The big issue that I see with the RB is that there is absolutely no control of the injection timing. The basic principle is great.
I am currently looking at a microprocessor controlled injection timing device to complement the RB unit. (I have MANY years of programming embedded microprocessor units for $H!T$ and G!GGLES!) ;)
It is a fact that - due to emission controls - that the timing is around 4% retarded due to weird regulation that advise Nitrous Oxides being reduced ??? what ??? - yet, surprisingly, INCREASING the CO / CO2 emissions at the same time !..
By removing this limitation on timing (which - of course - REALLY good remap could do - but - I do not believe there are many out there - and, they are non adjustable !!!!) I believe that - certainly - in the earlier engines (the L series for example) that the power increase could be genuinely increased. (this is also NOT part of the MOT!!!)
THIS - IMHO is the way to go, ALONG with the fairly simple fuelling increase provided by the ronbox type of assistance.
This approach to fuel timing needs an inbuilt, but simple - internal mapping to correlate the relationship of CPS to NLS - but this is fairly simple.
If anyone really wants to look or discuss the technical side of the injection advance / retard external units and mapping - or - indeed - the source of the information - then PM me. I can provide spreadsheets and up to date info to the right person(s) - PREFERABLY - ! THOSE WHO WANT TO HELP TO PRODUCE THE DEVICE.
The solution is relatively simple and actually very cheap.
Basically it needs an intercept from the needle lift sensor and the CPS as a closed loop and then an output to the A/R solenoid on the VP37. again = this is for the L series. yes -in future, it could be adapted for td4 etc..
Any techies who want to converse ??? let us talk, I have an outline valid solution.
Joe
 
Last edited:
@Joe_H
I agree that timing is as important to torque production as the fueling. However on the L Series, the timing can be altered a few degrees at the pump drive. In fact pump timing has to be optimised to get the best out of the engine. Simply using locking pins is not 100% accurate when optimisation becomes necessary.
 
Playing with the fuel pump to improve 'power'/fuel consumption I think is called the "Hammer Mod" (on here).

If adjusting the timing will improve the power per squirt - then it stands that it will improve economy. I should say that I don't really know the technicalities of HP verses Torque play off and whether this adversely effects 1 to improve the other, but it does appear to improve economy...

https://www.landyzone.co.uk/land-rover/l-series-44mpg-is-that-good.243887/

I always get between 35 and 40mpg from my L Series, which correlates with @kev1nlm before his 'mod'. I've never achieved over 40mpg so to get 44mpg even if all the conditions were 'right' is a 10% improvement. @kev1nlm also tows quite a big caravan so if there is an adverse effect on HP or Torque - it can't be much.

I have been tempted to try this, but I haven't as yet.
 
Engines make torque. The BHP rating is simply torque over time. So the torque in Ftlb multiplied by RPM divided by the constant for BHP, in this case 5252. The name could be anything, Brake Donkey Power for instance. BDP would have a different constant, but it's still work done over time. Now BHP has a formula that was worked out centuries ago, so that's what we use. So if we have an engine that makes 100Ftlb of torque at 5252 RPM, due to the way BHP is calculated, the engine is also making 100BHP at the same RPM.
So whenever something improves and engines output, it's the torque that increases, the BHP will rise as a result.
 
Nodge68 said:
@Joe_H
I agree that timing is as important to torque production as the fuelling. However on the L Series, the timing can be altered a few degrees at the pump drive. In fact pump timing has to be optimised to get the best out of the engine. Simply using locking pins is not 100% accurate when optimisation becomes necessary.
Click to expand...
Hi Nodge, I would actually disagree with reference to adjusting timing slightly on the L series VP37 pump by using offset dowels or adjusting the pump drive slightly.
The reason is that the actual injection timing set at the drive wheel for the pump is a very wide adjustment and only allows a wide enough window for further control over the point of commencement of injection. In fact, if you were to move it a few degrees - nothing in effect would happen. This is because the 'commencement of injection solenoid' (often referred to as the advance / retard solenoid) is the actual fine control of the system. Hence a movement of a few degrees at the drive wheel will simply cause the EDC feedback loop to adjust the advance / retard solenoid proportionally to the required value mapped 'inside' the EDC which is derived from the needled lift sensor (Commencement of injection sensor) and the Crank Position (TDC) sensor positions / measurements at the time. The advance retard solenoid unit is constantly variable over it's travel and pwm controlled.
So, a movement of say, 3 degrees at the pump drive will be simply 'corrected' by the EDC altering position of the advance retard solenoid.
Obviously there is a limit. On the vp37 EDC combo in the L series. The 'emissions' warning light will illuminate if the advance/retard solenoid is maxed in either direction without a corresponding ability to reach the mapped value. This will occur - for example - if someone mis-times the HPIP badly.
You can look at the actual timing at the pump drive only really as a 'window of opportunity' for correct timing, (and of course we need to be somewhere within this window) . but the actual part that controls the timing is the advance retard solenoid. 3 degrees at pump drive creates an equal and opposite 3 degrees at the solenoid hence no difference.
Joe
 
Last edited:
GrumpyGel said:
Playing with the fuel pump to improve 'power'/fuel consumption I think is called the "Hammer Mod" (on here).
Click to expand...
Hi GG, on older engines like the L series there is actually quite a lot of leeway to to improve consumption on the 'pump' but not really without injection timing adjustments which nobody has every really done without an internal mapping change - or indeed, multiple internal mapping changes as the older EDC contains up to 24 individual 'maps'. - I firmly believe a better solution to the rather crude 'remaps' is to have an external injection advance / retard mapped unit running in collaboration with the inbuilt factory maps. The main areas of control over the pump (derived from a fairly simply - comparatively - EDC (ECU) can be accessed prior to consulting the internal maps. Simply tricking the system into a slightly longer injector duration (increasing fuel - richer) is 'ok', but relatively crude as it is linear in it's progression. (however, it is linear in relation to the internal mapped requirement meaning it is additive to the mapped requirement. Whether this is always a linear requirement is unlikely.

GrumpyGel said:
If adjusting the timing will improve the power per squirt - then it stands that it will improve economy
Click to expand...
Normally, the only real way you can reduce fuel consumption is by control of your right foot :). HOWEVER, I have commercial data showing that the required EU emissions for Oxides of Nitrogen demand a retarding of optimum ignition timing. The quoted fuel INCREASE by having to do this under the regulations is quoted at around 4% !. The crazy part is by retarding the ignition to achieve the 'NO' family reductions also INCREASE the CO and soot levels.!!! crazy... (and that is example is on our very own pump and its electromechanical control (the VP37)
But in answer, yes, if you can get more bang for the buck by slightly altering ignition timing and removing cat / egr etc - AND the fuel quantity injected remains the same then yes, the fuel consumption decreases. In fact the only time that any fuel consumption decreases apart from driving style is when more power is produced per injected fuel quantity unit.
By removing restrictions in a Diesel (that unlike petrol does not want any back pressure) - for example - decat and egr removal will benefit slightly from an increase in fuelling also. Adding slightly more boost will also require a compensatory increase in fuel delivery.
It is all good fun isnt it ;-) ..
I have a very detailed description of the operation of the VP37 and also the figures I quoted above if anyone would like a copy.
Rgds
Joe
 
I have to say, that a lot of the time when people claim great improvements in economy from such things as plug in boxes - I do wonder if a lot of it is 'placebo' type effect. What you're saying is that any fuel consumption increases on a Freelander L Series by the 'Hammer Mod' - must be placebo - because it will make no difference?

I suppose with a timing wire in injector 1 - it must do 'something' - ie the ECU uses it to adjust the timing of the fuel pump regardless of whether its a couple of degrees outside of its perfect manual timing position. I would hazard a guess that this is not used on start up. This would explain why when the pumps are not timed manually correctly the engine has difficulty starting - but if you can start it, it will appear to run pretty 'OK'.

I was talking to my brother about the new Ingenium engine. The different Nox/Co/comsumption type emissions requirements are robbing 'Peter to pay Paul' type effects. They're now pumping pee into the exhaust to counteract some of these. He's been running a Jag XE with the engine and he's been getting fantastic performance from its 180HP and up to 70MPG on the run - all from an L Series size engine :) He recons though that in the D Sport (sort of Freelander equivalent I suppose) you'll probably be getting only high 40's - but that's still a 25% improvement on the L or TD4 - with a lot more power if you want it. I'd love to put one of those in an F1! His Jag's gone now anyway, his current wheels are an Evoque Convertible!
 
Joe_H said:
The big issue that I see with the RB is that there is absolutely no control of the injection timing. The basic principle is great.
I am currently looking at a microprocessor controlled injection timing device to complement the RB unit. (I have MANY years of programming embedded microprocessor units for $H!T$ and G!GGLES!) ;)
It is a fact that - due to emission controls - that the timing is around 4% retarded due to weird regulation that advise Nitrous Oxides being reduced ??? what ??? - yet, surprisingly, INCREASING the CO / CO2 emissions at the same time !..
By removing this limitation on timing (which - of course - REALLY good remap could do - but - I do not believe there are many out there - and, they are non adjustable !!!!) I believe that - certainly - in the earlier engines (the L series for example) that the power increase could be genuinely increased. (this is also NOT part of the MOT!!!)
THIS - IMHO is the way to go, ALONG with the fairly simple fuelling increase provided by the ronbox type of assistance.
This approach to fuel timing needs an inbuilt, but simple - internal mapping to correlate the relationship of CPS to NLS - but this is fairly simple.
If anyone really wants to look or discuss the technical side of the injection advance / retard external units and mapping - or - indeed - the source of the information - then PM me. I can provide spreadsheets and up to date info to the right person(s) - PREFERABLY - ! THOSE WHO WANT TO HELP TO PRODUCE THE DEVICE.
The solution is relatively simple and actually very cheap.
Basically it needs an intercept from the needle lift sensor and the CPS as a closed loop and then an output to the A/R solenoid on the VP37. again = this is for the L series. yes -in future, it could be adapted for td4 etc..
Any techies who want to converse ??? let us talk, I have an outline valid solution.
Joe
Click to expand...
Do you have the ability to plug 'something' into the ODB socket and talk to L Series Freelander components? I'm not into the EMS side of things, but my pet goal is to run a Android/Linux/Arduino device plugged into the port that monitors ABS data - specifically the wheel speed sensors.
 
disco_mikey said:
I have a Synergy 2 for sale, if anyone wants it. £75 posted
Click to expand...
Ihad one of these fitted to my Rover 75 cdti highline,it did make a great difference to the running of the engine,cured the known flat spot,gave a good speed boost,and never noticed any more fuel being used.
 
GrumpyGel said:
I have to say, that a lot of the time when people claim great improvements in economy from such things as plug in boxes - I do wonder if a lot of it is 'placebo' type effect. What you're saying is that any fuel consumption increases on a Freelander L Series by the 'Hammer Mod' - must be placebo - because it will make no difference?

I suppose with a timing wire in injector 1 - it must do 'something' - ie the ECU uses it to adjust the timing of the fuel pump regardless of whether its a couple of degrees outside of its perfect manual timing position. I would hazard a guess that this is not used on start up. This would explain why when the pumps are not timed manually correctly the engine has difficulty starting - but if you can start it, it will appear to run pretty 'OK'.
Click to expand...

Hi GG, (apologies for the long reply ! :( - ) it is not something that can be summed up in a couple of lines) however - in reference to an L series, I can see no real way that any tangible economy increases can be obtained by the current plug in boxes. I CAN see that a slight performance improvement is possible but a lot of that may be the advice to increase the max boost pressure at the time of fitting. Increase in performance will virtually always result in an increase in fuel consumption unless one is overcoming a built in limitation put there by the manufacturer - for example - due to emission controls - or - due to fuel consumption being tested at specific MPH /KPH resulting in a slight flat spot built into the mapping (quite common and an early version of emissions cheating). The emission laws now are very tight and certainly can cause cases where economy is sacrificed for emission standard compliance. So, in these cases - there is a possibility of 'removing' a limitation by such methods. This also 'may' make the power delivery / drive-ability of the vehicle more controlled hence by driving style adjustments a slight gain in economy can be observed.
So, IMHO, there is scope for slight improvements, however, any specific ECONOMY improvement is almost certainly negated by the linear approach to fuelling increases across the band. in most cases the removal of other limiting devices can have a greater impact - for example the egr and cat, also increasing max boost slightly. The less restriction should allow the turbo to start to spool earlier and reach max boost sooner. Fuelling increases 'should' be taken care of by the ecu reading the increased MAP sensor value.
However, the biggest issue is that these devices are almost always a linear approach (meaning they are constantly additive to the inbuilt map which almost certainly will not be optimal. re-mapping of the ecu - or, building a non linear map into a small micro (dirt cheap) in an external box would work well however the actual testing needs to be done on a rolling road and is not cheap. I very much doubt that any of the remaps or add ons have actually been properly rolling road tested and adjusted in real time. in fact, most if not all of the external boxes cannot be adjusted to actually 'map' the required changes.
One possible approach is to use a wideband Lambda sensor and monitor / tweak the external mapping of any fuel increase / decrease device in real time - not actually too difficult but I need to research suitable wb lambda units for diesel units - then it would need to be run as a data collection unit in the first place to actually visualise what is going on in a 'normal' setup. This really only applies to older diesel units as most modern units have such systems in place along with many more sensors.
Add on 'boxes' could be made extremely beneficial in this method (using a WBL and real time adjustments) but as a commercial venture it is not viable as most of the vehicles that would benefit are reaching the end of life. As a project for a techy leccy it is a great thing and it is something I certainly want to experiment with.
Any commercial viability of add on units to the public that need multiple connections into existing wiring harnesses are also asking for trouble. So again, really a diy experimental approach - then publish the results in the public domain.
An external - mapped - injection timing adjustment (on older engines) would certainly help - even then it would be a best guess because adding a constant variation to the timing in addition to the map is only possible with a non linear map. For example - the time addition in microseconds for 1 degree of advance measured from TDC sensor and NLS at 1000 rpm is not the same as 2000 rpm - it is a decreasing response that is also not linear. As for statically timed engines badly timed having difficulty starting, and then running ok would depend a lot on the external temperature and how far out the timing is. You are also correct that the starting 'timing' is preset depending on these environmental and physical factors and only when actually running can the finer control be accomplished which, if the incorrect static timing is not too far out will allow the commencement of injection solenoid to attempt to correct. This will allow it to run but usually lead to heavy diesel knock as the solenoid will be often end stopped. in the FL the emission light would illuminate during periods of end stopping.
On the VP 37 pump (and all the above generally is referring to the L series with this unit) it actually is a 'not unknown' fault for the actual solenoid to fail completely, seize, or have limited travel. you are now left with a motor that is never actually timed correctly unless the the required timing happens to be about the point it is stuck at ! (and this will only be at certain specific times in the driving curve - a bit like a stopped watch is more accurate than one that is - say - 8 hours out - the stopped watch will at least be accurate two times a day ;) ! - this also manifests itself as diesel knock that is far heavier than usual. Many folks in this situation never really know as they presume the knocking is normal and doesn't occur all the time - often improving when warmer. The FL L series (and all the other L series fitted models - even some hondas use this! - can all suffer from this. The emission light will not normally light as the differential limits from mapped request to actual results are not great enough and the DCU is fairly crude, however, a small but noticeable power loss will result, fuel consumption will increase and engine noise will increase.
 
Last edited:
GrumpyGel said:
Do you have the ability to plug 'something' into the ODB socket and talk to L Series Freelander components? I'm not into the EMS side of things, but my pet goal is to run a Android/Linux/Arduino device plugged into the port that monitors ABS data - specifically the wheel speed sensors.
Click to expand...
Hi Again GG, I have not specifically played with the OBDC connector on the FL yet - (I have a full suite for our Fiat Panda that can do anything !)
My understanding though is that the FL ecu needs a coded key response to access the data (AFAIK) - and even then limited data is available without specific monitors.
It is something I will look into but I am sure there are people more experienced than me with this specific DCU / ECU.
There are units on Ebay etc that purport to allow data retrieval -but exactly what is available in real time ? - I do not know. There is a list of codes etc in Rave - I will take a look. Perhaps emailing some of the purveyors of the devices specifically for the Landrover models may be appropriate ? - I have not looked for. or indeed heard of a method of manually exchanging key data to achieve communication.
Why the specific interest in realtime data on the ABS sensors ? - that would be possible by other means with arduino or a 'PIC' microprocessor fairly easily depending on what was actually required. Monitoring the actual sensors is straight forward with a micro / arduino / whatever. I program mostly for PIC microprocessors (the 8 bit units) which are indeed incredible these days, I prgrammed these commercialy for many years and use Crownhill Proton PDS language and also native code. -I do program the occasional Arduino but have only played around with those a wee bit. PDS (Crownhill) also produce the Amicus 18 which is pin compatible with the Arduino (but not based on ATMEL processors - it is based on a PIC 18 series) and - for me - easier to code for as I know the language and hardware extremely well.
Joe
 
Last edited:
Do they have dates on them?
Click to expand...
checked mine today .. although just the label side ..
no date .. but a model description ..
e.g. "2a+" as on mine
~~~~~~~~~
btw: to anyone using a ron-box with the td4 ..
( i.e. the model that incorporates the optional maf mapping / compensation )
consider getting the pierbug maf sensor as well
as lower rpm engine response is far better than with the bosch maf ..

using the pierburg maf also gives one the option of using the bosch maf settings
i.e. settings 1 thru 5 ..
but .. there's a noticeable delay in go-pedal response with those settings at lower rpm
whereas with the pierbug maf settings .. 6 thru 10 .. there's virtually no delay ..

with the pierburg maf settings .. the dash switch 'eco-1' and 'eco-2' use a milder maf mapping ..
which by the feel of it .. be the mapping used for the 'bosch' settings ..

i'm going to email rover-ron and see if it's possible to make a d.i.y. change
so the 'eco' dash switch settings would retain the pierburg maf mapping

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

btw: the figures at the bottom of this page suggest otherwise
http://tuning-diesels.com/75Zt/R75maf.htm
i.e. for rpm below 1500 ..
so maybe using the bosch maf settings with the pierburg maf
doesn't exactly equate getting a bosch maf mapping ..

can only go by how my motor .. using the pierburg maf
responds to the various settings ..

the ron-box instructions do state .. that with an egr bypass / delete unit
it's viable to use the bosh maf settings with a pierburg maf fitted

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about going down the second hand 2a route with a new LR MAF. They aren't that expensive to buy the genuine (Bosch?) LR part.
 
They aren't that expensive to buy the genuine (Bosch?) LR part.
Click to expand...
the pierburg .. from http://www.tuning-diesels.co.uk .. is less £ ..
and evidently more reliable than the bosch ( according to r.ron. )
also purchasing the p.maf from r.ron .. one just gets the sensor ..
( as opposed to sensor plus housing ) .. so maybe easier to replace ?
r.ron also sells the required torx-bits for removing / fitting the sensor by itself

i've had my ron-box 2a 'n pierburg maf fitted for the past 75,000 miles ..
absolutely no problems with it ..
only fuel system component replaced be the l.p. fuel pump at 76k miles ..
( hippo bought on 37k miles .. currently on 119k miles )

tbh: if re-mapping wasn't available .. nor tuning modules like the ron-box
i'd be thinking of changing vehicles .. to an older type that could be tuned up

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

the most annoying thing .. to me .. about post 'emission-control' diesels ..
is the delayed .. or initial lack of .. engine response when the go-pedal is pressed
( but good there's no added plume of black smoke on acceleration :) )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Last edited:
hd3 said:
the most annoying thing .. to me .. about post 'emission-control' diesels ..
is the delayed .. or initial lack of .. engine response when the go-pedal is pressed
Click to expand...
In talking to my brother about the Ingenium engine in his XE, he has the oposite problem. It has virtually no engine braking - so you lift off the go pedal and the car just coasts to a halt. However, he says that this only occurs when the engine's warm. When its cold it runs in a traditional fashion - which causes problems because he expects it to always coast. When he pulls away from home in the morning, the first stop he lifts off the accelerator, almost throws himself through the windscreen and stops 50 yards short :)
hd3 said:
if re-mapping wasn't available .. nor tuning modules like the ron-box i'd be thinking of changing vehicles .. to an older type that could be tuned up
Click to expand...
The Ingenium in his Jag is the 'standard' 180HP from the 2L oil burner. The 'entry level' 'manual 2WD LR' ones are a 'poultry' 150HP and they're releasing one soon that has 220/250HP.
hd3 said:
( but good there's no added plume of black smoke on acceleration :) )
Click to expand...
No need to take a pop at the L Series!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
2004 TD4 Gearbox oil change Filler Plug
Replies
6
Views
282
davidnortoni
D
xDParis64
Freelander 1 Driver Door does not unlock with Fob
Replies
10
Views
827
Jimbo70
J
H
Unknown connector under the alternator
Replies
5
Views
414
Nodge68
Nodge68
C
Air Con
Replies
10
Views
828
Alteredtech
Alteredtech
F
Tow Bar Electrics Freelander 2
Replies
1
Views
405
Nodge68
Nodge68