few problems just had my car itb'd

[mattatmtech]

Danny,

Even after mapping againl, its till down 20bhp. Like I said to nick, im not saying you/me etc anyone has done anything wrong, just the changes made have lost it power.

I am intrieged...

 

[Autoflock]

This is an intersting thread from all angles I must say,

must stick up for Matt in his corner though, Ive never seen a tuner take as much time and effort to rectify a customers need like this before, ive done quite a bit of work with Matt over the past few years and MTECH's reputation speaks for itself, there should be more tuners out there like this who actually want to help people instead of just taking money and shutting the door once they have left.

Anyway, had a quick flick through this thread and was wondering what sort of power are these conversions supposed to give and has any one got a fuelling/timing and power graph they can post up with similar mods?

What power was this car running before the itb conversion?

I notice a lot of people stating they get 200bhp from their clio's which to me seems very impressive, i wonder how many were actually done on a dd r/r with the operators foot well away from the brake ;-)

Nick - can you post up your graphs for this conversion, I doubt very much it is a mapping issue as matt has done many cars mostly turbo's which are running well over the 300bhp mark, this is where things begin to happen very very quickly so I have every confidence he can map a 2.0 mildly tuned na engine.

Try and stick with it mate as these are cracking cars when done right, and remember to try and stick to the same set of rollers, you can have as much as 80bhp difference between different makes depending on their make and location. Its not so much the power figure thats important but more the curve if you know what I mean.

Fingers crossed this will get sorted

 

[Nick r26r]

i dont have a power graph , i was never given one by matt , as said i have only ever read good things about m tech hence why i took it there in the first place , he has offered to map my next car for free which i cant complain about !!!

 

[172Ben]

Heres my graph

AT power bodies, Standalone ecu, and group n exhaust, otherwise standard engine.

 

[Nick r26r]

What power was this car running before the itb conversion?

was running 155bhp , then went to 180bhp then taken back in because car was running crap , then cam timing was done and car was mapped again and it is now running 160bhp

 

[Adey.]

nick book in somewhere local and ill come along and take a look

 

[Icarus]

A bit of for reference. We've done over 40 Renault F4R engines on port throttles which are in use in 5 countries at the last count, not just 172 and 182 but X85 and C85 competition cars including ex R3 230PS engines etc on Pectel, Marelli and EC engine control.

A healthy stock 172/182 engine will make between 165 and 170bhp estimated fly when corrected to SAEJ1995E on our chassis dyno. The same engines read between 166 and 173bhp on an SF902 engine dyno again corrected to SAE but obviously with the advantages cooling towers and no ancils provide. Anything around 165bhp is 'correct' for a 172 with aircon and 168bhp for a 'cup'.

With port throttles and the requried engine control they will make circa 189bhp for one on filter socks and 197bhp for a really good one with a decent airbox. The occasional freakishly good one may crack 200bhp. Again these values are estimated fly based on a wheel measurement corrected to SAEJ1995E with engine controllers running accurate inlet air temp measurment and baro compensation and fueling between λ0.85 and λ0.89

In short they don't make 'stock' power as standard but a pretty standard engine will do almost crack 200 beans on port throttles.

 

[Nick r26r]

nick book in somewhere local and ill come along and take a look

ill book it in at the place you said , paul will be putting the standard wiring loom in next week so the car should be ready to go once paul has finished with it ,

 

[Russ_16v]

This is mine, 191 bhp on RS tuning's RR which is generally known to be very accurate, iv been told to expect closer to 200 on other rollers


This is with 135,000 miles and standard, bar the exhaust.

Still retains the catalyst also

 

[Nick r26r]

still on standard ecu as well isnt it ??

 

[Russ_16v]

Yup

Torques the thing that impressed me the most, over 150 lb ft from just over 4000 right up to near 7000

 

[Autoflock]

Hi Russ, has your car got tb's?

 

[Russ_16v]

Yes mate, 48mm Jenveys







<<<<<

 

[Andyrg@ ClioTurbo]

is your car a ph1 172 or a ph2 172
Have they installed a nock sensor?
Have they installed a Lambnda? or is it closed loop?
Sounds like there is issues with timing (ign) for the power too be so low, ive not read this full thread, can i suggest a adaptronic ecu www.efiparts.co.uk over a omex.

ill await your responce

 

[Russ_16v]

He isnt running an Omex mate

 

[Andyrg@ ClioTurbo]

He isnt running an Omex mate

He has previosluy stated getting a omex..... hence my reply

 

[Autoflock]

Russ - LOL

its been a long day pal, that pretty good power for the spec I think, isnt a 172 about 145ft lb standard though?

Andy - I think the V4 ecu is more than up to the job as it is a very high spec ecu with some excellent features

Probably overkill for a N/A engine though which is good

 

[sideways danny]

A bit of for reference. We've done over 40 Renault F4R engines on port throttles which are in use in 5 countries at the last count, not just 172 and 182 but X85 and C85 competition cars including ex R3 230PS engines etc on Pectel, Marelli and EC engine control.

A healthy stock 172/182 engine will make between 165 and 170bhp estimated fly when corrected to SAEJ1995E on our chassis dyno. The same engines read between 166 and 173bhp on an SF902 engine dyno again corrected to SAE but obviously with the advantages cooling towers and no ancils provide. Anything around 165bhp is 'correct' for a 172 with aircon and 168bhp for a 'cup'.

With port throttles and the requried engine control they will make circa 189bhp for one on filter socks and 197bhp for a really good one with a decent airbox. The occasional freakishly good one may crack 200bhp. Again these values are estimated fly based on a wheel measurement corrected to SAEJ1995E with engine controllers running accurate inlet air temp measurment and baro compensation and fueling between λ0.85 and λ0.89

In short they don't make 'stock' power as standard but a pretty standard engine will do almost crack 200 beans on port throttles.

have compared a few cars now and DD always seems to read 5-6bhp lower than the superflow around this level of output. Swings and roundabouts, every dyno is different etc, blah blah blah. I'd pick a Superflow if i was buying a dyno though

 

[Icarus]

That's mainly because of how the DD ATMC2 correction factor works out estimate flywheel power. If you run a DD with the SAEJ1995E correction factor they stack up pretty bloody closely with each other.

I do like the Superflow kit though

 

[mattatmtech]

i dont have a power graph , i was never given one by matt , as said i have only ever read good things about m tech hence why i took it there in the first place , he has offered to map my next car for free which i cant complain about !!!

Nick,

Not a problem mate, I think we've all just been unlucky witht his clio!

Bring on the boost

Matt

 

[Alic01]

I have just read through this whole thread with great interest. I'm sorry to hear how it has all gone.

Looking at it from a pure engine tuning point of view I see it that originally when installed the camshaft was some 30 degrees advanced of it's desired position. This will result in a greater than desired overlap of inlet and exhaust. It would appear that the balancing effect of the original plenum chamber masked this issue somewhat but the less than optimum timing resulted in arguably poor output of 155hp.

When the itb's were installed you lost the balancing effect of the plenum and the very function of itb's worked against you by accentuating the 'cammy' nature of the increased overlap. You were probably experiencing blowback down the inlet tract and/or loss of inlet charge down the exhaust ports. This is what contributed to the smell of petrol probably coming from the front and back of the car.

When the timing was reset correctly with the correct tools the camshaft was in renaults 'emmisions reduction' timing which is chosen to reduce overlap to a minimum ensuring air and fuel go in and exhaust comes out which reduces caminess at low revs.

Reading through this thread I think we can safely say that your dephaser is not working for whatever reason. It's receiving signal but cannot be sen to have a measurable effect which indicates no physical change in timing.

This then means that even tho it is timed correctly it is now retarded by 16 degrees resulting in a loss of top end power due to lack of overlap which is designed to allow exiting exhaust gasses create a vacuum on the inlet increasing the volumetric efficiency massively.

I don't know the figures for the cams so it would be hard to put a figure on the effects but knowing the effect of the scavaging on the standard engine at 5k I would expect your losing a lot.

It's a shame you have given up but I understand it, from the very first day you were never that far away. Matt did more than could be expected of him tbh but he should prob have done it quicker. 4 months is too long, if all this had of happened in a week things would be very different.

Feel free to rib me on the above if you wish. That's just how I see the problems and is a reason I sympathise with matt. He's putting the right amount of fuel in for the airflow that's being drawn in. If the engine is pulling in 20% less air than it should due to cam timing that's not his problem.

Also final thought.... Did anyone ever check the spark plugs. Only ask coz it has never been mentioned!!

 

[Nick r26r]

the car was serviced a few weeks before with brand new spark plugs , not sure if matt checked them to be honest , i will get the dephaser checked when the car is back to standard , thanks for the input you sound like you certainly know your stuff ..

 

[Russ_16v]

Russ - LOL

its been a long day pal, that pretty good power for the spec I think, isnt a 172 about 145ft lb standard though?

Andy - I think the V4 ecu is more than up to the job as it is a very high spec ecu with some excellent features

Probably overkill for a N/A engine though which is good

lol only jest mate

Yeah, most make 145-150 lb ft, mines peaking at 158 lb ft, bus as said its a completely different car to drive, as although the peak torque isnt up a huge amount, its making over 30 lb ft at 4500 rpm now, so you can imagine how it drives!

 

[mattatmtech]

We always check plugs when mapping just for colour. AFR is all well and good, but you can never beat the good old acide tests. Also, theyb were removed countless times when checking TDC for cam timing, leak don testing and so on, and no noticible issues.

The car wa smapped as pressnted, wo optimula AFRs and Ignition advance, and thats trhe power it made. Alot of people on here said the VVT had very little effect. As per the ST170, I can switch VVT over at 3,500rpm and see power go from 98bhp to 171bhp within 100rpm... I think fit that dephaser is sorted the remainig horses will appear at the top of the rev range...

 

[Alic01]

Matt, your dead right I think if the dephaser is sorted to sort the can riming the horses will come back. May need a tweek of the map to suit but not much.

I didn't mean to sound off with the spark plug comment it's just it was never mentioned and often things which are taken for granted are forgotten.

Would be interested to know if you agree with my line of thinking for the power outputs achieved.

 

[sideways danny]

function of the VVT will make near enough 10 bhp difference

 

[Russ_16v]

For reference I lost approx 7 bhp with VVT switched off when mine was mapped.

 

[mattatmtech]

Hmm, indeed, in thatc ase the problem must lie elsewhere. Its mapped as presented, and like Nicmk said hes wanting to use the ECU and bodies on his next project, so not really a problem, just be interesting to know what caused the issues in the first place

 

[Nick r26r]

what a absolute bunch of c0nts m tech are , just went to try and connect the old ecu plug back up , they have chopped it completly of , so the car needs the whole wiring loom taken out , BIG JOB !!! when i was told the old loom would be left on there , there is no other reason the old plug would of been chopped of other than being a complete bunch of bodging tw*ts , im not happy , why would you cut a loom and leave loose wires almost touching , pictures to follow of how shocking there work actuall is , STAY AWAY FROM THESE COW BOYS

 

[Laine_16v]

Sounds a bit ghetto!

 

[DMS]

Sounds pretty shocking actually. Get those pics up A.S.A.P, it'll be interesting to see what those in the know make of it.

 

[172Ben]

Sounds a bit ghetto!

Knew you were on here, you posted on my video of my car on YouTube.

To be fair, ive nearly cut all my standard wiring loom out as it's not needed. BUT if they said they would keep it in that's not good.

 

[Laine_16v]

Knew you were on here, you posted on my video of my car on YouTube.

To be fair, ive nearly cut all my standard wiring loom out as it's not needed. BUT if they said they would keep it in that's not good.

What video was that? jog my memory

 

[172Ben]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaCN8qNV4w4

Think it's you...

 

[Laine_16v]

Yeah thats me, cracks me up a mixture of your accent "thats fookin piston out back!" , whats the spec of that engine then? you never did reply

 

[Greeny.]

Has the timing been fixed again yet?

 

[172Ben]

LOL, bloody northern monkeys

Standard engine, just AT power ITB's, alot more stipped out now than back then though.

 

[Nick r26r]

the timing was fine bud , sidewaysdanny done it so it was spot on , just m tech being the cow boys they are trying to put the blame on everything else apart from them ,

 

[b33fy172]

What happened with all this in the end? Did you get a refund? or was it ever discovered why the figures were so low?

 

[Nick r26r]

no refund , just collected the car and decided to put back to stock as they lost 5bhp by fitting the bodies to the power it went in with , i and a few people on here put it down to management and badly mapped , there philosophy seems to be get the money in and screw the customers , they have a 350z that has been sat in there for about a year and they have hardly touched , when i went down there the windows were wide open and bonnet open (and it was pissing down with rain) apparently the customer is spending 50k on it for the to 4wd it and 800bhp it , there were a few customers cars in there when i last went down there that were shocking , the way they were just left there , convertible with the roof slightly open (for rain to p155 into it) ,