Freelander 1 V6 Remaps?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
You'll not notice the difference in the Freelander. The air intake and exhaust are the engine's biggest power sappers. Fit a nice cold air intake and a decent free flowing exhaust and you'll see 15 BHP straight away.
However much of the power gain will be hidden by the auto box so it's kinda pointless really. My ZS 180 (same engine) was running at just over 225 BHP with intake, exhaust, 270° cams and a remap. It was faster than the factory power but in the real world, it hardly noticed. You'll not really improve the MPG, regardless of what a remap claims. With the KV6, it's vital that the VIS is working correctly or the low end torque and MPG tumbles.
 
You'll not notice the difference in the Freelander. The air intake and exhaust are the engine's biggest power sappers. Fit a nice cold air intake and a decent free flowing exhaust and you'll see 15 BHP straight away.
However much of the power gain will be hidden by the auto box so it's kinda pointless really. My ZS 180 (same engine) was running at just over 225 BHP with intake, exhaust, 270° cams and a remap. It was faster than the factory power but in the real world, it hardly noticed. You'll not really improve the MPG, regardless of what a remap claims. With the KV6, it's vital that the VIS is working correctly or the low end torque and MPG tumbles.


Any pointers on the cold air intake? Barmy how the air filter sits on top of the engine, warming up the air as it passes through.
 
Any pointers on the cold air intake? Barmy how the air filter sits on top of the engine, warming up the air as it passes through.
It's completely mad unless you know why it was done. It was like that for 2 reasons I suspect. 1st would be reduced induction noise, which on a KV6 is considerable at wide throttle openings. 2nd would be to help keep the tree huggers happy. By warming up the incoming air charge, there's a slight benefit with an emissions reduction. This works in a couple of ways. First off a warm air intake will help the fuel mix and so reduce HC output. Second a warm air charge is less dense than a cold air charge. Less density = less Oxygen, which therefore can burn less fuel, again reducing emissions slightly, only CO2 this time.
It's relatively easy to make a cold air intake, in fact it's been documented on this very forum, although it was for the 1.8 that time.
 
That would be for the good old USA market then?
Probably. The tree huggers have a lot to answer for. All vehicles now put out more CO2 per mile than they otherwise would because of the catalytic converter. Most people are unaware that for the cat to function, the engine actually has to burn extra fuel!! This extra fuel being burned actually increase CO2 output well above the equivalent CO2 emissions for the same engine, calibrated to run without a cat.
 
This may just be me getting old and grumpy, but I find modern petrol engines very unrewarding to play with, the amount of £'s spent for what is now quite a small return, makes me cold. Give me an old twin carb and a half decent tool kit, I'd be like a pig in sh1t.
Unfortunately diesels now have so many computers on them that all you can hope for is a decent chip or remap.

Think I might restart negotiations with the wife again about that Triumph gt6 mk1 I've always fancied. I reckon with a concerted effort she'll crack in say 5 or 10 years:p
Mike
 
This may just be me getting old and grumpy, but I find modern petrol engines very unrewarding to play with, the amount of £'s spent for what is now quite a small return, makes me cold. Give me an old twin carb and a half decent tool kit, I'd be like a pig in sh1t.
Unfortunately diesels now have so many computers on them that all you can hope for is a decent chip or remap.

Think I might restart negotiations with the wife again about that Triumph gt6 mk1 I've always fancied. I reckon with a concerted effort she'll crack in say 5 or 10 years:p
Mike

Computer says "no".
 
This may just be me getting old and grumpy, but I find modern petrol engines very unrewarding to play with, the amount of £'s spent for what is now quite a small return, makes me cold. Give me an old twin carb and a half decent tool kit, I'd be like a pig in sh1t.
Unfortunately diesels now have so many computers on them that all you can hope for is a decent chip or remap.

Think I might restart negotiations with the wife again about that Triumph gt6 mk1 I've always fancied. I reckon with a concerted effort she'll crack in say 5 or 10 years:p
Mike
Modern engines are very difficult to improve as the fueling is so restricted. All modern petrol engines run with a very tightly controlled fuel mixture. This really hampers power generation and, strangely maximum fuel efficiency too.
If the engine didn't have to run with a cat within the lamda window, they would be more tuneable.
I used to build high performance Triumph engines. I specialised in large capacity straight six engines. I used to get a 2L MK2 Vittesse and GT6 engine up to 2.8L which gives them a huge torque increase. It wasn't uncommon for a 2.8L GT6 convertible to cover a 0 to 60 dash in around 6.5 second and 13.6 second quarter mile. I still do a bit of Triumph stuff. I've got an engine, OD gearbox and rear diff in for rebuilding at the moment.
 
Actually you will find a huge difference on a healthy kv6 mapped.

Your not talking massive figures but it's the smoothness and drivability that comes through.

My 190 kv6 ztt is mapped by reidy remaps (local agent in ni for them) and it took out 2 flat spots that greatly bugged me in every kv6 I've driven and I've owned 17 of them in 75 and zt form.

Bhp increase, well my 190 was far from standard. Let's just say the smoothness and overall experience of it was worth it.

She's nudging over 200 now. Which is just nice.
 
Back
Top