Diesel Power Chip: Results
Submitted: Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:24
ThreadID:
50381
Views:
10411
Replies:
5
FollowUps:
7
This Thread has been Archived
Gone Bush (WA)
I have a Cruiser TDV8 trayback and recently installed a power chip from Diesel Power in Queensland (www.dieseltuning.com.au). Their website states "approx" an extra 35kW and and extra 130nM for my vehicle. This should bring it up to approx 186kW and 560nM. It was installed by TurboTech in
Perth and they gave me a before and after dyno readout.
This is where things get a little confusing for me. The dyno gives power at the back
wheels but the vehicle manufacturers publish power at the flywheel. There can be a big, and variable, power loss between the two.
My results, at the rear
wheels, are:
Before: 114kW
After: 128kW.
This is an increase of 12%.
The power difference is noticeable but not such that it pushes me into the
seat. I've been looking at other company advertisements, like Safari Dtronic. They publish a 15% power and 22% torque increase at the flywheel for the 100 series which has identical standard power figures to
mine. I guess it's safe to assume that 12% at the
wheels is more than 15% at the flywheel.
I must admit to feeling a little frustrated that I can't get a figure that compares directly to the manufacturer's figures, and I did expect it to be more noticeable but I have to be realistic.
I asked in a previous thread about converting rear wheel figures back to flywheel figures and apparently it is not easy.
The whole exercise cost $1078 including the dyno run. At least the dyno established which setting to use on the chip that gives me the best air/fuel ratio.
Reply By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:28
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:28
Hi Gone Bush
12% at the rear
wheels is 12% at the flywheel
Robin Miller
AnswerID:
265734
Reply By: Robin hood - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 12:19
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 12:19
Normally you would allow about 20-25% power loss thru the driveline on any dyno readout.
Regards
Jason.
AnswerID:
265743
Reply By: Topend - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:15
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:15
I had a Dtronic in a TD100. The improvement was very noticable at lower revs. The problem with the V8TD is it already makes max torque at 1200rpm so any improvement will not be as noticeable
Where you should see a good improvement is if you tow a heavy load. My boat is 3000kg on the trailer and I will take all the torque I can get.
I'm looking into getting the 200 TDV8 and with 650nm I'll still look at a chip for an improvement.
Topend
AnswerID:
265752
Reply By: Moose - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:16
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:16
G'day Mate
Just wondering why you're looking for a power boost - isn't the new motor powerful enough for your purposes. Just wondering because I am considering upgrading to the new wagon when it's available however, what with your post on "poor" fuel consumption, and now possibly an underpower issue, I may have to re-consider.
AnswerID:
265753
Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:50
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 13:50
Moose, when you say the new wagon, are you referring to the 200?
The fuel isn't bad. It's way better than my previous 80 series. It's good around town (24mpg), reasonable on the highway (lousy aerodynamics) and the same as a 100 series towing a van.
Itis definitely not underpowered. Putting the chip in was purely a bloke thing. Nothing more, nothing less.
I am looking at a 200 for SWMBO and I may even swap the chip over into that. It's simply a plug-in thing.
Don't misinterpret my posts that I'm disappointed with the trayback because i'm not. All this is just Boys and Toys.
FollowupID:
527710
Follow Up By: Moose - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 14:01
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 14:01
Yeah mate - was referring to the new 200 series.
I thought in the previous post your highway figure was around 14/100. My petrol 80 does about 17, so it isn't too far behind the new v8 diesel. I've been told the TD Prado does 8.5/100 - I was hoping the new 200 motor would be closer to the Prado figure than to my current usage.
Admittedly my around town is significantly worse than 24mpg. From a purely financial aspect I'd be better off fixing up the few niggly problems with the 80, but gee it's nice to have a new beast ever now and then!
With the van on, what's it like as far as being able to hang on when tackling hills goes?
FollowupID:
527712
Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 14:20
Tuesday, Oct 09, 2007 at 14:20
I haven't towed with the chip yet. However, before I had it fitted and I was towing there was definitely no lack of power. I have passed people going up hills in the overtaking lane with the van on (now that's a good feeling).
Coming home across the Nullarbor I pulled the van up
Madura Pass doing 110kph dropping to 90 at the top.
A couple of weekends ago we were on a highway in SW WA in the overtaking lane and a big truck came up behind us at 110kph so I just put the foot down (in 4th) and left him
well behind. Got to 130kph before I got nervous and reigned it in.
Scuttlebut has the 200 giving 28mpg.
If some of my posts have litres per 100ks and they seem wrong it's because I hate using that method and often get it wrong.
FollowupID:
527717
Follow Up By: Moose - Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 08:43
Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 08:43
Hey Mr J I just figured out that we have met. Many moons ago you came over to Qld for a while and joined the TLCC here in Brissie. If I recall correctly you had a supercharged beast in those days. I recall a trip to
Brooklyn and there must have been others where we shared a campfire.
I was going thru your Club's mag this morning and there on the list of members appeared Gone Bush. On seeing the name belonging to the number plate all became clear.
Cheers from the Moose
FollowupID:
527870
Follow Up By: Wayne-o (Pilbara WA) - Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:18
Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:18
whoever told you TD prado was 8.5/lp100 was prob referring to the sticker on the windsheild.
Did a trip with my neighbour who owns one, and it used almost as much as the Patrol, at around 14-15 lp100.
says he never gets below 12, although he doesn't potter along. all comes down to driving style.
FollowupID:
527881
Follow Up By: Moose - Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:28
Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:28
Wayne - it came from a mate who works for a Toyota dealership. He gets to regularly take company vehicles on long runs for work and he's the type of guy who doesn't BS. Perhaps he drives a tad slower than your neighbour, although he's normally no slow poke.
Same guy, and some mates, took a petrol Prado down to snow country and they got about 11ltr/100. The others vouched for the results and said he wasn't driving exactly like an old granny.
But as you say perhaps driving style is the differentiating factor.
FollowupID:
527882
Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 18:42
Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 18:42
Wayne, Moose,
Might be worth clarifying which Prado diesels you're talking about.
Comparing the Govt figures:
The pre-2006 1KZ-TE was about 11.6 l/100k for the manual
The latest common rail 1KD-FTV is 9.3.
So 8.5 would be achievable with the latest Prado diesel, when brand new, and original tyres and no accessories.
For camparison, the new V8 in a traytop is about 11.5-11.9, and the previous 1HD-FTE 6cyl was 11.6, so bugger all difference.
FollowupID:
527968
Reply By: TerraFirma - Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 16:49
Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 16:49
Obvioulsy rear wheel power outputs don't show the same increases, I think to really utilise these chips the exhaust mods are also required make the more substantial gains. I would have thought the new TDV8 makes plenty of torque already so you chase your tail looking for power increases to throw you back in the
seat, the new TDV8 trayback wasn't designed for this. If you really think you need more torque again (Forget the KW's and think torque and what RPM) then you want to consider the exhaust manifold through to the dump but I doubt anything has been designed or done yet for this vehicle.
AnswerID:
265927