User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Good old mpg Vs bhp

  1. #1
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default Good old mpg Vs bhp



    I went back to Red Dot today with my other tuning bo to see which would get better results ontop of the remap. I turned the tunit upto Lv nine (max) but the car wouldn't start on that so I backed off a whole one to Level eight and she fired up. The last car with the 888 remap gave better results with the Tunit but there isn't as much smoke so I wasn't sure what to expect. It ran in at 213bhp but unless you floored it, it wasn't smokey.

    I then stuck the other box on, an old Diagnostix-UK CRD2 (never gave the promised 185bhp on the other car as standard). I had the box specialy made (at extra cost) with jumper to adjust the level, as these weren't a standard feature. I crancked it up to the second to top, the same level I had it on for the runs up north. At this point I had put the turbo back fully under ECU control so it was running around 25psi on the rollers. The figure came in at 221bhp at the fly and 303lbft at the road wheel. Not bad I though but I can do better.

    So I twidled with the turbo and after a few runs pushed out 224.8bhp with 300lbft at the road (turbo was boosting a little over 27psi). As it had done about five runs by then, the figures were starting to fall so I didn't waste my time playing with the boost any more.

    I drove her out on that setting and she was fine about it, except for the violent wheel spinning. So that's how I'll be banging down the Pod with on Sunday all being well and along with my alcohol intercooler sprayer, I'm hoping for some stonking times.

    as for my mpg... I've been had at work, testing the sprayer and different settings as I'm sure you can apreshiate I've hit speeds that are best not mentioned and had a bash on the rolling road. The end result is a very low 41.5mpg and that's filling up on V-Power diesel. Been a very expensive week but it should all be worth it for the fun and thrills on Sunday.

  2. #2
    Regular Member VectraV6CDTi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Wilts
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Best of luck getting some good figures at The Pod matey

  3. #3
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default

    Oggy finally sent the graph over so here it is. It's still kicking 160bhp at 5000rpm.

    The torque is still at the fly wheel, so that's about 355lbft at the fly (480NM). So the theory about the F40 gearbox being rated for only 400NM goes out the window as this one would have destroyed it by now, let alone the last one at 376lbft or some of the 3.0CDTIs at over 400lbft.

    And there can be no doubt that it is road wheel torque as when you see the petrol graphs, like the 2.0Ts last wast week, the roadwheel power and torque cross at 5252, just where they should!
    Last edited by nutron; 27th October 2007 at 15:31.

  4. #4
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nutron View Post
    The torque is still at the fly wheel, so that's about 355lbft at the fly (480NM). So the theory about the F40 gearbox being rated for only 400NM goes out the window.....
    Not a theory, it's clearly stated in TIS! Unless you think VX don't know the ratings of their own gearboxes?!
    Quote Originally Posted by nutron View Post
    .....let alone the last one at 376lbft or some of the 3.0CDTIs at over 400lbft.
    Give it time! You haven't had it long enough really. Of course the box isn't going to go bang the first time you go over 400Nm - but keep doing that over time and it will shorten the life of the gearbox, maybe not in the time you own it but it will have a life shortening effect.

  5. #5
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default

    The other one ran 510NM for a year, 888 remap to over 400NM, the 3.0 CDTI has 400NM as standard, I'm afraid all the facts point to an error on the TIS, which wouldn't be a first. As for Vx knowing anything except how to make money... The 888 Astra was supposed to be 330lbft (447NM) as standard, do you think that 888 and Thurby would sell cars that are destined to go bang?

  6. #6
    Regular Member Marty J CDTI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Yeovil
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Sorry I have to agree with Duncan, we have limitations on gearboxes for a reason to maintain life expectancy of the gearbox, a few blips are ok, agreed, but maintained exposure is gonna do some damage.

    That sounds abit bossy, sorry, jus don't want to writing your pride and joy off lol

  7. #7
    Regular Member cameraman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Leicester
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Looking very impressive, give 'em hell tomorrow

  8. #8
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nutron View Post
    The other one ran 510NM for a year, 888 remap to over 400NM, the 3.0 CDTI has 400NM as standard, I'm afraid all the facts point to an error on the TIS, which wouldn't be a first. As for Vx knowing anything except how to make money... The 888 Astra was supposed to be 330lbft (447NM) as standard, do you think that 888 and Thurby would sell cars that are destined to go bang?
    Regarding all the remap stuff, it's kinda irrelevant given that the rating of the gearboxes is for a standard tune engine. If other tuners are going to exceed that then it's nothing to do with Vx. The facelift 3.0 is 400Nm, the box is rated to 400Nm so nothing being exceeded there. As I said in the RR thread.....
    Quote Originally Posted by Duncan View Post
    The box is rated at 400Nm - i.e. can handle 400Nm day in, day out. Obviously there will be a good margin built in to the box to allow for engines that produce a bit more, but the box is listed as rated at 400Nm.
    The only explanation could be that they've stated the wrong units in TIS - should've been lb.ft. Although that wouldn't make sense as all the figures they use throughout are metric figures - be it torque values for tightening things, power figures (PS/Kw) etc.

    Anyway, at the end of the day if you're happy running your gearbox with that sort of torque then My comments in the RR thread to do with the gearbox rating was in reference to the fact that there's no way my car was kicking out 330lb.ft (445/450Nm) and therefore exceeding the listed rating of the box.

    Like I said, the box is listed as being rated as 400Nm in TIS - in more than one place - and I can't help but think that constantly pushing more through it is going to end up in it's life being shortened. Your last car seemed to be okay - maybe you were just lucky?!

    D

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Maybe Good Things Do Happen To Good People....
    By Leemarksmith in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 16th October 2010, 22:12
  2. Cheap rear spoiler...too good to be any good?!
    By Lightboy in forum Styling
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26th February 2010, 23:03
  3. seems a good set up for a good price?
    By david.aka.judas in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19th January 2009, 09:31
  4. Some good news, and some not so good...
    By Penfold101 in forum The 'Off Topic' room
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 19th August 2008, 10:06
  5. Good spec Signum, Good price too!
    By AndrewTi in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 18th April 2007, 18:44

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •