Jump to content


Photo

Amd Re-map


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 SILVERSPEED

SILVERSPEED

    Member

  • Pip
  • 207 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 07:54 AM

Had a re-map on my VXT on Friday - anyone who is considering it should get off the fence and have it done - its a revalation! PaulB saw your car there - new head?

#2 TURBO-CC

TURBO-CC

    Member

  • Pip
  • 145 posts
  • Location:Southampton (Aldermoor Green)

Posted 21 October 2003 - 08:43 AM

can you post your dyno results? what map are you running(how much bhp/torque)? has the new map done anything to the flat spot at 3-3500 revs? lots of questions but you might be the first since Thorney cheers Colin

#3 SSH1

SSH1

    Super Duper Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 628 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 09:02 AM

Yeah, come on silverspeed fill us in with some details!!!

#4 SILVERSPEED

SILVERSPEED

    Member

  • Pip
  • 207 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 10:33 AM

The results are at home but roughly 256 BHP - and 269 lb. Started at 225 bhp with Milltek and Viper before re-map. After I had Viper fitted the flat spot went!! Mines only phase 1 re-map as I couldn't go to expense of Charge Cooler. Thouroughly recommend the set up though - makes a great car into just something else. Even the exhaust sounds more sporty!! Best £550 I've ever spent on a car. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

#5 TURBO-CC

TURBO-CC

    Member

  • Pip
  • 145 posts
  • Location:Southampton (Aldermoor Green)

Posted 21 October 2003 - 10:38 AM

I've also got the Miltek and viper fitted and I still have a flat spot low down. Those figures look good for the re-map ;) I could be losing £550 of my money shortly :D cheers Colin

#6 SILVERSPEED

SILVERSPEED

    Member

  • Pip
  • 207 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 10:41 AM

Colin Since I had the Viper fitted I have also always used Super Unleaded - I haven't a clue if this would affect the flat spot issue. Just a thought. Regards PS Have you spoken to Craig at AMD about your problem?

#7 madasahatter

madasahatter

    Need to get Out More

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 939 posts
  • Location:South Warwickshire

Posted 21 October 2003 - 11:23 AM

SilverSpeed. I might be interested in having this done eventually, but have a couple of questions (could have asked Thorney as well I s'pose). Has the AMD/Thorney/Vauxhall joint work managed to get over any warranty problems with these mods, or do you have to invalidate your warranty to apply these power mods? How much did you insurance premium change? It is soooo refreshing for me to have a cheap(er) car to insure at the moment, I would be interested in the rise for the extra power? Sounds like a great investment from what Thorney, and now yourself have said. TIA cheers

#8 SILVERSPEED

SILVERSPEED

    Member

  • Pip
  • 207 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 12:39 PM

My VXT has been back to dealer since Milltek and Viper fitted for warranty work - no probs. I understand from AMD that the re-map will not affect warranty and more importantly will not cause problems. This is one of the reasons I went with the Thorney/AMD option. From an insurance point of view is undetectable. ;) The premium increase for the 'hardware' items was £36 per annum. Take it from me you wont regret it - only problem now is stopping the thing!!

#9 streetboy

streetboy

    Billy No Mates

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,860 posts
  • Location:Stone, Staffordshire

Posted 21 October 2003 - 01:00 PM

Has anyone had AMD's remap for the 2.2?

#10 R1 nur

R1 nur

    Scary Internerd

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,996 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stratford Upon Avon
  • Interests:Aerobatics, Cars, Bikes, Birds, having fun.

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:11 PM

Has anyone had AMD's remap for the 2.2?

U know you r 'avin a turbo soon. Don't bother 'till then!

#11 cheeky_chops

cheeky_chops

    Whipping Boy

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,922 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull
  • Interests:my car, snowboarding and drinking

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:14 PM

can i be a bit poof and enquire about fuel consumption?? Up or down?? :D

#12 Jay

Jay

    Member

  • Pip
  • 235 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:n

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:14 PM

Hi Silverspeed, When you say "From an insurance point of view is undetectable." Are you refering to the re-map? For instance is the re-map detectable by Vauxhall plugging their computer into the ECU? Also do you know if AMD offer to re-map the ECU for free if Vauxhall happen to write over it with the original software say during a service. 256 BHP and 269 ft/lb is brilliant. My Astra Coupe was modded to a claimed 234bhp and the difference was incredible so I can imagine the result must feel good. The dyno print would be nice to see if you've got time to post it. As you say £550 is a good deal! cheers Jay

#13 SILVERSPEED

SILVERSPEED

    Member

  • Pip
  • 207 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:26 PM

Jay I was refering to the insurance re re-map. Dont know on the AMD scenario regarding re-mapping for free. The guys down there are very genuine and I think they would help out. Thorney will be better placed to answer that question I think. I cannot forsee why my VX dealer would want to write over the software during the service. IMO its all about engine flush,oil change,pads etc. Unless there is a specific ECU problem they shouldn't be tampering with it - at the end of the day the car is my property! Cheeky Chops - too early on the petrol consumption.Off on my Palmersport day tomorrow so will get a better idea.

#14 iandhd

iandhd

    Scary Internerd

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,756 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:56 PM

On the insurance topic I've just renewed and whilst it wasn't painful to add the mods on with my current supplier, Elephant, I did find I was closing down many far cheaper insurance avenues by having the mods in the first place. My current premium of about £800 (about £30 of which is mods) could be reduced to £550 with the likes of e-Sure and Tesco if the car was standard. When you put it like that it's a bit more to stomach. I will eventually (when I'm not so skint) get over to AMD for the 2.2 remap and I'll be thinking very carefully about what to do about insurance ;) The aim is to get from my current 162bhp to 170-175bhp rally

#15 Chuck

Chuck

    Super Member

  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Interests:Cars, Home Entertainment, Computing

Posted 21 October 2003 - 05:54 PM

So you have no probs with the viper unit?

#16 capelink

capelink

    Member

  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 21 October 2003 - 09:27 PM

Wow, for £550 (+VAT ??) that is indeed good value - for the torque increase alone. I'm a bit confused.. from the Thorney archives, it's been mentioned time and again that you shouldn't take the car over 240bhp without the charge-cooler setup (that's AMD stage 2, with the exhaust/viper). From your figures, it seems that you are pretty well at stage 3, just without the charge-cooler. Infact, a cheeky monkey going by the name of chiptuninguk got a good old slap a few days ago for saying they were producing a 250bhp map without a charge-cooler. I'd be interested to know what AMD said about these limits - are they 'soft' limits or were you lucky to get a good unit out of the Vauxhall engine plant ? Did they give any warnings or just tell you to run on Super + only ?

#17 Thorney

Thorney

    Whipping Boy

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bucks, UK
  • Interests:Global domination.

    Fluffy bunny rabbits.

Posted 22 October 2003 - 08:04 AM

Its a bit over to be honest but as the Miltek has already been fitted there will be less heat build up (chiptuning was recommending a bolt on chip and 250bhp - which the engine can do but without sorting airflow in/out could be disastrous). I wouldn't want to go any higher than 250bhp (in theory the limit is 240bhp) but AmD monitor the air intake temps so were obviously happy with this particualr cars set up. Remember each chip is matched to the car, so they will vary a little from car to car.

#18 chiptuninguk

chiptuninguk

    Member

  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 22 October 2003 - 08:38 AM

Sorry Thorney, but I MUST correct you there. We never ever recommend bolt on chips. We don't fit these ourselves. All our upgrades are remaps via the OBDII port. Adam.

#19 chiptuninguk

chiptuninguk

    Member

  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 22 October 2003 - 08:59 AM

On a more technical note, intake temps themselves don't actually cause engine damage directly. What actually happens with high intake temps (especially on a turbo engine) is that the engine will start to knock. However, on doing so, the knock sensor will signal the ECU to retard ignition and lower the boost in order to stop the knocking. This will result in power loss, but more significantly, save your engine!!! Using higher octance fuel improves the resistance to knocking which is why turbo cars should always use it in order to sustain higher power. The point I am trying to make is that intake temps will simply determine the max power the engine can sustain for any given fuel grade you are using. The safety measures built into the ECU are there to protect the engine from detonation as a result of high intake temps. Should things really go tits up, the ECU will eventually shut things down so that it runs totally safe. Lowering intake temps is a means of running higher sustained power. If the engine can't sustain the power due to intake temps, rest assured that the ECU will take care of this, and the engine will simply produce less power. The debate is, therefore, how to lower intake temps in order to sustain higher power... Adam.

#20 Timbo

Timbo

    Scary Internerd

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,539 posts
  • Location:near heathrow

Posted 22 October 2003 - 06:51 PM

SILVERSPEED, you said 'it was 550 quid well spent', when i spoke to AMD the other day they said it was 550 quid + vat did they do you a deal or did you just forget to add the dreaded vat on. What ever it is im still going to get mine done in the next month or so. :P Timbo




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users