[Closed] gone and had my van remapped ( wow )

* usually called 'Scooby-John', RS-Kev or GTI-Gazzer. For motorbike cocks it's Dave the blade or Gixer John. Whatever it is they are all complete tosspots.

[img] [/img]

Can I ask one genuine thing - is this still wrong in some people's eyes - my old t5 was the 130 bhp version, VW made it with the same 2.5 engine in other versions inc. a 170 bhp. I found when carrying a lot for work it struggled a bit up hills so yes I had it remapped to make same output as 170bhp version, for a bit more low down torque and poke when needed. I wasn't tempted to go for the 200bhp+ some people had done, wanted to stay within limits of what VW already used then. I used posh V power diesel too which is supposed to clean your engine etc. The van drove well, nice and smooth with enough grunt for all situations now, I don't drive like a granny nor a boy racer, just boringly average. I guess maybe still a bad person to have done some might say but it did what I wanted without being OTT.

Diesels can be brilliantly simple engines, they produce as much power as you feed then diesel. There's no ballancing, or tuneing, just turn it upto 11. Older and cheaper ebay tuneing kits simply tricked the engine into dumping more fuel in.

NOx is produced at high temperatures with excess oxygen.

Your 130bhp engine will have turbos, egr and intercoolers and engine maps designed to keep the temperatures as low as possible whilst recirculating as much exhaust gas as possible to keep excess oxygen out. You can easily dial the boost up, blank off the EGR and turn the injectors on for longer and get more power and maybe even better mpg. But combustion temperatures (intercooler nonlonger big enough) and oxygen concentration go up so NOx is produced.

Youre also trying to squeeze more fuel through the same injectors. So it wont atomise properly. In the heat of the engine the droplets burn before they vapourise meaning they turn into soot (as theres no oxygen at the center of the droplet). So the endgine produces far more particulate emissions too.

If VW could make a 170bhp van from the same parts as the 130bhp version, with no hit on mpg or polution, why wouldnt they? They would sell more vans as the comparable transit would only have 130bhp or whatever. The truth is they cant. A re-map can because it never gets tested as rigorously.

@trout thanks, 148k that clutch owes you nothing ! Car I am looking at has a 130bhp petrol model and the 105 diesel - so perhaps clutch / flywheel are different but "the car" can handle it. Definitely leaning towards a remap if we go for that car in diesel which is likely as there are so few petrol models available used

Next thing to ponder, what's more environmentally damaging, the handful percentage wise of remapped vehicles, or the poorly maintained tradesmens vehicles ran on a shoestring to scrape an mot every year.

Edit, on that note, I was behind a united utilities corsa van the other day that had clearly a leaking injector, so big businesses is equally culpable as the skint one man bands

Jambs, petrol and diesel have differing torque curves, low down grunt in diesels, it's why dual mass flywheels were developed for early Common rail TD's, to stop them snapping drive train components

@thisisnot very interesting thanks, have heard justifcations about manufacturers havibg to cater for widely differing fuel quality too. Also it's ironic to talk about testibg properly as we know no diesel (or petrol) has really been tested properly.

@ulysee thanks

I reckon there are far more bad poluters than me on STW mr Edukator

It's always someone else's fault or there's someone worse. Well here it's you who's just made your already dirty diesel absolutely filthy. You and those like you are the problem. There's a thread on here because someone found a fast food box at the roadside - STW outrage, but litter doesn't kill people in large numbers. Diesels, especially filthy remapped diesels, do kill people. And what do gain? It's just easier for you to break the law, you don't "need" that extra power, but people really need cleaner air.

It's about time there was a proper exhaust gas test in the MOT.

ulysse - Member

Next thing to ponder, what's more environmentally damaging

The answer is someone else.
Always is.
Special mention to the chap who only does 50% more miles than average.
Have a pollution test cheating VW as a prize.

<[i]insert slow hand clap gif here[/i]>

Have a pollution test cheating VW as a prize

A pollution test cheating VW in only 2 states in the US where the emissions limits were effectively conceived to all but ban diesels, perfectly legal in the rest of the world. But don't let facts get in the way of riding your high horse

And you are aware that the official VW recall remap due to misinformation causing mass hysteria world wide, is more polluting than the original map?
Mpg down to 30mpg, force regen to achieve the modified emissions limits the engine was never designed for, destroying egr valves in weeks, VAG running out of replacement egr valves, now on backorder with a lead time of months.

Slow handclap gif.

but litter doesn't kill people in large numbers.

I note your concern doesn't extended to animals or litter contribution to environmental degradation / pollution.

Trolling human killing diesel users whilst hypocritically telling people they are ignoring an alternate perspective is your new hobby I guess?

ulysse - Member

A pollution test cheating VW in only 2 states in the US where the emissions limits were effectively conceived to all but ban diesels, perfectly legal in the rest of the world. But don't let facts get in the way of riding your high horse

The only thing getting in the way of riding my horse, which doesn't run on diesel or petrol is the smog from your vehicles.

And you are aware that the official VW recall remap due to misinformation causing mass hysteria world wide, is more polluting than the original map?
Mpg down to 30mpg, force regen to achieve the modified emissions limits the engine was never designed for, destroying egr valves in weeks, VAG running out of replacement egr valves, now on backorder with a lead time of months.

You know what isn't more polluting?
Using your car less.
Thanks for demonstrating your sense of entitlement and spectacularly proving my point.
It's always someone else's problem.

I think everyone should take a read back. The green crusader comment was made in response to the ridiculous notion that a car driver and pedophile were somehow comparable.

But if you all want to look like utter fannys knock yourselves out.

But if you all want to look like utter fannys knock yourselves out.

Isn't that the sole purpose of this forum for some posters?

Isn't that the sole purpose of this forum for some posters?

Not for me, I don't need the help of STW to achieve that.

The green crusader comment was made in response to the ridiculous notion that a car driver and pedophile were somehow comparable.

It was a strong gambit, I think it still has legs.

I think it still has legs.

I'm guessing, and forgive me if I'm wrong, that you've not been a victim of child abuse?

*reads thread title*

*reads last page*

*scratches head*

milleboy - Member

I'm guessing, and forgive me if I'm wrong, that you've not been a victim of child abuse?

Not sexual abuse, no.
But I have breathed in diesel fumes so am almost certainly qualified to comment.

But I have breathed in diesel fumes so am almost certainly qualified to comment.

Really? Did you have years of councilling afterwards to come to terms with?

I think this topic can broadly be summed up with a simple gif.

[img] ?w=650[/img]

@thisisnot very interesting thanks, have heard justifcations about manufacturers havibg to cater for widely differing fuel quality too. Also it's ironic to talk about testibg properly as we know no diesel (or petrol) has really been tested properly.

There'll be an element of that, but I'd think the tests are done with whatever fuel is specified, and the testers are going to go out of their way to make sure it's as good as practicable. That the engine then has to work in the real world everywhere from death valley to Colorado with a filthy fuel tank full of accumulated crap and fuels from all over the world is a slightly different issue.

As for testing, thats just whataboutism (like most of the arguments for remapping on this thread for some reason?). That the test is based on a flawed simulation of real driving which the engines get optimised to meaning they're never as good in the real world is one thing. Then making the engine worse is still worse than a less than perfect starting point.

Has it changed your insurance premiums at all?

I live near Heathrow, I don't fly. I guess that makes remapping our T5 ok, seeing as I breathe partially burnt jet fuel every day.

I live near Heathrow, I don't fly. I guess that makes remapping our T5 ok, seeing as I breathe partially burnt jet fuel every day.

I genuinely can't tell if this is Poe's law or Whataboutism.

Particularly as the poster chooses to live there....

That the test is based on a flawed simulation of real driving which the engines get optimised to meaning they're never as good in the real world is one thing

Were the potential profits so great that VW deemed fraudulently achieved emissions figures worthwhile? You need to question the marketing genius involved

Note to self "utter fanny" best insult ever.

Which is worse for the earth:

Keeping your diesel and using it as before for say another 10 yrs.

Or scrapping it and buying a new petrol car?

Or chucking litter liberally around Milton Keynes as some would silently endorse? C'mon we need balance here people.

#PeakSTW

ctk
my thoughts too but I need the van for work Flooring installer
not seen many petrol vans on the market .

62 years young and planning on keeping it till retirement

what is the possibility that engine maps have improved since my van was built and good remappers have programmed better maps for the indevidual van .

so when the novelty of the extra power has dulled and I revert to driving like a hypermiler as it is me paying for the fuel .
and say I get a couple of miles e tra to the gallon surly my engine is running better than when new in 2005

I certainly dont have the dosh to replace it and would be daft to on a whim so close to getting off the tools .

Kryton, I have never suggested chucking litter around Milton Keynes or anywhere else. Or even implied it.

I limited my litter argument to humans with no mention of other species. And why did I limit it to humans? Because like most people I'm aware that litter can be a problem to animals but I've no idea how many animals are killed by litter copared to diesel soot and NOX, and not wishing to make a false statement limited my case to one of which the facts are well known, humans.

There is no balance. Remapping to improve torque and power increases soot and NOX emissions. For some reason some people on this forum find this acceptable. I don't, so I rightly and reasonably point out that the remappers are making a choice to deliberately increase their contribution a known cause of excess deaths.

Society makes choices, a level of pollution is considered socially acceptable/tolerable. If you choose to deliberately modify your car to make it more polluting it's plain anti-social.

Edukator I can appreciate your "incremental" polution argument but the number of remapped diesels is tiny and their overall impact on pollution is minimal. What is far more significant is increasing over population and urbanisation (central heating is the buggest polluter I understand as is heating our houses warm enough to be able to walk round without a jumper in winter). That plus the whole diesel episode which saw emissions willfully misstated and the EU turn a blind eye. The Americans and Japanese (and most of Asia I think) don't really do diesels for non-commercial vehicles. We where duped.

my case to one of which the facts are well known, humans.

Go, on then, ill give you ten minutes to write down a short synopsis of the impact on humankind of how littering the countryside - that if googled cant be found so could reasonably assumed to be your own knowledge, therefore proving this statement:

I limited my litter argument to humans with no mention of other species. And why did I limit it to humans? Because like most people I'm aware that litter can be a problem to animals but I've no idea how many animals are killed by litter copared to diesel soot and NOX, and not wishing to make a false statement limited my case to one of which the facts are well known, humans.

Of course, if you can't that proves your not the true environmentalist you claim to be and are indeed trolling on the Diesel issue evidenced by ignoring any other environmental argument raised herein.

I make that 10:07 Uk for a response *waits*

People can read and even read back, Kryton. Their comprehension is generally pretty good too. If someone else had written your own last post what would you think of it?

In your shoes attempting to belittle someone whilst failing to respond to the challenge would lower my self esteem.

I've proved my point, night x

P.S you spelled "compared" wrong. 😉

Was it you or your computer that decided to spell "spelt" the American way, and leave the hyphen out of "self-esteem"? 😉

what is the possibility that engine maps have improved since my van was built and good remappers have programmed better maps for the indevidual van .

Zilch. Nadda. Not a sausage.

One bloke in a shed, Vs the engineering department of VAG?

and say I get a couple of miles e tra to the gallon surly my engine is running better than when new in 2005

If you put it through the same tests as the engine would have been through when new, it would without doubt now fail them.

what is the possibility that engine maps have improved since my van was built and good remappers have programmed better maps for the indevidual van .
Zilch. Nadda. Not a sausage.
One bloke in a shed, Vs the engineering department of VAG?

I limited my litter argument to humans with no mention of other species. And why did I limit it to humans? Because like most people I'm aware that litter can be a problem to animals but I've no idea how many animals are killed by litter copared to diesel soot and NOX, and not wishing to make a false statement limited my case to one of which the facts are well known, humans.

Zilch. Nadda. Not a sausage.

Stop sitting on the fence 🙂

I do think that manufacturers design to general parameters, eg fuel quality which can vary greatly in target markets. Also lower spec models are deliberately lower spec, ie artificially depressed power output. As an example of sorts it was widely believed that Porsche didn't fit a LSD into the Cayman or it would have lapped quicker than a 911 which is not acceptable for a car costing 60% of the price. IMO there is more than just emissions.

Edukator do they re-test emissions in the Controle-Technique ? (Note thats only every 2 years too, based on the amount of French cars I see with faulty headlights/brake lights I struggle to think a 2 year test cycle is desirable). At least in the Uk we re-test to a degree and we have started checking the DPF's are still fitted (easy to see why an owner would avoid ££££ by not replacing after discovering their "lifetime" filter had only lasted a few years)

@count thanks for that link, tomorrows breakfast reading.

Seems it wasn't VW rather than Bosch giving them what they asked for.

Classic corporate avoidance of responsibility ? Ask a contractor/third party to do something we don't want to be caught doing ?

[quote=jambalaya ]I do think that manufacturers design to general parameters, eg fuel quality which can vary greatly in target markets.

If they didn't have sensors to detect changes in engine performance due to using different fuel standards, then yes, I expect they'd do that. Assuming that is they sold exactly the same car in target markets with widely varying fuel quality - I'm sure it makes sense for them to sell millions of vehicles which can cope with poor quality fuel into markets where the fuel quality is always good.

Also lower spec models are deliberately lower spec, ie artificially depressed power output. As an example of sorts it was widely believed that Porsche didn't fit a LSD into the Cayman or it would have lapped quicker than a 911 which is not acceptable for a car costing 60% of the price.

That's not a terribly relevant example - sure there are different versions of the same engine block with different power outputs, but you'll find differences in the components other than the engine block (yes, it is a marketing thing as they can have a cheaper version for those buying to a price point and gouge money from those who want a higher spec - but they can also save a bit of money on the cheaper version by using lower spec components whilst getting economy of scale through having a common engine block).

Porsche didn't fit a LSD into the Cayman

It would need drugs to make it look attractive 🙂

By your reasoning, we should scrap all the commercial shipping now in use and build a fleet of wooden sailing boats

That's quite a leap, and I'm not sure how you got there by my reasoning, but yes. We should definitely be aiming at a fleet of ships that use renewable energy sources. I don't think wood is the best material to use for their construction though.

They do an emissions test at the contrôle technique, Jamba, but current limits are so high that a well-maintained 20-year-old diesel passes no problem.