# ECU re-mapping



## bradshaw47

I am considering having my 2004 Hymer b504 (fiat engine 127hp) re-mapped by Quantum Tuning. Has anyone had this done and if so I would particularly like to hear how it has worked out and your experience of using Quantum Tuning.


----------



## missbusybusy

its worth considering if you will be completely happy ! Fiat spent a lot of money and resource getting in right in varied conditions, Do you think a small outfit can do better ? I think not


----------



## tomar

*ECU Re Mapping*

Re Mapping is a great way to achieve optimal performance from your Motorhome and contrary to other posted comments Fiat only map engines for the standard commercial range of vehicles which are perceived to be running with relatively light loads.

Motorhomes are normally running fully loaded and therefore benefit hugely from re mapping which will provide improved torque characteristics which enable improved acceleration and improved uphill performance. Fuel economies are also claimed but in practice I find this is hardly noticeable.

Had my 3 litre 180hp Multijet Fiat engine re mapped after a couple of thousand miles and delighted by the results from Quantum.


----------



## sideways

My Autotrail has been chipped from 127bhp to 160bhp its got loads of grunt, however if you have cruise control beware the clutch.


----------



## simplyjimbo

I had my Fiat 3 Litre re-mapped from 180 to 200 Bhp by Richard Davies of Wiltshire Superchips.
Better fuel economy now, more torque when towing the car trailer and lower revs at cruising speeds.
It does not have a Cruise Control facility, so I can't advise on the C/C related post.


----------



## uncleswede

I had my Fiat 2.3l 130 multi-jet remapped by Quantum 2 years ago and am very pleased with it. 

Because of comments about overpowering the clutch, rather than the maximum performance mapping, I opted for the 'middle-ground' map that would give a modest performance gain with a modest improvement in fuel consumption. 

In fact the performance gain is very noticeable, particularly going up hills but the fuel consumption is only a tad improved. I was happy with this as we do a lot of mountain driving (which kills fuel consumption, of course!) and was primarily interested in performance.

Rgds
CD


----------



## trek

Another warning from me about your clutch!


My mate had his remapped and he was convinced every aspect of the performance was better

I suppose you do if you spend hundreds and convince yourself it's money well spent . 

Anyway clutch burnt out at 30,000 miles on his Ducato

It has cruise control so the use of that may have contributed to the premature failure of clutch. By allowing engine to labour in too high a gear with all that extra power 

:lol: 

But this was the beginning of his woes as the mechanic who changed the clutch may not have refilled the gearbox with oil or tighten up the drain plug enough as on their next run out the gearbox melted through lack of oil and missing drain plug ( of course he took no responsibility for the damaged gearbox)

So they had to fit a "refurbished" 2nd hand box and that too failed whilst in France

So I agree with miss busybody, not sure my mate does (at least he wouldn't want to admit it ) but he is a lot more careful driving and now changes gears much more


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE-MAPPING*

Thanks for all your replies and comments both favourable and cautionary. I do have cruise control fitted but hardly ever use it, so if I go ahead, it will be easy for me to follow the advice and not use cruise control.


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE-MAPPING*

Thanks for all your replies and comments both favourable and cautionary. I do have cruise control fitted but hardly ever use it, so if I go ahead, it will be easy for me to follow the advice and not use cruise control.


----------



## teemyob

I bought a chip re-map with hand held device to update and or remove the re-map.

I am very please with the extra torque. But it is no better with MPG that they claimed.

Mine is a Bluefin from http://www.superchips.co.uk/

Not on the Motorhome but on my Traveliner

TM


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE-MAPPING*

Thanks teem yob - Opinion generally seems to be from those that have had a re-map or re-chipping that the fuel economies/savings are generally less than advertised but most appear to be happy with the extra torque and pulling power on hills without the constant need for changing down a gear.


----------



## Zebedee

Hi Bradshaw

A friend of ours has a little box full of wizardry that is very simple to install (or remove if necessary) and does much the same as a chip but with more user control.

He has (I think) three torque settings that he can alter with the flick of a switch, and he is impressed by the better performance and no significant difference in the fuel consumption.

It cost £150 I think, but that was a show offer, and it may be about £180 otherwise. Tailored to his present van of course, but the firm will re-program it for a new van if he changes - for about £20 I think.

After all that you want to know the make, don't you!

   Ancient memory again!!

If you are interested I'll ask him next time we meet, and will let you know. It seems a lot more user tweakable than a re-map, which you are stuck with (more or less) once it's done.

Dave


P.S. Please PM if interested so I'm sure to get the message.


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE-MAPPING*

Hi Zebedee, thanks for your response. Yes the make of the piece of kit would be handy. Do you also know if it was a diy or supplier install?


----------



## Mrplodd

Without remapping the ECU the only "plug in" option is a gizzmo that fools the ECU (by sending altered readings) into supplying more fuel all the time!! It works but its primitive and will impact your MPG adversly.

I have a 3 litre Fiat that the previous owner had remapped, it now has just short of 200BHP and 27% more torque (and it feels like it  ) But like others have said when using CC its VERY easy to get clutch slip in higher gears at low engine revs, especially when you have a smart car and trailer hanging off the towbar!! (The engine produces much more torque than the clutch simply is not capable of transmitting) Its not an issue once you get over about 3000RPM

So long as you are aware of the issue and change down to keep the revs UP, (rather than simply relying on the huge torque at lower engine speeds) then its not an issue but you DO need to VERY vigilant when using cruise control, if you are not then you are going to be buying a new clutch very soon  

Its a fair bit of dosh to get a remap done so ask yourself if its really necessary. On my 3 litre I dont think its necessary, but I havent driven it without the remap.


----------



## Zebedee

Ploddy is right I am sure, but it was the huge difference in cost between a "proper" remap and the gizmo that attracted my friend, along with a written money back guarantee if he wasn't satisfied.

It is a DIY install, and undoubtedly uses a drop more juice - but so would any system including a remap 'cos you don't get something for nothing in the world of Physics. 8O

Driven without a heavy right boot my friend's verdict is (in a nutshell) "_Not much difference noticed on the flat, but less gear changes needed on a slope_". He has been sensible in selecting only a moderate increase in power, having heard the stories of clutch failure all too often.

Can't comment further as I have no personal experience of either system.

Dave


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE--MAP*

Hi Mrplodd Thanks for your response - I am considering re-mapping because I find the 2.8 JTD engine with 127 hp a little under powered for my Hymer M/H. My previous M/H had a Renault 2.5 dci with 120 hp and it was not as tall or as heavy as my current m/h. On any type of hill or incline it very runs out of pulling power in 5th and I am then having to change down and stay in 4th until the speed is fairly high before I can change back into 5th. It would be nice if by re-mapping I could achieve more torque and hence stay in 5th for longer periods, and the added fuel economies would be nice but I am not overly confident of achieving anything noticeable, after looking at previous entries on this subject on this site and others. As previously stated, CC is available but I rarely use it.


----------



## wilse

I had a booster remap, and 32,000 miles later, all is well.

And yes, I have cruise. Can't say I've had any slip, but it won't go up and hills in 6th either, the semi auto gearbox always drops down a gear... or two!

MPG no different, but I was told it wouldn't change.
It was done for drive-ability.

It's a 2.5L Renault with Quickshift6.

I would get it done, the extra torque makes a world of difference [well on the Renault anyway.]

w

PS, here's the original post, you may find interesting.

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopict-86172-.html


----------



## trek

Hi Bradshaw47

you say " It would be nice if by re-mapping I could achieve more torque and hence stay in 5th for longer periods, and the added fuel economies would be nice " ( is that the sales blurb?)

staying in top going up a hill will just labour the engine and put maximum load onto it hence more fuel used plus the strain on the clutch - I would save the chip money for other camper goodies & just change down

I don't profess to being knowledgeable on engines, power , torque or chipping etc but it may be worth looking at the engine power output graphs for your engine to see if it shows what revs to run the engine at for maximum torque , and go up these hills at or around those engine revs in a gear that its comfortable in ? hope that makes sense ?

you could get something like a Scangauge or other device that will show the actual engine load and drive to that trying to achieve the lowest levels by changing gears or changing throttle position ( even Ipads & android tablets can be used buy getting appropriate app & OBDII wifi or bluetooth interface )


----------



## bradshaw47

*ECU RE-MAPPING*

about Hi wilse, thanks for your favourable comments re-mapping. With my previous m/h it was also to drop down from 6th to 5th on all but the slightest of inclines, but it was on a manual gearbox. Having now read your original post, I can report there was another Lunar Telstar out there - loved the renault side but had too many problems with the Lunar conversion!!
Have now received sufficient positive responses about re-mapping, so am inclined to proceed with this solution - but will just wait a short while to see if I get any reports from members that have re-mapped and had a bad experience.


----------



## TheNomad

I had my 2001 2.8JTD mapped by Fiat.

That was after literally millions of hours of research and testing, by hundreds of the best specialist automotive design engineers. 

They've mapped it to provide the optimum balance between torque, strain on drive train, economy, and longevity.

Works just fine for me. It ain't broke so don't need fixing.

If I'd wanted a sports car I'd have bought a sports car.


----------



## uncleswede

When I got our MH remapped I wasn't after a sports car - just a motorhome that wouldn't struggle quite so much up mountain roads (on which we travel a lot)


----------



## TheNomad

If all those hundreds of expert, professional design engineers had thought that giving that engine and drive train 10%, or 20%, or 30% more torque, without affecting reliability, engine life, clutch life, drive shaft life, bearings, etc etc, wouldn't they have done so?

The light commercial automotive sector is a REALLY competitive marketplace. 
Fleet buyers would be falling over themselves to buy a van with a spec that does MORE mpgs. with MORE torque, with no reliability/component failure sacrifice in exchange.
All the van makers are in business to sell vans and make profit....if one had found such a Holy Grail, you can bet they'd have exploited it to win market share from their competitors.
More torque, more mpg, no sacrifice in reliability?
Just doesn't add up.

For me, the factory spec is the one that's been tested and tested and tested over gazillions of miles. 
I'd rather trust all those design engineers and all that testing.
I'd rather have the engine, the turbo, the clutch the drive shafts, lasting whilst they lug 3.5 tonnes of weight around all the time; even if it means shifting down a gear on a hill.


----------



## stewartwebr

Current motorhome is the 4th to be done by this company. Current is a Euro6 180BHP which is uprated to 205BHP. No difference in fuel economy, but far better pulling ability on hills especially when towing the car.

Great customer service and never had an issue, best prices are at the shows where they do a great discount.

Current one was done by a guy in Durham who did an amzing deal, far better than was on offer at the shows.

Highly recommended, and of course if you are not happy within 30 days they will remove it and give full refund, cant ask more than that.


----------



## deefordog

stewartwebr said:


> Current motorhome is the 4th to be done by this company. Current is a Euro6 180BHP which is uprated to 205BHP. No difference in fuel economy, but far better pulling ability on hills especially when towing the car.
> 
> Great customer service and never had an issue, best prices are at the shows where they do a great discount.
> 
> Current one was done by a guy in Durham who did an amzing deal, far better than was on offer at the shows.
> 
> Highly recommended, and of course if you are not happy within 30 days they will remove it and give full refund, cant ask more than that.


Quantum?


----------



## stewartwebr

Yes...sorry should have said Quantum which were formerly called WOW Power

No issues and fully recommend.

Stewart


----------



## lipupfatty

Greetings,
Had problems with my van pulling on hills, changed the fuel filter, massive difference, worth considering before a remap and much cheaper. :idea:


----------



## sideways

My van had been done by wow power before I bought it, it now as I said has 160 bhp its a pleasure to drive, it had had a clutch just before I bought it at 25,000 miles the guy towed a motor bike trailer to track days and lived up in the Cumbrian hills and I never thought any more about it, been to Europe in the van several times no problems, Anyway last summer I decided to fit cruise control I was pleased with the results but was only running about locally, I set off to Spain in Dec fully loaded at 3850KG and on the way to Southampton noticed on a long drag on the M1 with cruise engaged the clutch slipped, It caught me unawares I was listening to the radio and it took me a couple of seconds to realise what was happening, obviousely it had glazed it and it slipped again a couple of times. 
When I got off the boat I decided to not use the cruise and went all the way to Benidorm up and down some big drags with no issues. I also got it back with no issues, I have a new clutch and am about to fit it.
In my opinion whats happening is that in 5th gear at 2000 revs I,m doing 60mph the turbo is blowing hard at that and as soon as the speed drops off the cruise floors the throttle, your getting maximum boost probably maximum torque and the clutch just wont take it especially when your running at maximum weight. however I feel its still worth having the power upgrade as long as you drive accordingly.


----------



## Stanner

> If all those hundreds of expert, professional design engineers had thought that giving that engine and drive train 10%, or 20%, or 30% more torque, without affecting reliability, engine life, clutch life, drive shaft life, bearings, etc etc, wouldn't they have done so?
> 
> The light commercial automotive sector is a REALLY competitive marketplace.
> Fleet buyers would be falling over themselves to buy a van with a spec that does MORE mpgs. with MORE torque, with no reliability/component failure sacrifice in exchange.
> All the van makers are in business to sell vans and make profit....if one had found such a Holy Grail, you can bet they'd have exploited it to win market share from their competitors.
> More torque, more mpg, no sacrifice in reliability?
> Just doesn't add up.
> 
> For me, the factory spec is the one that's been tested and tested and tested over gazillions of miles.
> I'd rather trust all those design engineers and all that testing.
> I'd rather have the engine, the turbo, the clutch the drive shafts, lasting whilst they lug 3.5 tonnes of weight around all the time; even if it means shifting down a gear on a hill.


A guy I know actually works for the company (based in Austria) which carries out the "mapping" of new engines for most of the large European manufacturers.

He runs a diesel and he has not (and will not) had it re-mapped, even though he could do it himself. :wink:


----------



## BillCreer

The re mapping companies argue that Manufacturers optimise their map settings in order to show favourable results in the compulsory EU Fuel Consumption tests. The Manufacturers will set the mappings for an average configuration base vehicle.
These tests do not reflect real world conditions especially when most of the base vehicles being tested do not end up as overweight motorhomes.
Seems a logical argument in favour of some re mapping to me.


----------



## bigtwin

Some manufacturers offer two power levels from the same unit - if that isn't remapping, what is it!


----------



## TheNomad

bigtwin said:


> Some manufacturers offer two power levels from the same unit - if that isn't remapping, what is it!


It ain't the same unit.

The vehicle designers will have engineered and rigorously tested for hundreds of thousands of hours, in all sorts of environmental conditions, all of the drive train components to be able to cope with the higher level of torque.

There'll be things added to enable the vehicle to do the life-expected mileage, in the range of expected load/conditions, like a heavier duty clutch, bigger/strong clutch bearings, bigger con rod bearings, bigger main shaft bearings, twin turbo, stronger first motion shaft, stronger drive shafts, higher tensile strength forgings, etc etc etc.

Torgue = physical stress. 
Increase torque by (say) 30%, and you are increasing the stresses on all the drive train components in your motorhome by 30%. Almost one-third more stress on each and all of those components. Components that were not designed to take those levels of stress for any length of time.

Yes, they'll take them for some while, because the expert design engineers have built in a margin. But those additional peak stresses MUST, by all the laws of automotive physics, lead to earlier/more catastrophic drive train failure.

If your back street re-mapper who knows nothing of the materials science of the components in your engine, is so confident that adding such extra strains to your vehicle does no harm at all to it, just ask them to guarantee your vehicles drive train components for say 5 years of 100,000 miles, rather than their "we'll give you your money back within just 1 month"......


----------



## wakk44

I always thought that the only difference between 2 models with different power options was the ECU mapping and all the drive train components were exactly the same. :?


----------



## chasper

If you take your remapped vehicle to say a main dealer for a service is there not a danger that they might check for software updates and overwrite your remap?


----------



## BillCreer

Diesel engine in commercial vehicle chassis are designed by their manufacturers to be abused under all sorts of loads and conditions.
I doubt if people who have their engines re mapped in MHs then go out and thrash their engines. 
The majority take advantage of the extra torque and power only on the comparatively rare occasion that it is required.
How often do you hear about a remapped engine giving more trouble than a standard unit? Maybe the odd clutch but I'm sure we would have seen reports on here.


----------



## missbusybusy

Hi 
out of interest when you have had the ECU remapped, do the mapping / fitting company take the vehicle to a rolling road dyno or do you ?
Terry


----------



## BillCreer

I think most of them do the mapping while the vehicle is sat on a rolling road / dynamometer so they can observe the changes they are making. I would be worried if they didn't.


----------



## TheNomad

I thought ECU mapping measured/amended torque and power at the crank, not the driven road wheels.
The two that I have experience of both did that.


----------



## BillCreer

TheNomad said:


> I thought ECU mapping measured/amended torque and power at the crank, not the driven road wheels.
> The two that I have experience of both did that.


How did they do that? Did they remove the engine?


----------



## Stanner

> I think most of them do the mapping while the vehicle is sat on a rolling road / dynamometer so they can observe the changes they are making. I would be worried if they didn't.


And the power "indicated" at the road wheels by the rolling road all depends on who calibrated it and how. The BHP "at the flywheel" then depends on an extrapolation of the power loss through the transmission from the apparent "drag" of the transmission as estimated by the dynamometer operator.

So basically the new power output is an estimation measured from a guessed starting point.

Well that's how it was described to me.

So as I see it the best you will get is an indication of the new position compared with the old position - a relative improvement NOT an absolute position.


----------



## BillCreer

The drag through the gearbox and running gear is pretty much a constant so any power increases gained will measure the same no matter where you take them, road wheels or crankshaft,so no guess work involved.


----------



## Stanner

BillCreer said:


> The drag through the gearbox and running gear is pretty much a constant so any power increases gained will measure the same no matter where you take them, road wheels or crankshaft,so no guess work involved.


A constant for ALL vehicles? Or for each vehicle?

Yes, as I said, the "relative" increase can be quantified, but that's all.


----------



## Stanner

An example of the perils of believing everything a rolling road (and it's operator) tells you.

http://www.pugheaven.co.uk/THE DANGERS OF ROLLING ROAD.htm


----------



## Zebedee

*Re: ECU RE-MAPPING*



> Bradshaw said :- Hi Zebedee, thanks for your response. Yes the make of the piece of kit would be handy. Do you also know if it was a diy or supplier install?


Just got in contact with my friend.

Details as received . . .

Energy Tuning Ltd
www.ENERGY-TUNING.CO.UK
01670 818914
Darren Darling

He is still pleased with the gadget, but has been very sensible from the start. He didn't expect miracles in performance, and anticipated similar or reduced fuel economy.

He just finds the van more relaxing to drive now it has a bit more grunt where he needs it.

Hope this helps you and others.

Dave


----------



## listerdiesel

We used to use our company vans with a trailer for collections and deliveries of our large battery chargers. First was a Vauxhall/Bedford Midi with 75bhp and 3.5 tonne overall train weight.

Next up we looked for more power and bought a new Vauxhall Movano (Renault Master) with 108bhp (2.8Dti turbo) and 4.8 tonnes train weight.

Then we jumped up in power with the Renault Trafic 2.5DCi 140, which gave us 4.9 tonnes train weight and 140hp.

Last was the Renault Trafic 2.5DCi 150, 4.9 tonnes train weight and 150hp.

All of those engines covered ~250k miles untouched. The Movano blew up in Spain after a cambelt change by a local Opel dealer went wrong, but apart from that, which wasn't an engine fault as such it was fine.

We chose the engines to suit the duty, we didn't buy the cheapest version and complain later on that it wasn't up to the job. All bar the Midi had tachographs by the way.

It seems to me that too often the choice of engine power is not given sufficient priority when choosing which engine, and some of the tales we here are possibly a result of that policy.

The other significant thing is that the Trafics both have 6-speed gearboxes, Movano was 5-speed and the Midi manfully struggled with four speeds.

We still have the two Trafics, still on original engines and those engines are untouched other than oil and filter changes. The older 2004 one has done something like 500,000kms, not exactly sure as the tachograph stopped recording.

If I was in the market today for a motorhome, I would be looking for the biggest and ugliest diesel available, especially if I was going to tow.

Another angle is the Discovery we run. It is a 4litre V8 with LPG, gives us something like 175bhp, down a bit on the book figure of 185bhp but we lose a bit on LPG.

That pulls nearly 6 tonnes at something like 19mpg equivalent based on LPG and petrol prices. That is fine for us, we didn't buy it for economy, we bought it to do a job which was to tow the trailer, and it does that very well.

We could have bought the same vehicle with the 2.5 TD5, 135bhp, have it chipped up to 160bhp or more, but it was never a fully developed engine and Land Rover dropped it like a hot potato when they were owned by Ford. It is Euro3 compliant but that is it, a mechanical dead end.

Renault no longer offer the 2.5 engines in the Trafic. When we bought our DCi 150 the sales guy said that it was going to be discontinued and replaced by the smaller 2.2litre 120hp.

Peter


----------



## BillCreer

Stanner said:


> An example of the perils of believing everything a rolling road (and it's operator) tells you.
> 
> http://www.pugheaven.co.uk/THE DANGERS OF ROLLING ROAD.htm


All that proves is that there are some incompietent people out there who don't know how to do basic tuning or operate their equipment.

There is no other way of verifying, with any accuracy, the results of any tuning other than using a dynamometer. If you pick a tuning company who doesn't know how to use their equipment then hard luck

Or am I missing the point?


----------



## Stanner

> An example of the perils of believing everything a rolling road (and it's operator) tells you.
> 
> http://www.pugheaven.co.uk/THE DANGERS OF ROLLING ROAD.htm
> 
> 
> 
> All that proves is that there are some incompietent people out there who don't know how to do basic tuning or operate their equipment.
> 
> There is no other way of verifying, with any accuracy, the results of any tuning other than using a dynamometer. If you pick a tuning company who doesn't know how to use their equipment then hard luck
> 
> Or am I missing the point?
Click to expand...

I have no idea whether you have got the point so cannot in truth tell whether you are missing it.

The point is a rolling road (chassis dynamometer) can give almost any answer the operator wants it to.

All it is in truth is an indication of the relative situation "before" and "after" an event.

If you didn't have the "before" recorded, knowing the "after" doesn't tell you anything useful.

How many people run their motorhome on a dynamometer before AND after having it chipped/remapped?


----------



## listerdiesel

Most professional tuners will do a before and after check on a dynamometer if they have the kit.

If you're not concerned about 'before' then a dyno will give you an accurate figure as long as it is calibrated and checked. Most electonic dynamometers are pretty accurate compared with the old Heenan & Froude water brakes, one of which we have on a trolley with a Caterpillar 1Y73 oil research engine.

The 1YB Ruston we have is part of an ex-college instruction dynamometer rig. All electric from the late 1950's (1959 in fact)

Peter


----------



## mfa

Hi All, 

We had our 3.0ltr Fiat re-mapped by WOW about four years ago and noticed the extra torque when going uphill. Now done 26500 miles and had a funny werring noise last week coming back from the Lakes......been told we need a new/re-con gearbox and clutch/DMF.....gutted.

We used cruise whenever we could on open road, which might change once we get the repair done. 

Question is, Why does the cruise control create a potential issue???

Cheers



Mark


----------



## TheNomad

mfa said:


> Hi All,
> 
> We had our 3.0ltr Fiat re-mapped by WOW about four years ago and noticed the extra torque when going uphill. Now done 26500 miles and had a funny werring noise last week coming back from the Lakes......been told we need a new/re-con gearbox and clutch/DMF.....gutted.
> 
> We used cruise whenever we could on open road, which might change once we get the repair done.
> 
> Question is, Why does the cruise control create a potential issue???
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Mark


Sorry to hear about this Mark.

It is ONE of the issues. 
But it, and the other issues aren't potential; all are real.

In the world of physics and automotive design, you really don't get something for nothing.

That is despite what the re-mapping snake oil salesmen will tell you in order to get you to part you from your money.

Extra "torque" is EXACTLY the same thing as extra "stresses" and extra"strains".

Extra strain/stresses on your engine and all the downstream drive-train components: your flywheel, your clutch, your gearbox, your drive shafts, etc.

If I offered to adjust your ECU mapping to add 30% extra STRESS, or 30% extra STRAIN to all of your engine and drive train components, for only (say) £400 quid with just a 30 day refund period, would people actually be buying my sales patter and laptop download? 
But say it's torque, not stresses, or engine/gearbox/clutch strain, and people pay up.

All that extra torque that your right foot and your cruise control system has enjoyed has strained your DMF flywheel and clutch to breaking point. 
The additional stresses that the ECU remapper got paid to add to your engine and drivetrain has strained it to destruction.

Those components were never designed by the all those hundreds of top actual professional automotive design engineers who designed your original vehicle, to take the extra strains you've been putting on them.

They were designed and manufactured to cope with the levels of torque/stress/strain that the vehicle manufacturers and component designers designed and exhaustively tested them to cope with, not the additional stresses that a back-street ECU remapper with a laptop has now added.


----------



## BillCreer

Hi,
The theory is that the cruise control will quite happily let the engine labour in a high gear and thereby transmit a large amount of torque through the gearbox and clutch.
If you want to test for clutch slip then the easiest way is to accelerate from low revs in a high gear.

I find it strange that the gearbox, clutch and dual mass flywheel should all go faulty at the same time. I would seek another opinion.


----------



## Mrplodd

The clutch transmits the engine torque (twisting effort) the clutches in Fiat X250's are not regarded as being particularly beefy. When you use cruise control it tries as hard as possible to maintain the set road speed. If you are turning fairly low engine revs then in order to maintain your selected road speed the cruise control applies more and more throttle in an effort to do so. You don't notice because there is no physical connection between the throttle pedal and the engine, it's all "fly by wire" these days. 

As the CC applies more and more throttle the engine produces more and more torque which the standard clutch simply cannot handle.

If allowed to slip (very easy unless you are watching for it and notice the revs rise) the clutch VERY quickly heats up due to the huge amount of friction, that heat is radiated into the Dual Mass Flywheel The DMF has a couple of hefty springs in it whose purpose in life is to smooth out the power being delivered from the engine.

Excess heat ruins the tempering of those springs and they then become weak and don't do the job they were intended for. 

End result is the need for a new clutch and DMF.

IF however you are careful and aware of the issue you CAN negate the effect of the extra torque by not allowing the engine to labour at low revs. When coming to a hill etc change down a gear and maintain the engine revs at above 2500 that means you will need a LOT less throttle to be applied, the torque is therefore not as high (still higher than standard) so it doesn't cause clutch slip!!!

Engines are mapped by the manufacturer to meet as many varying operating conditions as possible whilst giving excellent fuel consumption using highly variable fuel quality across hundreds of thousands of miles. The factory setting is a best all round compromise for a vehicle that will rarely be anywhere near it's max weight for the vast majority of its life.

HOWEVER a motorhome runs at or near it's max weight for its entire life!! Hence the remap to deliver more power. 

My 3 litre was done by the previous owner (can't think why but he did) It goes like stink!!! It pulls smart car and trailer and I rally cannot feel any difference. BUT I am VERY aware of the limitations of the clutch, I use CC on flat sections of road and motorways but at the first sign of a long or steep hill I disengage it so I can "feel" through my right foot the amount of throttle that is required and adjust the gear I am in to suit.

If I just used the CC all the time I would destroy my clutch and DMF pretty quickly, I am very conscious of that fact and I drive accordingly

I have a pal with a 2.2? Euro5 powered 3500 MAM motorhome and it is GUTLESS Getting it to "go" is like trying to shove a dry stick up a dogs a***! AND he gets about 4-5 mpg LESS than my 4 tonne 3 litre powered vehicle!


----------

