General Re-Mapping of 1.3 Multijet

[mjs4x4]

Is anybody around that can answer the above questions today?

It would be nice to have some definitive answers on this engine/gearbox combination.

I am particularly concerned by what appears to be the small (3%) margin between the max engine output torque and max gearbox input torque.

Someone with greater engineering/mechanical knowledge than me might be able to explain this??

Mike

 

[mjs4x4]

Doctor, doctor - you've got to help - people keep ignoring me!!!!

Next please........


Seems to me there are people who have seen / contributed to this thread who could answer my questions.

As somebody said earlier in the thread can we get some answers. What about the bloke who has the inside track to the Diesel Development Manager at Fiat Powertrain Technologies?

Where are you?


Mike

 

[T14086]

Although I appreciate your eagerness...but you have to respect the fact that people do have other things in life besides a internet forum or simply cant be bothered to reply / away on holiday/ dont want to give out information.

I'm quite sure that if someone has the info you require & the time to write it out they will

 

[mjs4x4]

Let's hope so.

There were plenty of opinions flying round last week - we just need the facts now.

 

[N500SHP]

Mike

You have to respect that this is a public forum, a lot of people from many organisations read it and wish to remain anonymous for a multitude of reasons, some professional and some legal. I doubt if you will get someone from Fiat DPT to respond directly and give their contact details for verification. This forum is no different to any other. The same goes for customer confidentiality for any product, not just engine tuning.

I have emailed you the information we have but I will also put this here, all contributors can either throw scorn or if they want to be helpful to this thread, add additional information to what we know.

1. Fiat are not going to downgrade the quality of a component as important as a gearbox when millions of pounds of development has gone into designing one that will take a higher torque figure and has been in use for years without problems. To save £5 on components to make a cheaper and less reliable gearbox would take £5m of test and development costs.

2. The torque limiter on the 500 is, and this is as far as I have been told by the contacts we have, is PROBABLY no more than to reduce the insurance on what is meant to be a city car or maybe even something to with NCAP rating.

3. Fiat and in fact NO manufacturer is going to release a car that can only take a small % above the torque being put out. Quite simply, if you towed with the car, the thing would fall apart. Give the guys at Fiat DPT credit, they are not that stupid!

I do not have 100% of the fact as I only get information from UK Fiat guys and not from the factory / design / quality control guys on the project team so I can only go on what I am told but more importantly what we test.

a) I have a Fiat Doblo 1.3MJ that has been running more power than the 500 we have, carried heavy loads and has now done 96,000 miles in 16 months without a single hitch in any area, let along the gearbox.

b) We have a Fiat 500 1.3MJ that has run in excess of 150lb ft for over 9,000 miles now, a large amount of which has been circuit, dyno and journo demonstration as well as our own demonstrations and general use. OK this isn't 90,000 miles, but believe me when you over power a gearbox you know it a lot sooner than 9,000 miles! We also have two customers with 1.3MJ 500 out on the road that are not having any adverse effects either.

c) The gearbox on the Doblo and the gearbox on the 500 may not be exactly the same in terms of part numbers due to differing mounting points, case aesthetics etc, but Fiat DPT are NOT going to design, make and spend millions on designing a weaker box to save a few £ on each one.

Like I said I do not posses 100% of the testing records from Fiat, no one here does, so I can't say 100% fact in any of the above and can only go on what we have tested.

Therefore from our test results we can conclude that under normal road use, even rigorous use, the gearbox is more than capable of handling 155 Lb ft of torque.

I await howls of derision now from people with opinion, but please do read that I am only going on what we have tested and information that we have been given by the contacts we have and not the test and development facts directly from Fiat.

 

[N500SHP]

Do you gain financially if people follow your advice, or any re-assurances that the torque can be increased ?

Undoubtably, never hidden that, nor do any other tuning company. But its what we do for a living, so we have these cars and increase the torque on them and have first hand experience of doing so on this and many, many other cars.

At the end of the day, do you really think any of us would be in business if we destroyed anything on a car, let alone the gearboxes - not just us, any tuning company? We wouldnt be able to pay the repair bills, get any future business etc etc.

None of us are out to ruin your car, most of us are in this business becuase we are auto enthusiasts, not just becuase we couldnt get into medical college. Most of us have engineering and automotive background - hell I had to cut my teeth in the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers building and rebuilding engines and gearboxes on vehicles made 40, 50 and in some cases 60 years ago!

If you have some factual data from Fiat design testing please share it as its going to help all of us.

 

[Mark Elvin]

On the gearbox front, as soon as my EPC turns up I'll be able to help with pt.nos.

 

[Oldschool]

Questions for the Fiat Powertrain boys:

1. To a non-engineer like myself, those figures look like 'borderline engineering' - that is, not much margin of safety built in to ensure longevity of components. Fair comment?

2. Do torque limiters ever fail to operate properly? If so, given the figures above - what are the implications?

Some full answers would be appreciated and then I, for one, will draw my own conclusions about the pros and cons of re-mapping and will be happy to 'put this thread to bed'.


Mike

I am not working for FPT but I have been working for manufacturers on a consultancy basis (till I had enough of it) and I am a trained engineer.

To 1.: When the manufacturer makes a gearbox (or any other unit) they have to make everything to a price. Sometimes this means that they are oversizing for a second use because it is not worth to downgrade as the cost of downgrading woul outweigh the savings.

The rating for a gearbox at x Newton meter does not mean that it will go at x + 1Nm. In all gearboxes is a safety margin added on, which depends on various factors.

The hardest a gearbox has to take is usually lausy gear changes, which put much more strain on than a torque increase by performance tuning.

To 2.: The torque limiter is a part of the map, which is a separate table. The values in there are set on experience. The ECU can't evaluate the torque level. Once the ECU sees that certain amounts of fuel over the normal are injected it will override the relevant table according to the specified requirements.

 

[Jake_in_notts]

Ok this is getting more and more baffling !!

FPT quote for the NF500 gearbox (C514) 150Nm and the engine is limited to 145Nm. The extra 5nm difference is more than made up for with extra tollerances.

The C510 box in the GP etc is rated to 206Nm and the engines set at 190Nm.

The discussion is now centering on the internal components of the C514/C510 boxes. It is suggested that they are "essentially" the same and both capable of handling 190Nm because why would anyone spend money developing two boxes when when once can do the job?

Is that pretty much the the argument so far?

This is quite critical to me. If this is the case-remapping the diesel wont be stressing major powertrain components.

As a side note I wonder what the remap does the operation of the particle filter? Does this act independantly ie it knows when its full and needs a regeneration cycle.

 

[Mark Elvin]

As soon as my EPC turns up I'll be able to post pt.no's of bearings etc.

 

[Oldschool]

Ok this is getting more and more baffling !!

FPT quote for the NF500 gearbox (C514) 150Nm and the engine is limited to 145Nm. The extra 5nm difference is more than made up for with extra tollerances.

The C510 box in the GP etc is rated to 206Nm and the engines set at 190Nm.

The discussion is now centering on the internal components of the C514/C510 boxes. It is suggested that they are "essentially" the same and both capable of handling 190Nm because why would anyone spend money developing two boxes when when once can do the job?

Is that pretty much the the argument so far?

This is quite critical to me. If this is the case-remapping the diesel wont be stressing major powertrain components.

As a side note I wonder what the remap does the operation of the particle filter? Does this act independantly ie it knows when its full and needs a regeneration cycle.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Between the 2 boxes is a rating difference and therefore a difference in strength. I made reference to the situation in general (just to prevent people making wrong conclusions on other gearboxes or drive train components). In many cases it is not worth making more than one variant. But with the Diesel boxes is a difference as they are more expensive to make due to the torque requirements.

 

[Venters]

As a side note I wonder what the remap does the operation of the particle filter? Does this act independantly ie it knows when its full and needs a regeneration cycle.

It is my understanding that the DPF is self cleaning at high temperature and will start to self clean whenever it gets hot enough. At the same time error codes can be stored regarding a chocked DPF so I assume there is a sensor of some that will signal a warning but not initiatiate a clean cycle.

But then I'm no tech so the above is not confirmed, just what I have been told.

 

[mjs4x4]

Thanks for the contributions guys. I started this thing with an innocent question and did not anticipate where it would lead. Still - free speech, free country and all that.

Basically I am on the side of the tuners over this. For what it's worth I think it is pretty pathetic when people come on here claiming to know the top people at FPT and 'rubbishing' the tuners. Ask a couple of straight questions and they are nowhere to be seen!

Having ordered a £12k car of course, I should just be able to go back to my FIAT dealer and get them to make enquiries on my behalf - but let's face it - it would probably be a more enjoyable and rewarding experience either pissing into the wind or smashing my head agaist a concrete wall!!!!!

Anyway if I don't get a delivery date soon I'll be cancelling the order and resurrecting the purchase of a 185bhp Fabia VRS (which, for reasons known only to herself, my wife passed over in favour of a 75bhp 500)!

Now do you understand why I want to tune the ******* thing?


Mike

 

[Jake_in_notts]

Now do you understand why I want to tune the ******* thing?

Mike

I went from a 234bhp remapped Saab 95 with 378Nm so I am also interested in upping it a little

Untill the gearbox questions are satisfactorily answered or untill there are a few years successfull history I dont really want to be the first to do it. A couple of car just isnt enough in my opinion, Im sure all over the world little diesels will be being breathed so I will keep my fingers x'd.

 

[Oldschool]

I went from a 234bhp remapped Saab 95 with 378Nm so I am also interested in upping it a little

Untill the gearbox questions are satisfactorily answered or untill there are a few years successfull history I dont really want to be the first to do it. A couple of car just isnt enough in my opinion, Im sure all over the world little diesels will be being breathed so I will keep my fingers x'd.

German top tuners like Novitech and Engstler doing it and their mods are approved by Fiat. Merkur does it as well and so do quite a few more. If you can have it done by a company that knows what they are doing, there is no need to worry.

Also if it is done on the rolling road with each car the torque limit can be set to anything wanted. And what you shouldn't forget is that the peak torque can be kept while the torque curve can be flatened, which means that performance is much improved because you do not have a peak torque point rather than a peak torque plane.

 

[T14086]

Anyway if I don't get a delivery date soon I'll be cancelling the order and resurrecting the purchase of a 185bhp Fabia VRS (which, for reasons known only to herself, my wife passed over in favour of a 75bhp 500)!

Now do you understand why I want to tune the ******* thing?

yep..........she has good taste

 

[Geordie Amanda]

Having modified many of my own cars, the one consistent thing they have in common, is, if there one of them has a mechanical failure, it is either gearbox or turbo (clutch may become included in this if it is well worn). I really fancy a Panda Cross 1.3 MJ but have read about its torque limit. Built into these figures is a certain amount of tolerance, so the gearbox may well handle similar max torque to the Punto, but this will probably be the MAX figure whereas the Punto will have a safety margin built in on top of this figure. Obviously unless Fiat are lying or are pulling the wool over our eyes, only a stripped down gearbox and a metallurgists’ test of the metals used will reveal the strength of the different gearboxes, but I do believe the Panda/500 box will have lower thresholds than the Punto.

I still wish for a mild improvement (assuming I eventually buy a Cross) on its base figures, so a slight remap would almost certainly be on the cards, but I take on the very real risk of premature failure of a major component. There is so much hype talked about improved mpg and ‘not to worry if you only do motorway miles’, this is complete rubbish!!! Put your foot down in top gear and as there is no tyre slip, the transmission train take the full force of the improved maximum torque and not just for the few seconds that a traffic light start takes (and that usually has wheelspin to lessen the load) but possibly minutes, as you floor it going up the M62 over the Pennines for instance. You will overstress the car more than likely, the question is, how long will you keep the car, how lucky are you and do you believe the dreamers?

Fiat are not idiots, they don’t spend millions to give the customer an inferior product, they have already worked out the best all-round compromise of Mpg/reliability/ drivability/performance/emissions for you. You can only decide to eat into one or more of these things as you trade off extra power for extra stress. There is no such thing as a free lunch guys and girls.

 

[Oldschool]

Fiat are not idiots, they don’t spend millions to give the customer an inferior product, they have already worked out the best all-round compromise of Mpg/reliability/ drivability/performance/emissions for you. You can only decide to eat into one or more of these things as you trade off extra power for extra stress. There is no such thing as a free lunch guys and girls.

Sorry, but you are talking nonsense here. Firstly, the 1.3 box has derived from the FIRE boxes, which might come as a surprise to some.

Having worked as an inpendent (consultacy) with car manufacturers I can tell you that manufacturers do not work the way you assume. First priority in the design departments is to save money.

When the 16v FIRE was released it was fitted with double valve springs because of the increased revs. They were replaced by cheaper single ones.

Each spring a 20p saving is a sving of 3.20 an engine, at a thousand engines a week (in that time) 3200 resulting in a 150k a vear.

Save a pence on each gearbox at over 1.5m gear boxes is 150k a year.

Do a couple of pence here and a few there it will end up in pounds. This is a big portion of what design departments have to spend their time with:

Downgrading products after designing them in the first place.

Also the gearbox rating is done to a set formula. If the gearbox is rated to x Newton meter it will be safe to be used under normal conditions at 1.2 times x Newton meters.

Two of the hardest stresses on the gearbox are when driven wheel losse contact with the road under hard acceleration and get then rapidly slowed down when regain contact again and brutal gear changes.

 

[white 500]

Sorry, but you are talking nonsense here. Firstly, the 1.3 box has derived from the FIRE boxes, which might come as a surprise to some.

Having worked as an inpendent (consultacy) with car manufacturers I can tell you that manufacturers do not work the way you assume. First priority in the design departments is to save money.

When the 16v FIRE was released it was fitted with double valve springs because of the increased revs. They were replaced by cheaper single ones.

Each spring a 20p saving is a sving of 3.20 an engine, at a thousand engines a week (in that time) 3200 resulting in a 150k a vear.

Save a pence on each gearbox at over 1.5m gear boxes is 150k a year.

Do a couple of pence here and a few there it will end up in pounds. This is a big portion of what design departments have to spend their time with:

Downgrading products after designing them in the first place.

Also the gearbox rating is done to a set formula. If the gearbox is rated to x Newton meter it will be safe to be used under normal conditions at 1.2 times x Newton meters.

Two of the hardest stresses on the gearbox are when driven wheel losse contact with the road under hard acceleration and get then rapidly slowed down when regain contact again and brutal gear changes.

so are you saying that money saving results in an inferior part.?
if its the case tuned derv drivers are getting small power gains at the loss of reliability.and do you REALY believe that if the 1.3 engine could produce more power AND get better economy fiat would have produced it that way ? after all they would sell more cars if there model's were more powerfull and still achieve the same economy of all it's competitors?. reality is if you tune you'r car and say "i know how to use the power" or " i just want it to go up hills faster" then you'r kidding you'r self and have probably bought the wrong car.

 

[dave]

so are you saying that money saving results in an inferior part.?
if its the case tuned derv drivers are getting small power gains at the loss of reliability.and do you REALY believe that if the 1.3 engine could produce more power AND get better economy fiat would have produced it that way ? after all they would sell more cars if there model's were more powerfull and still achieve the same economy of all it's competitors?. reality is if you tune you'r car and say "i know how to use the power" or " i just want it to go up hills faster" then you'r kidding you'r self and have probably bought the wrong car.

:bang: THEY WOULD HAVE TO THEN MAP EVERY CAR SEPERATLY
they just use a good for all map, all things mass produced have room for improvement.