Improving drive-ability of XF 2.2d 200hp 2013.

I am not very happy with the gear ratio and hence the drive-ability and noise (droning) of my XF.

There are a couple of performance chip upgrades on the market with impressive descriptions from their makers.

I am not too concern about the economy but more about improving driving pleasure.

As these are not cheap chips I am wondering whether some of you already fitted one and what is your opinion.

- Are you happy overall - how many stars? 1-5 (5= Excellent)
- Has it improve performance
- Has it improve gear changing - ie not staying in high gear at low speeds and reducing droning/vibration/engine labouring.
- Which make/model did you use

Looking forward to your input

 

No chip or reprogramming will change the gear ratios or 'droning'.

 

HAHAHAHA

 

OK SORRY ... for the OP ive not a diesel jag ... but ive tuned my diesel truck twin turbo , with like changing results....ive also tuned my jag... that just made a fast car really fast.... the truck though is amazing...i highly recommend a tune...research and find the right one...

 

I have a Bluespark Pro +boost on order for my 3.0d. A friend has it installed and it works very well.
The claim is a jump from 277ps and 500nm torque to 294ps and 577nm torque, and it feels it. Big improvement.
Because of the torque boost, economy actually improves as well because the engine isn't working as hard in normal use.

This is the one for the 2.2. from 190ps to 235ps and torque from 450 to 521.

Bluespark Pro + Boost Diesel Chip Tuning Box for Jaguar-XF 2.2 Diesel | Improve Power and MPG with our Tuning Boxes

 

Miraculous.

 

@Madart - Had a quick look at their site and it looks quite interesting.

I had a bit of time to look deeper into this subject and now I am not sure whether using a box or an actual ECU Remapping & Programming is the best way.

Its getting more confusing now ......

Madart - I will love to hear your feedback after you have yours installed

 

mmm, tuning boxes the modern equivalent of snake oil. If it was that cheap and easy to improve power , torque and economy all in one ,the manufacturers would be the first to use them. Show me some real dyno traces before and after and I might believe

 

Actually not necessarily true. The manufacturer builds an ample level of "safety" into their fuel "maps". They are usually quite rich at high revs to limit the possibility of damage to an engine. The extra fuel has a cooling effect.

What some cheap chips do is to fool the cars computer into leaning out at high revs and even advancing the spark.

That way you can get a bit more performance at the risk of engine damage.

This is an oversimplification obviously.

There are some good examples in this forum where the exact same engine gets less hp in one model Jag as opposed to another model and can succesfully be tuned to the higher level.

Look at the thread on Quest for 450 hp for additional info on professional level retuning.

 

The OP has a diesel.

He's also looking for a tune that moves the RPM range around to avoid droning.

 

Good point Mikey.

I was responding to post #9 specifically.

 

There may well be some margin of safety built in, but thats whats its there for! The manufacturers have invested millions into state of the art rolling roads and dynamometers that accurately measure engine parameters to get that final road tune fit for sale. Do you honestly believe that some spotty geek with a laptop and a second hand rolling road in a tin shed can produce something substantially better? Like I said, show me the before and after dyno traces along with the specific fuel consumption curves, unless they can change the laws of physics, you can either have better BHP or fuel consumption, you cant have something for nothing.

 

ho, just remembered a anecdotal story more to do with remaps than gismo boxes but its still apt. One of my work colleagues got himself a range Rover 3.0 D. we questioned his logic at the time as they are not the most frugal of cars and he drives quite a distance to work. He said he would buy it and then get it remapped as apparently you can get 40-50 mpg on the motorway with a remap which wasnt much different to his old car. Anyway, he bought it and ran it for 2 weeks, he was getting 20-25 mpg around town and 30 on the motorway. Anyway he took a days holiday to get it in the garage for the remap, on returning back to work we asked him how he got on. 'They didnt do it' was the reply. Apparently when the spotty geek hooked up and had a poke around, it had already been done! Ho we did laugh and about 2 months later he got rid. The moral of the story is that if you want a car with good mpg, get a small car with small engine, if you want something with horsepower, get one with a bigger engine, don't try and turn them into something else that they were never meant to be, you are wasting your money

 

@phanc60844 - thanks, a good story and in a way I agree with you to buy the right thing for the job and also I accept that manufacturers will try to follow the middle and not go for the optimum for various reasons.

Although, I believe I did my homework prior to buying, the problem , see my OP, I am trying to solve was not highlighted or possibly others are not too much concerned or noticed it to be shown as a major issue ( in my defence I didn't have the hindsight to search for this specific issue. :-) ).

So, I hope that someone somewhere had a box or remapp that solved my issue as well......

 

I fitted two different tuning chips to my old XFS (3.0 V6 twin turbo diesel).
The first was a cheapy, but it worked, the second was more expensive and it also worked, even better in fact.
I never dynoed the second one, but I did dyno the first, here's a chart:






Per the annotations on the bottom, the first run was stock with the chip set to "0", the second one set to "3", and the third one set to "8".
The chip had nine settings, 0 to 8, with 8 being max.

So it definitely worked, both on the dyno and on the road, and remember this was the el cheapo chip (around $120 AU IIRC). The second chip (I can't recall the brand/name) worked even better and it cost around $500AU. When I sold the XFS I sold the second chip a bit later and I still have the first one.

Edit - I now remember the second chip, it was a RaceChip Pro2, see here: https://www.racechip.com/shop/jaguar...2kw-600nm.html

 

so where is the chart for the specific fuel consumption? any computer nerd can alter the map to inject more fuel, but the boxes claim more BHP AND better fuel consumption and as I said, unless you can defy the laws of physics you cant have both

 

I have no evidence of improved fuel consumption but that was not what I was looking for, I was looking for more power, more torque and better throttle response and I got all three.

 

Yeah well the controversy around tuning boxes is like starting an oil or tyre thread.

Keep in mind that we're talking Diesel here. Torque is king with a diesel. These things only rev to 6 grand and have a flat torque curve. Cruising at 120kph they're only turning 1500 revs. The standard 3.0d is rated at 500nms of torque standard. The 3.0 d S has 600nms standard. Put the foot down at anything over 2000 revs and the torque does the work. They are not like a petrol engine at all. Having an extra 100nms makes a big difference throughout the rev range. Cruising at 120kph over distance gives a fuel usage of around 50mpg.

There is no physical difference in the engine- only tune, so the increase in torque and power in the standard 3D is well within the design parameters for safety. The gearbox (same throughout the range) design parameters is safe to something over 700nms.

Older tuning boxes altered only fueling and the timing of it. Newer ones like the Bluespark Pro with Boost also alter the turbo settings in real time, which is a lot more sophisticated.

Many advocate a remap over a tuning box. This of course in permanent and will give slightly better results, but is much more expensive and not to be done if your car is under warranty. The technitian also has to know what they're doing. A tuning box can be easily removed, swapped between the same model in under a half an hour. It can also be sent back and remapped for a different model.

The difference between the drivability between the standard 3.0D and the 3.0D S is quite considerable. It means not only increased power for overtaking, but that cruising at HWY speeds means the engine is working less hard for given revs. A jump in torque of 20% is like having an extra gear so I would say that it may well alleviate the 'droning' to a large extent in the smaller engine.
This is also why at cruising speeds the engine will use a little less fuel. It depends how you drive of course.

As bang for buck, I'd say the tuning box is unbeatable.

I found my mates car with the tuning box did all of the above, although the 3.0 engine doesn't 'drone'. For overtaking having an extra 100nms of torque makes overtaking like the hand of god is pushing you, and the standard engine is no slouch.

Oh and it has had a positive effect of eliminating most ot the turbo lag as well.

 

OZ I have absolutely no issue with that because that is believable and possible. What I take exception to is people who use the excuse that the mod improves fuel consumption and that would pay for the remap when in the real world, fuel consumption will be worse. YOU CANT HAVE INCREASED POWER AND REDUCED FUEL CONSUMPTION, it is physically impossible. As for the gizmo boxes, please! at least get a proper remap rather than a box that just fools the ECU into putting more fuel into the engine and are just a dumb mod that only take into account a limited number of parameters, at least a remap does a proper job of it.

 

This defies logic was well as the laws of physics. If an engine is producing more tq. at a given RPM due to a tune, the car will accelerate.

To remain at a set speed, the engine must remain at a given RPM irrespective of the tq. produced.

The fuel consumption will also remain the same (agreeing with phanc) as the efficiency of the engine has not been changed. As such the droning will not be alleviated.