As a mechanic with a good experience of engine thermodynamics I am dubious of claims of increased power and at the same time increased fuel economy. The proverbial free lunch. To me as the thermal efficiency of a motor is determined by its design then more power requires more fuel to be burnt. I am interested to hear from anyone who has fitted a chip without any other changes and has kept careful records as to fuel economy both before and after fitting. Where the chip has been fitted along with other modifications negates the study of economy due to the chip alone. Impressions like "it goes better" etc. wont help the discussion.
Alan
D and D said
10:09 AM Oct 13, 2014
This'll make for interesting reading. Looking forward to it.
Dave
deverall11 said
06:37 PM Oct 13, 2014
Alan, there is a 'must read' thread on the LCOOL forum. This is the best I have seen and explains in details the various chips available. You will need to sign in and search for posts by DIESELTUNER. Another chap under the name of PREMIER has also some good points. It has caused me to totally rethink the whole chip thing and has given me the required information for my next chip. I currently have a 'ChipIt' chipn on a 200 series Landcruiser as well as a freeer flowing exhaust.
Larry
first timer said
07:00 PM Oct 13, 2014
I'm with you D&D, Dave, this topic should make for some interesting discussion. I'm currently toying with chipping my prado so I'll be keen to read the results.
Ashley
rockylizard said
07:01 PM Oct 13, 2014
Gday...
I offer the following article, found through Google search, without any prejudice either way regarding the installation of a "chip".
I have no affiliation with the author in any way and don't necessarily share his views/opinions.
It is a fairly long article, but at least read it all the way through BEFORE you form any opinion on the merit or otherwise of the advice/opinion it contains.
I offer the following article, found through Google search, without any prejudice either way regarding the installation of a "chip".
SNIP
Great article John, makes sense and just about sums it up.
Regards
ps...I see HiClone is being promoted in some circles. Caveat Emptor.
Brenda and Alan said
12:08 PM Oct 14, 2014
Thanks for the link John (Rockylizard) a very interesting article and accords somewhat with my thoughts. However some manufacturers fit the same engines to different models with different power and torque outputs so there is some room to move without over stressing them. The same applies to gear boxes and diffs fitted to vehicles with motors of higher power than the motor one wishes to improve. What I wanted to explore was cost in fuel economy associated with chipping to get improvements in power and torque. In my case a small improvement would enable towing in 5th gear at 2500 RPM as opposed to 4th at 3000 RPM. When conditions are cool in the mornings we do this and gain an increase in fuel economy of 8% which is a worthwhile saving. (I don't want to side track into a discussion on towing in overdrive.)
Alan
oldboar said
02:05 PM Oct 14, 2014
As I was almost getting RSI from gear changes heading inland up through Queensland, I fitted a DP Chip to our Isuzu NPR200 truck. This resulted in a dramatic increase in power towing our van (from a nameplate 114kW to similar to the 147kW of our previous BT50 tug). As for fuel economy there has been a very minimal increase but I'm pretty sure my average speed is now greater due to the ease of driving. Very happy with the results so far, rarely out of 6th gear with average fuel economy between 17 & 20 litres/ 100km for a gross weight of about 7.5 tonne. We've also added more weight to the truck since fitting the chip.
Darrell & Sandra
-- Edited by oldboar on Tuesday 14th of October 2014 02:08:05 PM
PeterOr said
06:18 PM Oct 14, 2014
Intentionally I have not read the linked articles as yet. My personal experience is as follows:
2003 Landcruiser TD, manual transmission
Installed DP Chip after purchasing Kimberley Kamper camper trailer, tare about 1200, fully loaded about 1500kg
First trip to Fraser Island without the chip
Did two further trips totalling in excess of 25,000km (Central Oz and WA) with the chip plus lots of city (Sydney) driving without the trailer.
If there is a difference in power/fuel consumption than I have certainly NOT noticed it. I was getting 11.8 l/100 without towing and 15.5 average towing pushing to 17.5 on Fraser Island. Speed limited to 105km/h
I did second trip to Fraser with the chip two years later - very similar figures, driving technique and conditions make bigger difference.
I don't consider $1700 cost (incl. installation) to be of value. The chip did not affect reliability, so at least no issues there.
Now I have moved on to LC200 and full size off road van with an ATM of 2600kg. I am still open minded but certainly on the sceptic side
Radar said
08:28 PM Oct 14, 2014
Hi All
Our Land Rover Discovery TD5 was pretty ordinary so being a big kid I put into having some tricks done, better exhaust $700. The computer remapped and the air inlet changed, 20% increase in power great. $1200.
Between 2 markers on the road before it would get to 70 ks and then after 95 ks from a standing start yes going over the hills near Nambour on the freeway towing our 2 tonne van it would gain speed but for fuel it was around the same no real gain but the car was more driveable.
It like a set of tyres I brought salesman tried to tell me the green label tyre will give me 10% better fuel, looking back over my fuel figures there is no differances certainly no 10 % gain.
This time when I wanted more power I brought it off the show room floor Nissan Navara V6 550 torque 190 Kilo watt crew cab ute, I am getting around the same fuel figures but my road speed is lot quicker compared to the Discovery.
I don't think I can justified spending the money on improvements again, maybe a exhaust, what about some nice spring and shockers. Ralph.
Radar said
08:33 PM Oct 14, 2014
Hi All
Our Land Rover Discovery TD5 was pretty ordinary so being a big kid I put into having some tricks done, better exhaust $700. The computer remapped and the air inlet changed, 20% increase in power great. $1200.
Between 2 markers on the road before it would get to 70 ks and then after 95 ks from a standing start yes going over the hills near Nambour on the freeway towing our 2 tonne van it would gain speed but for fuel it was around the same no real gain but the car was more driveable.
It like a set of tyres I brought salesman tried to tell me the green label tyre will give me 10% better fuel, looking back over my fuel figures there is no differances certainly no 10 % gain.
This time when I wanted more power I brought it off the show room floor Nissan Navara V6 550 torque 190 Kilo watt crew cab ute, I am getting around the same fuel figures but my road speed is lot quicker compared to the Discovery.
I don't think I can justified spending the money on improvements again, maybe a exhaust, what about some nice spring and shockers. Ralph.
deverall11 said
12:34 PM Oct 15, 2014
PeterOr wrote:
Now I have moved on to LC200 and full size off road van with an ATM of 2600kg. I am still open minded but certainly on the sceptic side
Peter, my post is extremely relevant to your situation and the vehicle you now have.
Larry
Brenda and Alan said
09:00 AM Oct 16, 2014
Deverall11 I did not pick up anything new from the LCOOL forum regarding the effects of chipping on fuel economy. Both posters you mentioned still talk of increasing both power and fuel economy at the same time which I for one think is not possible. The link that John provided did raise the power improvement that can be obtained by the fitting an intercooler without the need of a chip. This method may be the way to go in my case but I don't know of the effects on economy. So far we have not had any one with carefully recorded figures for before and after chipping post their results.
Alan
deverall11 said
04:40 PM Oct 16, 2014
Alan, Dieseltuner goes into the details as to what chip does what and it come down to only one having the ability to alter many crucial parameters. I thought you were looking for a chip.
Whilst I have not kept acurate records of fuel consumption with and without a chip, I can say that I am using less fuel with a chip because the engine is producing more torque at lower RPM. Surely you must be in agreement that more RPM equals more fuel.
As an example, I use to tow our previous van (2.5t loaded) with a Pajero. The vehicle never returned less then 18l/100 and was usually over 20l/100. Swapped for a 200 series Landcruiser, same van and same driving conditions and I halved my fuel consumption.
Larry
rockylizard said
07:25 PM Oct 16, 2014
Gday...
Just as an observation, Larry ... ya can't really compare completely different vehicles - especially makes of vehicle - to compare fuel economy/consumption, despite towing the same van.
Are you really sure you "halved my fuel consumption" ? That means the Cruiser used between 9 and 10Ltrs/100km towing ?
I also doubt ya could even really compare the same model of the same brand - eg different "identical" 200 Series LCs could (would?) produce differing results.
Cheers - John
Brenda and Alan said
09:36 AM Oct 17, 2014
Larry again all the "experts" in these posts basically say the same thing. Dump in more fuel you get more power. But nobody quantifies the cost to economy which I for one would like to know. Now consider this scenario.
A vehicle with a chip the can be turned on and off at will, travelling at constant speed uses a set amount of fuel per Km. Now switch on chip, more fuel into motor, more power, speed increases. Now you ease off on the accelerator to bring speed back to same as before. BECAUSE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MOTOR IS FIXED the best possible out come is the same consumption as before, but this would be difficult as the throttle opening would be less so the mixture would be richer than before. But if the economy is reduced significantly the use of a chip is not cost effective .
Accurate figures from people who gone this route is what I am hoping to get but they seem to be ethereal.
Alan
Phillipn said
10:08 AM Oct 17, 2014
When I got my BT-50 a diesel mechanic friend told me not to chip the motor, but fit a bigger exhaust system .
He stated that the cost of a chip is not worth spending the money on.
Bill B said
10:26 AM Oct 17, 2014
deverall11 wrote:
As an example, I use to tow our previous van (2.5t loaded) with a Pajero. The vehicle never returned less then 18l/100 and was usually over 20l/100. Swapped for a 200 series Landcruiser, same van and same driving conditions and I halved my fuel consumption.
Larry
Sorry but you are dreaming with your claimed consumption for your Cruiser whilst towing.
I doubt that you could get those figures (9 - 10 l/100) whilst not towing let alone with 2.5 t behind the Cruiser.
-- Edited by Bill B on Friday 17th of October 2014 10:27:43 AM
Santa said
05:49 PM Oct 17, 2014
Bill B wrote:
deverall11 wrote:
As an example, I use to tow our previous van (2.5t loaded) with a Pajero. The vehicle never returned less then 18l/100 and was usually over 20l/100. Swapped for a 200 series Landcruiser, same van and same driving conditions and I halved my fuel consumption.
Larry
Sorry but you are dreaming with your claimed consumption for your Cruiser whilst towing.
I doubt that you could get those figures (9 - 10 l/100) whilst not towing let alone with 2.5 t behind the Cruiser.
-- Edited by Bill B on Friday 17th of October 2014 10:27:43 AM
Yep, definitely dreamin.
ruffnut09 said
09:45 PM Oct 17, 2014
Brenda and Alan,
Nissan Patrol GU IV ZD 30 3 Litre engine.
First 5 years whilst under warranty fuel consumption 9.5 to 11 l/100k empty mixed highway/city.Towing 19' tandem van..14.5 to 22 l/100k
At 5 years & 1 day.........3" exhaust, chip,block EGR, high flow air induction, boost guage and pyrometer and blast off.............complete disappiontment.
Engine overboosting, black smoke, very harsh to drive $3600 wasted????
In desperation took it to a Dyno tuner and another $2100 it finally is all happening.....over 500Nm and a slingshot compared to standard.
The vehicle is now much heavier, steel bullbar, winch, roofrack, long range (220L) tanks, 3 batteries, 33" tyres blah, blah, blah...............
10.5 to 12l/100 highway/ city and 14 to 18 l/100 towing same caravan. (Mind you the 18l figure has been the worst since the mods. but travelling around Texas, Tenterfield, Glen Innes etc is a tough run for any Tug.. some of the gradients were signed 14%).
Was the excercise worth it............For me financially NO......what ever way it is looked at. For the person that buys this Tug secondhand.....perhaps.
If you want more power buy a more powerful Tug, if you want economy don't tow............
Regards,
Ruff.
mr glassies said
05:26 PM Oct 18, 2014
fish n chips for meeeeeee
na for real I'm going chip and 2.5 inch exhaust
dibs
The Hats said
06:22 PM Oct 23, 2014
Brenda and Alan wrote:
I would like to start a discussion on this topic.
As a mechanic with a good experience of engine thermodynamics I am dubious of claims of increased power and at the same time increased fuel economy. The proverbial free lunch. To me as the thermal efficiency of a motor is determined by its design then more power requires more fuel to be burnt. I am interested to hear from anyone who has fitted a chip without any other changes and has kept careful records as to fuel economy both before and after fitting. Where the chip has been fitted along with other modifications negates the study of economy due to the chip alone. Impressions like "it goes better" etc. wont help the discussion.
Alan
Al Mate as a road train driver for over 35 years and some who keep very acurate records in my cars as well as the trucks I drive I will give you my story.
I have a V8 troopy it was stock for 150,000ks with my very acurate records over this time I have fuel burn for every tankfull Ks verses Litres as well as an average taking into account the various environmental issues IE wind rain ect.
I had ROO systems Chip and a 3" ss exaust system put on at the same time. Now after 9,000,000+ks in trucks and another couple of million in cars and 4bies I can tell you that I got a very very good power increase from 123kw and 430nm at the back wheels to 175kw and 567nm on there dyno, with the Roo System they play around with the timing within the manufacturers specs.
The Troopy now has 210,000ks on it so I have 60,000ks worth of figers to work with and I can tell you that my fuel is the same, when empty, and 0.250 of a litre more per 100ks when towing a 2.5 ton trailer. but I am a full gear or better up the big hills the pulling power is very good.
I like you was very iffy about claims of better fuel consumption, But I am happy to have a power increase with no extra fuel to speak of.
Hope this helps
Cheers
The HAts
Ron
Legendts said
05:44 PM Oct 24, 2014
Alan, I have a 200 series. It now has a chip and Beaudesert exhaust. Exhaust on its own made almost as much seat of the pants feel as the chip without the exhaust upgrade, both together make towing much better. As for fuel usage, absolutely no difference when towing from standard. Not towing on a three hour trip to Melbourne I regularly see low 10s and on two occasions even got as low as 9.8l/100. Pre chip/exhaust it was always high 10s but as I said above, towing no change at all, but much more tractable in my opinion.
I would like to start a discussion on this topic.
As a mechanic with a good experience of engine thermodynamics I am dubious of claims of increased power and at the same time increased fuel economy. The proverbial free lunch. To me as the thermal efficiency of a motor is determined by its design then more power requires more fuel to be burnt. I am interested to hear from anyone who has fitted a chip without any other changes and has kept careful records as to fuel economy both before and after fitting. Where the chip has been fitted along with other modifications negates the study of economy due to the chip alone. Impressions like "it goes better" etc. wont help the discussion.
Alan
Dave
Larry
I'm with you D&D, Dave, this topic should make for some interesting discussion. I'm currently toying with chipping my prado so I'll be keen to read the results.
Ashley
Gday...
I offer the following article, found through Google search, without any prejudice either way regarding the installation of a "chip".
I have no affiliation with the author in any way and don't necessarily share his views/opinions.
It is a fairly long article, but at least read it all the way through BEFORE you form any opinion on the merit or otherwise of the advice/opinion it contains.
I believe it is good "food for thought"
http://outbackjoe.com/macho-divertissement/macho-articles/why-no-diesel-chip/
Cheers - John
Great article John, makes sense and just about sums it up.
Regards
ps...I see HiClone is being promoted in some circles. Caveat Emptor.
Thanks for the link John (Rockylizard) a very interesting article and accords somewhat with my thoughts. However some manufacturers fit the same engines to different models with different power and torque outputs so there is some room to move without over stressing them. The same applies to gear boxes and diffs fitted to vehicles with motors of higher power than the motor one wishes to improve. What I wanted to explore was cost in fuel economy associated with chipping to get improvements in power and torque. In my case a small improvement would enable towing in 5th gear at 2500 RPM as opposed to 4th at 3000 RPM. When conditions are cool in the mornings we do this and gain an increase in fuel economy of 8% which is a worthwhile saving. (I don't want to side track into a discussion on towing in overdrive.)
Alan
As I was almost getting RSI from gear changes heading inland up through Queensland, I fitted a DP Chip to our Isuzu NPR200 truck. This resulted in a dramatic increase in power towing our van (from a nameplate 114kW to similar to the 147kW of our previous BT50 tug). As for fuel economy there has been a very minimal increase but I'm pretty sure my average speed is now greater due to the ease of driving. Very happy with the results so far, rarely out of 6th gear with average fuel economy between 17 & 20 litres/ 100km for a gross weight of about 7.5 tonne. We've also added more weight to the truck since fitting the chip.
Darrell & Sandra
-- Edited by oldboar on Tuesday 14th of October 2014 02:08:05 PM
2003 Landcruiser TD, manual transmission
Installed DP Chip after purchasing Kimberley Kamper camper trailer, tare about 1200, fully loaded about 1500kg
First trip to Fraser Island without the chip
Did two further trips totalling in excess of 25,000km (Central Oz and WA) with the chip plus lots of city (Sydney) driving without the trailer.
If there is a difference in power/fuel consumption than I have certainly NOT noticed it. I was getting 11.8 l/100 without towing and 15.5 average towing pushing to 17.5 on Fraser Island. Speed limited to 105km/h
I did second trip to Fraser with the chip two years later - very similar figures, driving technique and conditions make bigger difference.
I don't consider $1700 cost (incl. installation) to be of value. The chip did not affect reliability, so at least no issues there.
Now I have moved on to LC200 and full size off road van with an ATM of 2600kg. I am still open minded but certainly on the sceptic side
Hi All
Our Land Rover Discovery TD5 was pretty ordinary so being a big kid I put into having some tricks done, better exhaust $700. The computer remapped and the air inlet changed, 20% increase in power great. $1200.
Between 2 markers on the road before it would get to 70 ks and then after 95 ks from a standing start yes going over the hills near Nambour on the freeway towing our 2 tonne van it would gain speed but for fuel it was around the same no real gain but the car was more driveable.
It like a set of tyres I brought salesman tried to tell me the green label tyre will give me 10% better fuel, looking back over my fuel figures there is no differances certainly no 10 % gain.
This time when I wanted more power I brought it off the show room floor Nissan Navara V6 550 torque 190 Kilo watt crew cab ute, I am getting around the same fuel figures but my road speed is lot quicker compared to the Discovery.
I don't think I can justified spending the money on improvements again, maybe a exhaust, what about some nice spring and shockers. Ralph.
Hi All
Our Land Rover Discovery TD5 was pretty ordinary so being a big kid I put into having some tricks done, better exhaust $700. The computer remapped and the air inlet changed, 20% increase in power great. $1200.
Between 2 markers on the road before it would get to 70 ks and then after 95 ks from a standing start yes going over the hills near Nambour on the freeway towing our 2 tonne van it would gain speed but for fuel it was around the same no real gain but the car was more driveable.
It like a set of tyres I brought salesman tried to tell me the green label tyre will give me 10% better fuel, looking back over my fuel figures there is no differances certainly no 10 % gain.
This time when I wanted more power I brought it off the show room floor Nissan Navara V6 550 torque 190 Kilo watt crew cab ute, I am getting around the same fuel figures but my road speed is lot quicker compared to the Discovery.
I don't think I can justified spending the money on improvements again, maybe a exhaust, what about some nice spring and shockers. Ralph.
Peter, my post is extremely relevant to your situation and the vehicle you now have.
Larry
Deverall11 I did not pick up anything new from the LCOOL forum regarding the effects of chipping on fuel economy. Both posters you mentioned still talk of increasing both power and fuel economy at the same time which I for one think is not possible. The link that John provided did raise the power improvement that can be obtained by the fitting an intercooler without the need of a chip. This method may be the way to go in my case but I don't know of the effects on economy. So far we have not had any one with carefully recorded figures for before and after chipping post their results.
Alan
Whilst I have not kept acurate records of fuel consumption with and without a chip, I can say that I am using less fuel with a chip because the engine is producing more torque at lower RPM. Surely you must be in agreement that more RPM equals more fuel.
As an example, I use to tow our previous van (2.5t loaded) with a Pajero. The vehicle never returned less then 18l/100 and was usually over 20l/100. Swapped for a 200 series Landcruiser, same van and same driving conditions and I halved my fuel consumption.
Larry
Gday...
Just as an observation, Larry
... ya can't really compare completely different vehicles - especially makes of vehicle - to compare fuel economy/consumption, despite towing the same van.
Are you really sure you "halved my fuel consumption" ?
That means the Cruiser used between 9 and 10Ltrs/100km towing ? 
I also doubt ya could even really compare the same model of the same brand - eg different "identical" 200 Series LCs could (would?) produce differing results.
Cheers - John
Larry again all the "experts" in these posts basically say the same thing. Dump in more fuel you get more power. But nobody quantifies the cost to economy which I for one would like to know. Now consider this scenario.
A vehicle with a chip the can be turned on and off at will, travelling at constant speed uses a set amount of fuel per Km. Now switch on chip, more fuel into motor, more power, speed increases. Now you ease off on the accelerator to bring speed back to same as before. BECAUSE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MOTOR IS FIXED the best possible out come is the same consumption as before, but this would be difficult as the throttle opening would be less so the mixture would be richer than before. But if the economy is reduced significantly the use of a chip is not cost effective .
Accurate figures from people who gone this route is what I am hoping to get but they seem to be ethereal.
Alan
When I got my BT-50 a diesel mechanic friend told me not to chip the motor, but fit a bigger exhaust system .
He stated that the cost of a chip is not worth spending the money on.
Sorry but you are dreaming with your claimed consumption for your Cruiser whilst towing.
I doubt that you could get those figures (9 - 10 l/100) whilst not towing let alone with 2.5 t behind the Cruiser.
-- Edited by Bill B on Friday 17th of October 2014 10:27:43 AM
Yep, definitely dreamin.
Nissan Patrol GU IV ZD 30 3 Litre engine.
First 5 years whilst under warranty fuel consumption 9.5 to 11 l/100k empty mixed highway/city.Towing 19' tandem van..14.5 to 22 l/100k
At 5 years & 1 day.........3" exhaust, chip,block EGR, high flow air induction, boost guage and pyrometer and blast off.............complete disappiontment.
Engine overboosting, black smoke, very harsh to drive $3600 wasted????
In desperation took it to a Dyno tuner and another $2100 it finally is all happening.....over 500Nm and a slingshot compared to standard.
The vehicle is now much heavier, steel bullbar, winch, roofrack, long range (220L) tanks, 3 batteries, 33" tyres blah, blah, blah...............
10.5 to 12l/100 highway/ city and 14 to 18 l/100 towing same caravan. (Mind you the 18l figure has been the worst since the mods. but travelling around Texas, Tenterfield, Glen Innes etc is a tough run for any Tug.. some of the gradients were signed 14%).
Was the excercise worth it............For me financially NO......what ever way it is looked at. For the person that buys this Tug secondhand.....perhaps.
If you want more power buy a more powerful Tug, if you want economy don't tow............
Regards,
Ruff.
na for real I'm going chip and 2.5 inch exhaust
dibs
Al Mate as a road train driver for over 35 years and some who keep very acurate records in my cars as well as the trucks I drive I will give you my story.
I have a V8 troopy it was stock for 150,000ks with my very acurate records over this time I have fuel burn for every tankfull Ks verses Litres as well as an average taking into account the various environmental issues IE wind rain ect.
I had ROO systems Chip and a 3" ss exaust system put on at the same time. Now after 9,000,000+ks in trucks and another couple of million in cars and 4bies I can tell you that I got a very very good power increase from 123kw and 430nm at the back wheels to 175kw and 567nm on there dyno, with the Roo System they play around with the timing within the manufacturers specs.
The Troopy now has 210,000ks on it so I have 60,000ks worth of figers to work with and I can tell you that my fuel is the same, when empty, and 0.250 of a litre more per 100ks when towing a 2.5 ton trailer. but I am a full gear or better up the big hills the pulling power is very good.
I like you was very iffy about claims of better fuel consumption, But I am happy to have a power increase with no extra fuel to speak of.
Hope this helps
Cheers
The HAts
Ron