase from 150 to 170-180 bhp seems rather trivial.
Then what about heavily modified cars, who are clearly geared towards racing but cruise public roads without restrictions... where do those guys get insured?

shietpilot

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Even if the ECU is reset back to original, the fuel pump for example may log that a higher pressure than the original factory limit was requested. The only explanation for that would be a non-factory map. (maybe not, an example for this discussion).

Can you back this up and provide an example make/model that has a fuel pump capable of storing the maximum pressure ever requested?

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Directly from my car's manual below. Almost a 14 year old design as this stage but has 39 ECU's of different complexities around the car.

39 engine control units? Hmmm

s15r330

Half the cars in the country must have void insurance as something as simple as bigger wheels is a modification.
Insurance companies would screw you without a second thought.
I have 3 tdi's all remapped. Nice boost in performance and improved mpg. Best money I spent on a car.

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Are you advocating fraud there?

Have to laugh at people who portray this squeaky clean persona on public forums. Different story in real life i'd say.

bear1

amf78 wrote: »

Thanks to all for the useful information.
I do have one final question which might sound naive or beside the point but here it is.
Considering the fact that there are quite a few road worthy, perfectly legal cars in Ireland with more than 300 bhp under the bonnet, an increase from 150 to 170-180 bhp seems rather trivial.
Then what about heavily modified cars, who are clearly geared towards racing but cruise public roads without restrictions... where do those guys get insured?

Not sure what you mean by this? They get insured the same as the rest of us do. But those cars left the factory with that power. If they want to increase it then technically they would need to follow the same practice as informing the insurance company.

bazz26

It's a double edged sword really ~ being honest and declaring modifications gives insurance companies a license to print money which in turn discourages owners from declaring them.

I'd say the majority of modifications are not declared whether it be right or wrong.

dar83

Most aren't declared because it's usually the quickest way to be declined a quote, probably right after having a disqualification in the list, which is frustrating.

We really need a modification friendly insurer here, like Adrian Flux in the UK or similar. Problem is our market is too small to be appealing to companies like that, but you never know, hopefully with the shake up the industry might get here we might see the opportunities rising for full declaration and it not resulting in a blackballing of your car.

Henry Ford III

Titzon Toast wrote: »

When did you turn into Ned Flanders?!
Lighten up man, he's not talking about swapping the engine or nailing an extra turbocharger to it.

@ the OP, get a remap and say nothing, they're great fun.

I didn't.

My point is by not disclosing a material mod. like a remap you are quite deliberately jeopardizing your cover, and future insurability.

I'm all for a bit of fun, provided it's legal.

grogi

s15r330 wrote: »

Half the cars in the country must have void insurance as something as simple as bigger wheels is a modification..

And I have always declared different rim sizes. I was driving Prius on 205/55/r16 instead of 195/55/r16 and that was noted down by insurer as well.

Henry Ford III

grogi wrote: »

And I have always declared different rim sizes. I was driving Prius on 205/55/r16 instead of 195/55/r16 and that was noted down by insurer as well.

That's the same wheel size but a wider tyre.

grogi

Henry Ford III wrote: »

That's the same wheel size but a wider tyre.

Diameter is a bit larger, around 4% iirc.

kirving

shietpilot wrote: »

Can you back this up and provide an example make/model that has a fuel pump capable of storing the maximum pressure ever requested?

As I said, an example only, but absolutely possible. But the reality is that there are dozens of indicators which could be left behind in software following a remap and subsequent removal.

If anything out of the ordinary is seen by certain components, then it could be logged as a fault. Accelerate too quickly for that model car? Maybe the acceleration sensor is faulty - car logs it just in case. Again an example that could be visible if looked for.

It's not as simple as just putting the old map back on the car if someone really wants to investigate. DTC's are only a small part of the equation when it comes to fault logging in a modern car.

shietpilot wrote: »

39 engine control units? Hmmm

Well, Electronic Control Units. Page 34 here (BIG PDF) actually shows locations of 48 different control modules. New cars would have many more.

rex-x

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I didn't.

My point is by not disclosing a material mod. like a remap you are quite deliberately jeopardizing your cover, and future insurability.

I'm all for a bit of fun, provided it's legal.

The insurance companies have made it so that its impossible to do it legally.... I spent many years getting shafted by Quinn Direct with my 50% increased premiums and engineers reports for being honest until Liberty took over and instead of a renewal sent me a PFO letter saying they didn't want my 10 years no claims and 0 points as I was too high risk...

At that point I gave up! There is not one single company in Ireland that will allow power related modifications and I wont be told what I can or cant do to my car :mad:

If I crash through someones fence and knock down their prize winning endangered zebra while sailing through their priceless art gallery I look forward to being sued by the insurance company who try to recoup their costs because I didn't tell them about my remap, bring it on

Henry Ford III

rex-x wrote: »

The insurance companies have made it so that its impossible to do it legally.... I spent many years getting shafted by Quinn Direct with my 50% increased premiums and engineers reports for being honest until Liberty took over and instead of a renewal sent me a PFO letter saying they didn't want my 10 years no claims and 0 points as I was too high risk...

At that point I gave up! There is not one single company in Ireland that will allow power related modifications and I wont be told what I can or cant do to my car :mad:

If I crash through someones fence and knock down their prize winning endangered zebra while sailing through their priceless art gallery I look forward to being sued by the insurance company who try to recoup their costs because I didn't tell them about my remap, bring it on

What if you cause serious injury or death to an innocent 3rd party though? If your power mod. was discovered your own damages would not be covered and you'd then find it impossible to obtain cover again due to your policy being voided because of your blatant non disclosure.

http://www.boards.ie/ttfthread/20575...1#post98104401

I note from some of your other posts that Liberty offered to re-examine your case following their decision not to renew your policy but after raising the issue with them you declined to provide details. Why?

Do you realise that their decision not to offer renewal terms should have been disclosed to your subsequent/current insurer? I wonder what they'd have said if it had been?

bmstuff

Kevin Irving wrote: »

... actually shows locations of 48 different control modules. New cars would have many more.

No 48 here is the maximum number of modules this car can have when fully loaded included side view cameras, gps, automatic transmissions and so on.

New cars these days have half that number of modules. Some up to 30 but then they have self parking, TV, 5 cameras, heated and ventillated seats etc

48 is called over engineered. As progress goes many functions are regrouped from 4-5 modules to only one these days. Simplicity and costs.
A brand new BMW 3 or 4 series would have about 12-15 modules only or more if more options.

PrzemoF

selectamatic wrote: »

Think you need to swap to a smaller kompressor (supercharger) pulley to make it worthwhile as this will increase boost slightly a freer flowing exhaust would help too. I think a remap on its own would only see very marginal gains.

Thanks for the answer! I have the older version, so remap should give a lot (163 HP --> ~180 HP) as newer SLKs have exactly the same mechanical setup.

CiniO

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I didn't.

My point is by not disclosing a material mod. like a remap you are quite deliberately jeopardizing your cover, and future insurability.

I'm all for a bit of fun, provided it's legal.

But afaik there's nothing illegal in non disclosing such facts to insurance company.

Your legal requirement is to have insurance policy for the car you're driving.
By purchasing one you are fulfilling your legal requirement.

If you don't disclose facts as mods, etc to your insurer might be a breach of the insurance contract and might cause your insurer to re refuse to pay for damage to your own car, as well as they might look into recouping from you the amount they paid to third party.

But there's nothing illegal in not disclosing all the facts to insurer.

Henry Ford III

CiniO wrote: »

But afaik there's nothing illegal in non disclosing such facts to insurance company.

Your legal requirement is to have insurance policy for the car you're driving.
By purchasing one you are fulfilling your legal requirement.

If you don't disclose facts as mods, etc to your insurer might be a breach of the insurance contract and might cause your insurer to re refuse to pay for damage to your own car, as well as they might look into recouping from you the amount they paid to third party.

But there's nothing illegal in not disclosing all the facts to insurer.

1/. Fraud.

2/. Obtaining insurance by deception.

Apart from that it's fine

amf78

Henry Ford III wrote: »

What if you cause serious injury or death to an innocent 3rd party though? If your power mod. was discovered your own damages would not be covered and you'd then find it impossible to obtain cover again due to your policy being voided because of your blatant non disclosure.

The issue shouldn't be disclosure or non-disclosure, the issue should be whether the said modification, disclosed or not, was the sole (or even contributing) factor in the accident. It wouldn't be hard for an expert in the field to convince the jury that the said modification is irrelevant, when, for instance, you have model variants out there with the same - or possibly more - horsepower and torque. If power increase is the added risk, then 300 or 400 bhp cars shouldn't be allowed anywhere outside racing tracks, whether or not it's a factory config.
That's what would happen in a normal world. In a world where we're one step away from making it illegal to cross the street without proper supervision if you're under 21, it's a whole different story.
If there's a law against driving without insurance, then there's should be a law preventing insurance companies from refusing to cover road worthy cars. It's that simple.

grogi

CiniO wrote: »

But afaik there's nothing illegal in non disclosing such facts to insurance company.

Actually there is. In Common Law systems the insurance contracts are based on Uberrimae Fidei principle.

Even if not asked, everything that might influence the insurer to offer the cover and the price of the premium needs to be disclosed.

Your legal requirement is to have insurance policy for the car you're driving.
By purchasing one you are fulfilling your legal requirement.

And that is the biggest issue in Ireland.

There is a legal requirement for TPL insurance, but very little regulation of what this insurance covers, how it is offered, the fault determination etc.

It relies solely on the 'invisible market hand'. And MIBI ruling, which to me sounds very ambiguous.

There is no certainty for the drivers and no certainty for the insurers as well. That's why the latter don't want to enter any contract under which they might be made to pay even though the contract itself did not cover it.

grogi

amf78 wrote: »

The issue shouldn't be disclosure or non-disclosure, the issue should be whether the said modification, disclosed or not, was the sole (or even contributing) factor in the accident. It wouldn't be hard for an expert in the field to convince the jury that the said modification is irrelevant, when, for instance, you have model variants out there with the same - or possibly more - horsepower and torque. If power increase is the added risk, then 300 or 400 bhp cars shouldn't be allowed anywhere outside racing tracks, whether or not it's a factory config.
That's what would happen in a normal world. In a world where we're one step away from making it illegal to cross the street without proper supervision if you're under 21, it's a whole different story.

But that's not only about that. The risk profile of a driver that fancy modifications is completely different from one that drives unmodified car with same power.

Compare who can afford a 535d with who can get 520d and chip the hell out of it. They might have same power and acceleration, but the statistical driver of them is a completely different chap.

It makes sense that insuring a more risky driver is more expensive. But if you fail to disclose the modifications, you are preventing the insurer to properly asses the risk and the premium.

If there's a law against driving without insurance, then there's should be a law preventing insurance companies from refusing to cover road worthy cars. It's that simple.

It is not that simple. If such law is introduced, you will just get €30000/year quotes instead of refusal to cover.

Del2005

amf78 wrote: »

The issue shouldn't be disclosure or non-disclosure, the issue should be whether the said modification, disclosed or not, was the sole (or even contributing) factor in the accident. It wouldn't be hard for an expert in the field to convince the jury that the said modification is irrelevant, when, for instance, you have model variants out there with the same - or possibly more - horsepower and torque. If power increase is the added risk, then 300 or 400 bhp cars shouldn't be allowed anywhere outside racing tracks, whether or not it's a factory config.
That's what would happen in a normal world. In a world where we're one step away from making it illegal to cross the street without proper supervision if you're under 21, it's a whole different story.
If there's a law against driving without insurance, then there's should be a law preventing insurance companies from refusing to cover road worthy cars. It's that simple.

I've a 300+ bhp car and my insurance is wayy higher than if I had a 100 bhp car.

Go to your insurance company and get a quote for a 90bhp car and then for its 130bhp model sibling, the quote will be higher for the more powerful car. So by remapping a car to higher power you will definitely be increasing the insurance risk so you should be paying the appropriate amount.

Insurance claims will most likely be civil cases so there's no jury to be convinced it'd be a judge working on the balance of possibilities. So the insurance company will just have to say that the quote wasn't taken out in utmost good faith and is void, you're expert will be wasted.