As someone who feels 100 times more comfy working with wood than mechanical things, I'm reading through these posts and instinctively coming to the conclusion that, Yes, these chips make your motor go more lively, but No, you don't get more MPG, is there a conclusion? or is it still being weighed up?

christi1 said:

As someone who feels 100 times more comfy working with wood than mechanical things, I'm reading through these posts and instinctively coming to the conclusion that, Yes, these chips make your motor go more lively, but No, you don't get more MPG, is there a conclusion? or is it still being weighed up?

Click to expand...

I get at least 10mpg more with a synergy box fitted , set on eco mode

spent months and months taking mpg readings before I fitted the synergy box

having the two settings can tell the difference between power and Eco mode , also the mpg will drop at least 10mpg set on power , being driven at the same speed, road and conditions

but know due to the extensive variety of road conditions driving styles a rolling road would be the most accurate

this is what I've personally found through brimming the tank etc myself , but expect others will differ

Thanks

gstuart said:

I get at least 10mpg more with a synergy box fitted , set on eco mode

spent months and months taking mpg readings before I fitted the synergy box

having the two settings can tell the difference between power and Eco mode , also the mpg will drop at least 10mpg set on power , being driven at the same speed, road and conditions

but know due to the extensive variety of road conditions driving styles a rolling road would be the most accurate

this is what I've personally found through brimming the tank etc myself , but expect others will differ

Click to expand...

That is VERY interesting. Joe and Nodge are trying to figure out what the Ron Box is doing, but if the difference between the eco setting and the power setting are that great then it must be doing more than tweaking pot on the MAF amp.
Mustn't it?

Alibro said:

That is VERY interesting. Joe and Nodge are trying to figure out what the Ron Box is doing, but if the difference between the eco setting and the power setting are that great then it must be doing more than tweaking pot on the MAF amp.
Mustn't it?

Click to expand...

the technical side is way over my head

the synergy does have a maf compensation setting so it can control a weak maf , but mine is set to off

know there's a consderable amount of programming also that must go into these boxes , in altering the amount of fuel that is allowed to be pumped into the engine ,

but like I said the full technical side is way out of my thinking and it's very complicated

this is what I've personally found and assume others have found an improvement in their mpg and power since fitting a synergy box ??

must have done at least 20 -30 tank fills comparing the mpg of the two different switch settings and on fitting this is what results I've had

Yes, these chips make your motor go more lively, but No, you don't get more MPG

Click to expand...

mpg be mainly down to how the driver uses their right foot ..
'n choice of gear ..
( bar any mechanical ailments .. vehicle loading .. choice of tyres .. etc .. etc )

and the ' variations ' of engine performance .. between 'chips' ..
or 'chips' / tuning-boxs that allow multiple choice performance parameters
might have an effect on how the vehicle is driven ..

e.g. a lower power setting might see the driver compensating by using a heavy right foot
so gains no mpg by using the lower power 'eco' setting ..
or ..
a high power setting whereas the performance encourages the driver to use it more frequently ..
so loses on the mpg potential .. that would be had .. if a lite right foot be employed

i use a multiple choice 'chip' .. 10 power options .. 2 maf map options ..
regardless of which one i use .. i get the same mpg ..

( but .. that mpg has always been better .. compared to when .. the engine was in 'standard' format .. )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

hd3 said:

mpg be mainly down to how the driver uses their right foot ..
'n choice of gear ..
( bar any mechanical ailments .. vehicle loading .. choice of tyres .. etc .. etc )

and the ' variations ' of engine performance .. between 'chips' ..
or 'chips' / tuning-boxs that allow multiple choice performance parameters
might have an effect on how the vehicle is driven ..

e.g. a lower power setting might see the driver compensating by using a heavy right foot
so gains no mpg by using the lower power 'eco' setting ..
or ..
a high power setting whereas the performance encourages the driver to use it more frequently ..
so loses on the mpg potential .. that would be had .. if a lite right foot be employed

i use a multiple choice 'chip' .. 10 power options .. 2 maf map options ..
regardless of which one i use .. i get the same mpg ..

( but .. that mpg has always been better .. compared to when .. the engine was in 'standard' format .. )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Click to expand...

quite agree as u say the variations are great , different road conditions, traffic, weather the list can go on

I tried to keep the same revs , speed and driving style whilst comparing the settings , but suppose the most accurate would be a rolling road

may I ask what do u get please on a run

think a lot of us get around 40-42 mpg on the td4

may I ask what do u get please on a run

Click to expand...

i usually average 40 mpg ..
but ..
since i fitted the intake mod .. the improvement it made has seen me using heavy r.f.
that is .. more often than i would normally

( purely 'cause the resultant power curve is a pleasure to use )

be like when i 1st got the synergy box .. right foot gained a little weight frequently

then the novelty wore of .. and i got sensible ..
that occurred when i realised how fast the then new tyres were wearing
and the cost of replacements

so current mpg isn't as good as it can be ..
but that's due to my right foot usage .. nothin' else

should add that it's quite hilly terrain round these parts ..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

just re. this agian ..

Yes, these chips make your motor go more lively, but No, you don't get more MPG

Click to expand...

generally with a good tuning box / chip / remap ..
for the manual gear td4's
the uprated engine performance allows for the use of higher gears for many a situation
and to take easy advantage of block shifting on occasion .. e.g. 3rd to 5th ..
that be one potential for better mpg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

generally with a good tuning box / chip / remap ..
for the manual gear td4's
the uprated engine performance allows for the use of higher gears for many a situation
and to take easy advantage of block shifting on occasion .. e.g. 3rd to 5th ..
that be one potential for better mpg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just my 2 P worth.
I see absolutely no way in hell that ANY #tuning# box would give ANY increase in MPG .... It simply does not compute .
However, people who fit these may well adopt a different driving style when set to (what I personally believe) is a false claim re -eco / MPG increase/ (there simply IS no 'eco setting - it is advertising BS I am sorry to say )
The DRIVER changing their driving style is what gives an increase. - the right foot syndrome.
ANY fuel consumption test should be taken over about 1000 miles or more - yes 1000 miles or more - seriously - and only then with no alteration in driving 'style'
Shorter distances are meaningless. Even then the #driver# attitude / changes to driving are often more important.

I simply (IM (reasonably qualified and professional) opinion would 100% categorically say that there is absolutely and utterly no way that MPG would be IMPROVED by fitting a fudge box.
Talk of needing 'less pedal' due to 'increased' power at X rpm is also meaningless as the engine needs X amount of fuel to produce Y amount of power. hence cancelling or balancing the requirement - NEVER lowering it.

Technically there is NO WAY there is any gain in MPG. Subjectively - certain individuals may see a perceived increase due to expectations and adoption of a differing driving regime.
I am sorry to say Gary mate - that 10 MPG is (IMO) simply impossible. Absolutely - totally - utterly - impossible due to a fudger unit. It simply cannot be.

And again, please do not shoot the messenger. You are definitely being misled.
PS, great to see you lol - nice suit !
Joe

Joe_H said:

generally with a good tuning box / chip / remap ..
for the manual gear td4's
the uprated engine performance allows for the use of higher gears for many a situation
and to take easy advantage of block shifting on occasion .. e.g. 3rd to 5th ..
that be one potential for better mpg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just my 2 P worth.
I see absolutely no way in hell that ANY #tuning# box would give ANY increase in MPG .... It simply does not compute .
However, people who fit these may well adopt a different driving style when set to (what I personally believe) is a false claim re -eco / MPG increase/ (there simply IS no 'eco setting - it is advertising BS I am sorry to say )
The DRIVER changing their driving style is what gives an increase. - the right foot syndrome.
ANY fuel consumption test should be taken over about 1000 miles or more - yes 1000 miles or more - seriously - and only then with no alteration in driving 'style'
Shorter distances are meaningless. Even then the #driver# attitude / changes to driving are often more important.

I simply (IM (reasonably qualified and professional) opinion would 100% categorically say that there is absolutely and utterly no way that MPG would be IMPROVED by fitting a fudge box.
Talk of needing 'less pedal' due to 'increased' power at X rpm is also meaningless as the engine needs X amount of fuel to produce Y amount of power. hence cancelling or balancing the requirement - NEVER lowering it.

Technically there is NO WAY there is any gain in MPG. Subjectively - certain individuals may see a perceived increase due to expectations and adoption of a differing driving regime.
I am sorry to sat Gstuart that 10 MPG is simply impossible. Absolutely - totally - utterly - impossible due to a fudger unit. It simply cannot be.

And again, please do not shoot the messenger. You are definitely being misled.
Joe

Click to expand...

done the test over a year , I didn't believe the results so done it again and again. tank fill after tank fill , same fuel same road

maybe my freelander is special, lol , I can't be the only one to see an improvement in mpg

I can't explain it , not technical enough but know the mpg improved after fitting the box , could there have been a problem with the engine and the tuning box corrected the problem thus improving the mpg

gstuart said:

done the test over a year , I didn't believe the results so done it again and again. tank fill after tank fill , same fuel same road

maybe my freelander is special, lol , I can't be the only one to see an improvement in mpg

I can't explain it , not technical enough but know the mpg improved after fitting the box , could there have been a problem with the engine and the tuning box corrected the problem thus improving the mpg

Click to expand...

Actually Gary, you raise a good point ! a failing MAF will benefit from a MAF AMPLIFIER (I have posted a simple circuit build a variable one for a few quid !
With a MAF AMP added your MPG WILL increase - but that is nothing at all to do (directly) with the fudge box. It is simply making up far a low spec / contaminated maf
In other words, given a NORMAL MAF, the fuel consumption would be fine and you would see no gain at all. Given a failing MAF then the MPG due to MAF signal amplification would improve.
In other words the fudger CANNOT in any way increase MPG in a normally functioning engine - however - it can fudge the results from a failing MAF which the TD4 unfortunately seems to suffer from

SO, no increase at all over normal...... some increase over a faulty maf...
I commend my simple maf amplifier circuit to the house (utterly not patented but appreciate a mention ) cheap, simple, and will do everything that you experienced.

Again - nice suit

Joe

Joe_H said:

Actually Gary, you raise a good point ! a failing MAF will benefit from a MAF AMPLIFIER (I have posted a simple circuit build a variable one for a few quid !
With a MAF AMP added your MPG WILL increase - but that is nothing at all to do (directly) with the fudge box. It is simply making up far a low spec / contaminated maf
In other words, given a NORMAL MAF, the fuel consumption would be fine and you would see no gain at all. Given a failing MAF then the MPG due to MAF signal amplification would improve.
In other words the fudger CANNOT in any way increase MPG in a normally functioning engine - however - it can fudge the results from a failing MAF which the TD4 unfortunately seems to suffer from

SO, no increase at all over normal...... some increase over a faulty maf...
I commend my simple maf amplifier circuit to the house (utterly not patented but appreciate a mention ) cheap, simple, and will do everything that you experienced.

Again - nice suit

Joe

Click to expand...

thks, again

the maf compensator if off, but might as u say still compensate the maf which may explain the improved mpg

can only go by the results and good to understand why