Extra 40-60 bhp from diesel cars?

[Iain McLaren]

Hi,

I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra bhp for
no added fuel consumption.

It has something to do with removing the connector to the air flow sensor,
possibly cutting a wire on it, and adding a little box of tricks to the
circuit. He's done it on his VW and says it's fantastic.

Apparently it works by fooling the engine management systems into thinking
there's more air going into the engine than there really is.

Has anyone heard of this? If it's true and it works, why aren't
manufacturers building it into their engines???

Cheers,

Iain

[John Greystrong]

Iain McLaren wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
> modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra bhp for
> no added fuel consumption.

Time for a new mechanic I fear.

John

[Adrian]

Iain McLaren (iain.mclaren@nospam.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

> I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
> modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra
> bhp for no added fuel consumption.

Uh-huh.

> It has something to do with removing the connector to the air flow
> sensor, possibly cutting a wire on it, and adding a little box of
> tricks to the circuit. He's done it on his VW and says it's fantastic.

How much is he wanting to charge to do it to yours?

> Apparently it works by fooling the engine management systems into
> thinking there's more air going into the engine than there really is.

This guy's a *mechanic*?

> Has anyone heard of this?

Yes. Pushed as being for petrol engines, they've been all over fleaBay,
but they seem to have nearly disappeared. Which says something about
their efficacy.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7927458530

"The mod itself is a small resistor that tells your engine control unit
(ecu) that all of the air coming into the engine is cold and therefore
dense and packed with oxygen. The ecu then takes this info and tells the
injectors to fuel slightly more. This in turn makes for a more powerful
detonation in the cylinders and releases the full potential of your
engine."

Except for the small detail that the lambda will detect that the engine's
running too rich and reduce the fuelling.

On a diesel, the air coming in is unmetered, so there's only three ways
to increase power - more fuel, different injection timing, and more
boost.

> If it's true and it works, why aren't
> manufacturers building it into their engines???

Because it doesn't work.

[Mark Hewitt]

"Adrian" <toomany2cvs@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95865FD837BEFadrianachapmanfreeis@130.133. 1.4...
> Iain McLaren (iain.mclaren@nospam.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
> like they were saying :
>
> On a diesel, the air coming in is unmetered, so there's only three ways
> to increase power - more fuel, different injection timing, and more
> boost.

A friend of mine is getting his TDi Fabia 'chipped' which appearently
changes the injection timing to give another 30bhp. At what cost (apart from
purchase price) I do not know.

[Huw]

"Iain McLaren" <iain.mclaren@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4173741a$0$22746$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
> Hi,
>
> I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
> modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra bhp
> for no added fuel consumption.
>
> It has something to do with removing the connector to the air flow sensor,
> possibly cutting a wire on it, and adding a little box of tricks to the
> circuit. He's done it on his VW and says it's fantastic.
>
> Apparently it works by fooling the engine management systems into thinking
> there's more air going into the engine than there really is.
>
> Has anyone heard of this? If it's true and it works, why aren't
> manufacturers building it into their engines???
>
> Cheers,
>
> Iain
> the

Certainly you can chip electronically controlled engines but it costs.
Surprisingly I have found a slight improvement in fuel consumption when
normally driven, but not as much as indicated by the on-board computer.
An increase of more than 15% tends to increase smoke unacceptably so to get
the 40 to 60 hp you quote is unlikely without consequences, unless you have
a supercar to start with.


Huw

[Adrian]

Huw (hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

> Certainly you can chip electronically controlled engines but it costs.

I suspect this isn't chipping, but the usual "cheap chip" bodge of stuffing
a resistor into the intake air temp sensor, to make the ECU think it's
getting cold dense air.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article <4173741a$0$22746$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
Iain McLaren <iain.mclaren@nospam.com> wrote:
> I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
> modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra bhp
> for no added fuel consumption.

If pretty well any decent engine is modded to produce more power it will
use more fuel when that extra power is demanded. Otherwise you could make
an engine that used no fuel at all. Think about it...

> It has something to do with removing the connector to the air flow
> sensor, possibly cutting a wire on it, and adding a little box of
> tricks to the circuit. He's done it on his VW and says it's fantastic.

And this is your mechanic?

> Apparently it works by fooling the engine management systems into
> thinking there's more air going into the engine than there really is.

You can increase the maximum power of a diesel slightly by overfuelling,
but this will be accompanied by lots of smoke and is rather anti-social -
oh, and illegal.

> Has anyone heard of this? If it's true and it works, why aren't
> manufacturers building it into their engines???

Many turbo diesels can indeed be relatively easily modified to produce a
lot more power by re-mapping. This costs several hundred pounds. And the
makers may well do just this on future models.

--
*Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Iain McLaren]

>> It has something to do with removing the connector to the air flow
>> sensor, possibly cutting a wire on it, and adding a little box of
>> tricks to the circuit. He's done it on his VW and says it's fantastic.
>
> How much is he wanting to charge to do it to yours?

Nowt - I ain't got a Diesel! It was part of a general conversation to do
with air mass sensors (mine was giving an intermittent engine warning
light). He said they were available for £300, but he'd got his for about
£180.

Hmmmm.

[Ian Johnston]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:38:06 UTC, Adrian <toomany2cvs@gmail.com>
wrote:

: Huw (hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like
: they were saying :
:
: > Certainly you can chip electronically controlled engines but it costs.
:
: I suspect this isn't chipping, but the usual "cheap chip" bodge of stuffing
: a resistor into the intake air temp sensor, to make the ECU think it's
: getting cold dense air.

Can I get another 40 - 60hp out of my 2CV by pulling the choke out a
bit, then?

Ian
--

[Adrian]

Ian Johnston (NOianSPAM.NOgroupsSPAM@btinternet.com) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

>: I suspect this isn't chipping, but the usual "cheap chip" bodge of
>: stuffing a resistor into the intake air temp sensor, to make the ECU
>: think it's getting cold dense air.

> Can I get another 40 - 60hp out of my 2CV by pulling the choke out a
> bit, then?

Apparently. After all, it works on all cars made after 1988, according to
the fleaBay link I posted - and there's no difference on any other
"normal" 2cv before that date.

Doesn't seem to work on mine, though. I must email the seller and ask.

[Uno Hoo!]

"Mark Hewitt" <mail@markhewittDotCoDotUk.spammers.will.die> wrote in message
news:ckvv7h$u3a$1@ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
>
> "Adrian" <toomany2cvs@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns95865FD837BEFadrianachapmanfreeis@130.133. 1.4...
>> Iain McLaren (iain.mclaren@nospam.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
>> like they were saying :
>>
>> On a diesel, the air coming in is unmetered, so there's only three ways
>> to increase power - more fuel, different injection timing, and more
>> boost.
>
> A friend of mine is getting his TDi Fabia 'chipped' which appearently
> changes the injection timing to give another 30bhp. At what cost (apart
> from purchase price) I do not know.

I hope your friend has discussed his modification with his insurance
company. When I was considering having the power on my Rover 75 CDT boosted
by a manufacturer's modification from 116 bhp to 131 bhp, my existing
insurer (Axa) advised me that they did not insure modified cars. When I
phoned around I found one or two who would, - at ridiculously increased
premiums. I've now changed my car to a Rover 75 CDTi, which has the higher
power engine as standard, and Axa have continued to insure me with no
increase in premium. Crackers!

Kev

[Uno Hoo!]

"Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4cffb98a1bdave@davenoise.co.uk...
> In article <4173741a$0$22746$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
> Iain McLaren <iain.mclaren@nospam.com> wrote:
>> I was speaking to my mechanic at the weekend. He says there's a little
>> modification you can make to a diesel engine that gives 40-60 extra bhp
>> for no added fuel consumption.
>
> If pretty well any decent engine is modded to produce more power it will
> use more fuel when that extra power is demanded. Otherwise you could make
> an engine that used no fuel at all. Think about it...


The fuel consumption figures for the Rover 75 CDT automatic (116ps) and the
CDTi automatic (131ps) are identical for urban/extra urban/and combined. For
the manual equivalent the CDTi is 1 mpg worse on urban, 2.9 mpg better on
extra urban, and identical on combined. Very strange !!

Kev

[Guy King]

The message <4173741a$0$22746$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>
from "Iain McLaren" <iain.mclaren@nospam.com> contains these words:

> Has anyone heard of this? If it's true and it works, why aren't
> manufacturers building it into their engines???

Because they decide how long they want the engine to live and set the
fuelling accordingly.

And if anyone's fool enough to believe they can get 40-60bhp extra
they're living in cloud cuckoo land and deserve to be parted from their
money as fast as possible.

--
Skipweasel.
In the beginning was the word.
And the word was Aardvark.

[Andy Hewitt]

Mark Hewitt <mail@markhewittDotCoDotUk.spammers.will.die> wrote:

> "Adrian" <toomany2cvs@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns95865FD837BEFadrianachapmanfreeis@130.133. 1.4...
> > Iain McLaren (iain.mclaren@nospam.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
> > like they were saying :
> >
> > On a diesel, the air coming in is unmetered, so there's only three ways
> > to increase power - more fuel, different injection timing, and more
> > boost.
>
> A friend of mine is getting his TDi Fabia 'chipped' which appearently
> changes the injection timing to give another 30bhp. At what cost (apart from
> purchase price) I do not know.

*BANG*

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

[Andy Hewitt]

Iain McLaren <iain.mclaren@nospam.com> wrote:

<snipped text>

> Has anyone heard of this? If it's true and it works, why aren't
> manufacturers building it into their engines???

To add to what's already been said, the manufacturers could quite easily
get much more power out of any engine if they so desired.

However, you need to consider that they have done maybe millions, if not
tens of millions of pounds of research and development into making just
a single engine for their range [1]. This engine not only has to
perform, and be economical, but be reliable too. Drivability is also a
major factor.

In all the engine is tuned as a compromise. It gives reasonable
performance, at a reasonable economy, and has an acceptable life span. A
large majority of drivers will probably want comfort and a smooth drive
too.

To give you some idea, in the late 80's Honda produced a 1.5ltr V6
engine for Formula 1 cars, it was turbo charged, and in one qualifying
session they obtained 1500BHP. Of course this lasted about 12 laps of
use - or about 36 miles of your average track. They also only idle at
about 3000 rpm too, and consume 60 litres of fuel every 15-20 laps.

You need a car to do a little more than this, so obviously you cannot
produce such power.

The engine will have been designed to work for, say, 100,000 miles
reliably at a reasonable power output. They will have calculated how
much metal is required to strengthen the block so as to not fail through
fatigue before this time.

In some cases you will note that an engine may well have been
over-engineered, and will surpass this mileage by some margin, Volvos
exceed 300,000 miles for example. Some cars may not make this at all,
Alfas commonly fail at 50,000 miles (or less), but have the highest
output of any normally aspirated 2.0ltr engine in mass production (see
the pattern).

You only need to increase power by a small amount, 20BHP perhaps, to
decrease the life span of an engine. However, the performance gain is
actually quite minimal. Indeed, you may gain performance in some ways,
and actually lose in others.

The engine tuning in not linear, and at some point in the rev range no
more fuel is added, and no more advance is used on the timing. Unless
you know where to change the timing, fuelling and air flow, you will
most likely cause more problems than you save.

There is also no such thing as a free lunch. If you increase fuel to get
more power, you will also increase the fuel used, thus harming the fuel
economy.

Of course you could go the other way, and decrease power to increase
economy and engine life, and not actually notice the difference as much
as you'd think.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article <cl10cl$oip$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>,
Uno Hoo! <kev@dropthisbigfoot.com> wrote:
> > If pretty well any decent engine is modded to produce more power it
> > will use more fuel when that extra power is demanded. Otherwise you
> > could make an engine that used no fuel at all. Think about it...


> The fuel consumption figures for the Rover 75 CDT automatic (116ps) and
> the CDTi automatic (131ps) are identical for urban/extra urban/and
> combined. For the manual equivalent the CDTi is 1 mpg worse on urban,
> 2.9 mpg better on extra urban, and identical on combined. Very strange
> !!

Not strange since none of these figures makes use of the maximum power.
The maximum speed consumption figures would be rather more revealing.

It's also common to raise the gearing along with a boost in power - if
the factory does it.

--
*The severity of the itch is proportional to the reach *

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Guy King]

The message <1glva2l.1kw66lp18qwbc5N%hairy.biker@spamcop.net>
from hairy.biker@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) contains these words:

> You only need to increase power by a small amount, 20BHP perhaps, to
> decrease the life span of an engine. However, the performance gain is
> actually quite minimal.

This is the trouble with Max Power ideas - it's generally only the sort
of plonker that's obsessed with peak output that drives at full throttle
that often anyway.

--
Skipweasel.
In the beginning was the word.
And the word was Aardvark.

[Andy Hewitt]

Guy King <guy.king@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:

> The message <1glva2l.1kw66lp18qwbc5N%hairy.biker@spamcop.net>
> from hairy.biker@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) contains these words:
>
> > You only need to increase power by a small amount, 20BHP perhaps, to
> > decrease the life span of an engine. However, the performance gain is
> > actually quite minimal.
>
> This is the trouble with Max Power ideas - it's generally only the sort
> of plonker that's obsessed with peak output that drives at full throttle
> that often anyway.

That's true. There's certainly no quick fix for better economy though,
better driving is about the cheapest thing to do.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

[Guy King]

The message <1glvim0.ws7xq6zud3vaN%hairy.biker@spamcop.net>
from hairy.biker@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) contains these words:

> better driving is about the cheapest thing to do.

Only for those with the wit to do it.

--
Skipweasel.
In the beginning was the word.
And the word was Aardvark.

[Will Reeve]

Guy King wrote:
> The message <1glvim0.ws7xq6zud3vaN%hairy.biker@spamcop.net>
> from hairy.biker@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) contains these words:
>
>> better driving is about the cheapest thing to do.
>
> Only for those with the wit to do it.

It's pathetically easy to do it should be in the test! The simplest one to
learn is if the lights just turn red a few meters ahead, instead of driving
at 30mph up to them and slamming on the brakes, just lift of the throttle!
nearly every trip I am in the left lane and do this and someone races past
in the right lane and brakes hard to a standstill for the red, lights change
and I just cruise past him (and lets face it, it's always a bloke!), as I am
still moving!

I put this down to the fact I am rapidly becoming a tight old git!

You DON'T get there any slower but you do get there LESS stressed and it
saves a lot of cash in the mpg state!

Will

[Guy King]

The message <4174ded5$0$47989$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>
from "Will Reeve" <will@reeve.org.uk> contains these words:

> It's pathetically easy to do it should be in the test!

It's one of the things I used to teach learners. Used to have a session
where the game was to travel for 15 minutes without coming to a complete
stop[1] which isn't easy round Watford. Didn't harf make 'em look well
ahead and consider approach speed.

[1] Though of course I always included at least one junction with a STOP
sign to make sure they were awake.

--
Skipweasel.
In the beginning was the word.
And the word was Aardvark.

[Richard]

Guy King wrote:
> It's one of the things I used to teach learners. Used to have a session
> where the game was to travel for 15 minutes without coming to a complete
> stop[1] which isn't easy round Watford. Didn't harf make 'em look well
> ahead and consider approach speed.

It's those who are used to driving without power to spare - truck
drivers, cyclists, and 1.1 Escort owners - who seem to do this best,
naturally. :-)

R.

[Guy King]

The message <cl39i5$rgm$1@hermes.shef.ac.uk>
from Richard <richard@nomail.nospam.thanks> contains these words:

> It's those who are used to driving without power to spare - truck
> drivers, cyclists, and 1.1 Escort owners - who seem to do this best,
> naturally. :-)

I used to dread learners who'd never ridden a bike. They were generally
clueless.

The very worst were lawyers - they seemed to think there was always a
right way and a wrong way, and couldn't accept that there's more than
one way of skinning a cat.

--
Skipweasel.
In the beginning was the word.
And the word was Aardvark.

[Andy Hewitt]

Will Reeve <will@reeve.org.uk> wrote:

> Guy King wrote:
> > The message <1glvim0.ws7xq6zud3vaN%hairy.biker@spamcop.net>
> > from hairy.biker@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) contains these words:
> >
> >> better driving is about the cheapest thing to do.
> >
> > Only for those with the wit to do it.
>
> It's pathetically easy to do it should be in the test! The simplest one to
> learn is if the lights just turn red a few meters ahead, instead of driving
> at 30mph up to them and slamming on the brakes, just lift of the throttle!
> nearly every trip I am in the left lane and do this and someone races past
> in the right lane and brakes hard to a standstill for the red, lights change
> and I just cruise past him (and lets face it, it's always a bloke!), as I am
> still moving!
>
> I put this down to the fact I am rapidly becoming a tight old git!
>
> You DON'T get there any slower but you do get there LESS stressed and it
> saves a lot of cash in the mpg state!

Strangely enough I also ride like this on the motorbike, although it
usually results in regularly siezed brakes. That certainly has horses to
spare.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com