[bambus]

I've seen on Ebay someone selling a Diesel Performance Chip that can increase power and torque and improve fuel efficiency all for the pricely sum of £90.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/diesel-performanc ... 240%3A1318

There are plenty of other suppliers out there selling similar products but all ask for around £300.

Has anyone ever gone down the Performance chip route?

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Bambus

 

[bambus]

Sorry for the duplicate post just found the other thread.

Bambus

 

[Guest]

Just seen this so not sure if you're still interested, but you should know that fitting one of these chips will invalidate your insurance unless you tell them. When you tell them, they will increase your insurance as it is classed as a modification to the original spec.

 

[shaggy]

Just seen this so not sure if you're still interested, but you should know that fitting one of these chips will invalidate your insurance unless you tell them. When you tell them, they will increase your insurance as it is classed as a modification to the original spec.

i have the Spider tuning box fitted and my insurance went up £60 a year on a £980 policy

 

[steev100]

I've seen on Ebay someone selling a Diesel Performance Chip that can increase power and torque and improve fuel efficiency all for the pricely sum of £90.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/diesel-performanc ... 240%3A1318

There are plenty of other suppliers out there selling similar products but all ask for around £300.

Has anyone ever gone down the Performance chip route?

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Bambus

:headbang: I've just brought a Spider performance chip for my 2.0 dci x trail and could tell the difference straight away, it was a lot smoother and more responsive, but after having it on for 60 miles the mpg has gone down from 26 mpg to 22mpg, i brought it not for performance but for better mpg, i phoned them up and they said open the box up and increase the power by 1 , there are 2 rows of connectors with jumpers on to adjust them one for revs and one for power, so far i've tried all sorts of combination's but can't get any better than 25mpg

 

[davy45]

Andy from DTUK does a tuning box...X-Trail 2.2 dCi 136 PS= standard BHP(136 PS) tuned(163 PS) standard torque(314 Nm) tuned(370 Nm). £350.
can fit in 10 mins, just plug n play. can be removed just a quick. :thumbs:

 

[Ben Bernstein]

Hi All

I just ordered a Spider performance chip, I am hoping for better MPG and obviously more low down grunt.

I will let you know how it goes

B

 

[sbradnam]

Just seen this so not sure if you're still interested, but you should know that fitting one of these chips will invalidate your insurance unless you tell them. When you tell them, they will increase your insurance as it is classed as a modification to the original spec.

i have the Spider tuning box fitted and my insurance went up £60 a year on a £980 policy

As an aside......that is expensive insurance!!! I pay £210 fully comp for me and my wife........(Aviva)

 

[kennygwood]

Hi SBradman, Off topic, but, as a comment on the aside....£210 is VERY cheap insurance....Post code / occupation/ on street parking/ claims, soon wind it up. I'm 55ys and was quoted £1200 fully comp after a (relatively) minor claim. Best I had before that was around £500....you are very lucky!

 

[posbyjohn]

re the insurance i pay £297 fully comp class 2 business so £210 seems about right to me

 

[John Willett]

Hi SBradman, Off topic, but, as a comment on the aside....£210 is VERY cheap insurance....Post code / occupation/ on street parking/ claims, soon wind it up. I'm 55ys and was quoted £1200 fully comp after a (relatively) minor claim. Best I had before that was around £500....you are very lucky!

Ooh - that's a hefty hike for a prang.

Like you, I am in sound (location classical music recording and the UK distributor for Gefell microphones, AETA location recorders and mixers and Geithain monitors).

My X-trail is insured fully comp. including full business use, including the wife and Euro cover - costs about £550 p.a. - though I was the victim of a "crash for cash" in Feb. I am with Aviva with protected no claims, so I hope I don't get a hike like yours on renewal in September.

 

[Sirrel Squirrel]

I'm also looking at the Spider, are the performance gains really as impressive as what the website states, 173PS > 231PS and Torque up from 360NM > 463NM?

I have a 2011 Tekna 2.0 173.

 

[andyneilson]

Is there any particular reason why people go for the Spider at around £450 rather than something like this?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Nissan-X-Trail-2-2-dCi-Performance-Tuning-Chip-Box-/251037634540

I'm looking at something not necessarily for performance, but to help with economy and £350 is a big difference in price...

 

[marksparks999]

£450 performance upgrade, if it gives you an extra 5 mpg, how many miles would you need to do for it to pay for itself? I cant see its viable... obviously if you want it to increase power, then perhaps...

 

[John Willett]

£450 performance upgrade, if it gives you an extra 5 mpg, how many miles would you need to do for it to pay for itself? I cant see its viable... obviously if you want it to increase power, then perhaps...

And how much extra on the insurance each year?

 

[marksparks999]

And how much extra on the insurance each year?

another cost factor, to think about... i cant see they are financially viable, motor manufacturers spend multi millions developing their engines to work at optimum performance for emmissions, reliabilty etc, and the market they are sold in, messing around with them seems potentially uneconomical, and with new vehicles no doubt it would have some warranty implications, unless completed by the manufacturer?

 

[andyneilson]

Obviously whether or not it is cost effective for the £450 models depends on lots of things, mainly how efficiently you are driving at the moment

Assuming fuel at £1.40/l if you currently get 30mpg and can go up to 35mpg then 15000 miles covers your cost. Moving from 35mpg to 40mpg takes it to 20000 and going from 40mpg to 45mpg would take it to 25000.

This was partly the reason for the question about why people opt for the £450 models over some of the cheaper ones.
If you get one for £100 and move from 35mpg to 40mpg the number of miles you need to be doing comes down to just over 4000.

For the amount I drive I couldn't justify £450 but £100 and it would pay for itself even with an insurance increase. Just wondering of anyone goes for the cheaper ones or if not, why they go the the expensive one?

 

[Avocet]

I have a very deep mistrust of these things. Ever noticed how they never seem to quote the standard that they tested to when making these claims? When a car manufacturer goes through the type approval process, they need to do (among other things) an engine power test, a fuel consumption test and an emissions / CO2 emissions test. These result in the "official figures" that we see published.

Emissions are usually done to Directive 70/220/EC (or one of its many amending Directives), and more recent vehicles will have been done to Commission Regulation 715/2007/EC.

CO2 emissions and fuel consumption will have been done to 80/1268/EC (again, as amended)

and engine power will have been done to 80/1269/EC.

If any of these aftermarket chip / box manufacturers would care to quote INDEPENDENT tests, to the same versions of each of those standards as the base vehicle was tested, by a proper test lab accredited to carry out type approval work, I'll put my hand in my pocket. Until then, buyer beware!!!

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that some of them will get the engine to produce more power (that's relatively easy to do on a turbo engine - just give it more fuel and more boost), but I'm rather more sceptical about claims of improved fuel consumption. I work (on the fringe of) the car industry and I can see the (literally) hundreds of thousands - if not millions of pounds they are prepared to spend to get a (say) 5% improvement in fuel consumption, or getting the CO2 emissions down into the next band for road tax. Hell, they're even at the point where they have a smart electronic monitoring system just so that they can reduce alternator drag when the battery is well charged and electrical demand is low! Does anyone really think they'd be going to those lengths if they could just go on eBay and buy a cheap box to plug into the engine loom?! (AND get more power while they're at it)! :roll:

Lastly, forget all this "carp" about them having to map the engine management system so the car can run on yak's pi55 at the top of the Andes. The above tests are done using standard EC "reference fuel" (either petrol or diesel) similar to ordinary forecourt pump diesel (not the go-faster stuff like Optimax) and the power tests are done on a dyno and compensated back down to "sea level" pressure conditions.

 

[atlantico]

Taking note of manufacturers figures doesn't always match up to reality! My first T31 173 (2008) manual diesel consumption on regular journeys typically managed 38/39 mpg matching the quoted 'combined quote' from Nissan. My later T31 173 (2011) typically managed 40/41 mpg on the same driving conditions and routes. However Nissan quotes 44.1 mpg for the combined so there would seem to be some optimism on their part rather than realism now. That said I am happy with the consumption I get but would have liked their figure!

John P

 

[x-inactive]

I can't really see how you can get BOTH an improvement in BHP and FUEL ECONOMY at the same time.

Yes, you can remap your ECU and even change parameters - but the basic principles of energy, work and thermodynamics can't be changed. An equation is an equation.

Take the BMW 320d. There are 2 versions of that engine - the efficent dynamics, gives ~60mpg @ 163 BHP and the 'normal' model gives ~52mpg @ 180bhp. It's economy or power.

The only way to optmise an engines performance, is the ability to change parameters on the fly. The modern diesel engine, uses a mechanical cam to let in air, another to let out burnt gases and an injector to allow fuel in.

There has been a lot of interest in the developing fully electronic systems, that use electronic actuators to allow optimal air in and exhaust gases out. An engine like this offers a lot more flexibility throughout the entire operating range, meaning under varying temp, load, torque, revs etc, the exact amount of air can be introduced - unlike it's mechanical counterpart.

While a set up like this may give better performance out of the same block and more flexibility in optimising power or economy under a certain set of conditions, beyond a thershold, you won't see an improvement in power AND economy at the same time.

My 2 cents.

Eoin