Thread: How i got more power, safely for my 2013 D4 SE SDV6

I admire your objective view Dr!

Sounds like that vehicle never got serviced!

Originally Posted by scarry

And how do us poorer people work out which ECU we have?
Does it work on MY?
Or is it easy to tell by looking at it.

Not MY - both Baz and my D4 are MY11... so it must have changed between mine and his! I'll look tomorrow to see the manufacture month of mine.

Originally Posted by PeterOZ

I have looked at this remapping a few times and lots of people swear by it, good on them but my thoughts are you are placing the engine into parmenters it was not meant to run in. Instead of plodding along nice a stress free like an old big block V8, well not quite, instead you are making it scream like a F1. Exaggeration perhaps but it is working harder.
Are the EGT also raised? What increase in pressure on big ends, mains and those critical journals?

For those that keep a vehicle 2 or 3 years becase they are not poor not so much an issue as they have a shiny new one to play with and any issues are passed on to the next sod, err owner. Called transfer of risk in my game.

I am quite happy with what I have, it runs well, has reasonable power and hopefully once I do the intercooler hoses with nice blue silicon ones will be even better. I also need to check that turbo actuator arm mmm

Just me sumasing so dont take offence. I just dont see the point in risking an already stressed engine by hooking up its gonads to some electric shock treatment

Peter - your concerns are all valid. Any increase in performance from the same engine is a compromise between risk and reward. If you were ultra conservative you could de-tune an engine (or just use that connection between brain an right foot) knowing you will get many years of reliable performance.

I find it interesting to watch the car companies start with a fairly mild engine and then progressively offer each new upgrade the same engine with more power. How much remapping has been done with the 3L to now get 200Nm of torque per litre capacity. That would put the Td5 at 500Nm, or the 2.7 at 540Nm - figures scoffed at not that long ago. Are the Pistons ceramic coated, is the head something special, all good questions? Whilst under warranty not an issue.

For me, I will happily take the risk once a car is out of warranty and seek the regards within moderation. My crude as tuning box on the Td5 pushes the torque up beyond the limits of the gearbox, and yes the gearbox is on its way out, but it has been fun. When I do upgrade to a D3 or D4 and get bored with the improvements over the D2, I am sure I will start again to seek that incremental improvement. Just never take more risk than you are prepared to pay for or write off!

Just came home with the D2, entering the freeway on ramp nice gentle curve which tightens up, in 4th (the one gear that makes no terrible noises), plant it at 50kph and quickly accelerate up to 110kph limit with a good solid push in the back, slight cloud of grey smoke, and I instantly crack up laughing. Yes juvenile I know. But some of us are just boys and girls playing with our toys.

Originally Posted by DiscoDB

Just never take more risk than you are prepared to pay for or write off!

That's the important bit. Unfortunately the way these things are marketed, many people are not aware of the risks they are taking.

cheers,
Jon

One other thing to consider - the bottom end of the D4 2.7 is the same as the 3L. That is good for 183kW, so not so much a risk as remapping a D3 2.7. That said, the engineers also factor in breathing space and can also detune to suit fuel available - remember 500 ppm sulphur diesel was around when the D3 was released.

Newbie question, I'm under the impression that the 3.0l TDV6, SDV6 for the Disco and RRS is the same physical engine just mapped differently. So why would a little tuning to get closer to the full power version hurt?

It is worth noting the difference in thinking.

I'm ex RAAF so lets use an analogy related to that.

The Russians build some damn nice aircraft and very lethal fighters. They are powered by turbofan engines that put out by Western standards incredible amounts of thrust for a similar sized engine.

Interestingly the avionics and in particular the radar systems have been tweaked to transmit increadible amounts of peak power through rather narrow radar apetures.

All sound familar?

The GE F414 turbofan that powers our current Superbugs, that is F/A-18F Super Hornet is deliberatly de-rated from some 25,000lbs of thuust in full AB down to some 22,000lbs. This emans the core operates much cooler, engine life is much longer and MTBF is considerably better.

If a comparison was done on avaial;bility rates for modern Western aircraft like the superbug compared to say the SU-27 series the Superbug would win hands down. It is delsigned for reliability in mind and longevity. Russian thinking is to produce as many aircraft as possible and hope enough will be working for a shooting war.

Western thinking is keep cots down yet generate max number of sorties per aircraft.

So yes tweak those engines up and enjoy playing with them.

All a trade off and compromise. As one has aluded to right foot is a big de-tuner in its own right.

Originally Posted by PeterOZ

...

I have looked at this remapping a few times and lots of people swear by it, good on them but my thoughts are you are placing the engine into parmenters it was not meant to run in. Instead of plodding along nice a stress free like an old big block V8, well not quite, instead you are making it scream like a F1. Exaggeration perhaps but it is working harder.
Are the EGT also raised? What increase in pressure on big ends, mains and those critical journals?

...

They are valid concerns. The remap people will of course claim there is no change in engine life, but of course they haven't measured that.
Indeed, many remapping companies these days are filled with people who may understand IT and electronics but have no qualifications in mechanical / automotive engineering.

The only modification which could be argued not to affect engine life (or even improve it) is EGT removal. However it should be noted that is illegal. However so is chipping/remapping an engine if it means it no longer passes emissions.

You should hear what automotive engineers who design engines for major truck companies say about rechipping...

Originally Posted by PeterOZ

...

I see to recall the early Patrol 3.0 engines were very highly stressed, the big ends or main bearings and I think might be the rear pistons used to cook on those. all in the name of getting that last bit of oompf.

...

This bit is not quite true AFAIK. The failures were due to problems with the engine management systems - and were at the top end of the motor not the bottom. This was in the early days of modern engine management and there weren't adequate controls for overfuelling when the turbo vanes malfunctioned. [ which shows that even major manufacturers with lots of R&D $$$ don't always get it right either ].

However you raise a good point. Engine designers consider everything Landrover size and smaller "toy" engines, and do not design them to last much longer than the warranty period.