A
Anonymous
Guest
Pete, if the car becomes lighter on petrol, it becomes more efficient. Less friction in the engine means parts work together easier. Less friction will not only lead to efficiency gains but also power.
Peugeot RCZ Forum
Register a free account today to become a member. It's free! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, connect with other members through your own private inbox and take part in competitions!
pete.garratt
Member
Saying what I undestand, asking if anyone knows more.
A
Anonymous
Guest
pete.garratt said:
Was my explanation inadequate or do you just not trust what i say?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Max, calm down. Your SA demeanor comes across here in the UK as aggressive.
A
Anonymous
Guest
OO58RON said:
I was asking if he didnt understand my explanation? I am calm, thanks for your concern.
A
Anonymous
Guest
MaX83 said:
I suspect that you are Max. Please take it from me, that, that is not how it comes across to us in the UK.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Ok, sorry, not intended like that.
Here are a few articles to read that explain the run in process and why its important. Not to be confused with ecu adaption. Let me know if you need more resources on this too. :beer:
http://www.ntnoa.org/enginebreakin.htm
http://bubiinnovation.hubpages.com/hub/how-to-break-in-a-new-vehicle
Here are a few articles to read that explain the run in process and why its important. Not to be confused with ecu adaption. Let me know if you need more resources on this too. :beer:
http://www.ntnoa.org/enginebreakin.htm
http://bubiinnovation.hubpages.com/hub/how-to-break-in-a-new-vehicle
pete.garratt
Member
Max,
I understood what you are saying and your further clarification.
However, the original post said (& I edit for clarity):
"...the problem i have is there is a lot turbo delay some times or the push from the engine is not good for 200 bhp. I drive another one a friend of mine and the difference is very high".
Now, the term 'adaptation' was used in the subsequent discussion and, to me, it just didn't sound like the right explanation for the symptoms as described, especially with both my and others experiences reported here on perceived performance. I've just exchanged a 32000 mile THP 200 - which I had from new - for a brand new RCZ R which, in the two days I've had it has dramatically more power than the 'well bedded in' THP 200. I never perceived my old car as getting more responsive, although I can quite see there would be a small improvement over time (a few months).
I would agree that efficiency goes up as an engine fresh from the factory cumulates mileage. However, in my experience, this manifests itself as increased mpg, not increased power or dynamic performance or, at least not dramatically noticeable and certainly not intermittent as the 'some times' in the original post suggested. Heck, I can't say I noticed a huge change in anything much when I had my THP200 re-mapped. Perhaps if I'd taken it on a track day before and after I might have noticed but not in everyday UK road driving. To me, that suggests performance limits are set by other things (compression ratio, inertia of the moving parts, limits on turbo boost pressure, engine revs. & valve timing etc.) and that the reduction in friction that occurs allows that performance to be released more efficiently
Now, while I will confess to having gained an Honours Degree in Applied Physics and 30 years experience in the aerospace industry, I would admit that I don't know everything and that someone else - working in the automotive industry, designing engine management systems, say - would know a lot more than me about the detailed design features and strategies employed within modern engine systems and how they might pertain to the situation described originally.
It's not that I don't 'trust' you (your word), it's simply that my knowledge an experience don't lead me to conclude that simple bedding in is the explanation for the reported problem.
If you have some more definitive information and descriptions/explanations, please enlighten us. There are many here - myself included - who would be interested to learn more about the technologies built into their cars.
I understood what you are saying and your further clarification.
However, the original post said (& I edit for clarity):
"...the problem i have is there is a lot turbo delay some times or the push from the engine is not good for 200 bhp. I drive another one a friend of mine and the difference is very high".
Now, the term 'adaptation' was used in the subsequent discussion and, to me, it just didn't sound like the right explanation for the symptoms as described, especially with both my and others experiences reported here on perceived performance. I've just exchanged a 32000 mile THP 200 - which I had from new - for a brand new RCZ R which, in the two days I've had it has dramatically more power than the 'well bedded in' THP 200. I never perceived my old car as getting more responsive, although I can quite see there would be a small improvement over time (a few months).
I would agree that efficiency goes up as an engine fresh from the factory cumulates mileage. However, in my experience, this manifests itself as increased mpg, not increased power or dynamic performance or, at least not dramatically noticeable and certainly not intermittent as the 'some times' in the original post suggested. Heck, I can't say I noticed a huge change in anything much when I had my THP200 re-mapped. Perhaps if I'd taken it on a track day before and after I might have noticed but not in everyday UK road driving. To me, that suggests performance limits are set by other things (compression ratio, inertia of the moving parts, limits on turbo boost pressure, engine revs. & valve timing etc.) and that the reduction in friction that occurs allows that performance to be released more efficiently
Now, while I will confess to having gained an Honours Degree in Applied Physics and 30 years experience in the aerospace industry, I would admit that I don't know everything and that someone else - working in the automotive industry, designing engine management systems, say - would know a lot more than me about the detailed design features and strategies employed within modern engine systems and how they might pertain to the situation described originally.
It's not that I don't 'trust' you (your word), it's simply that my knowledge an experience don't lead me to conclude that simple bedding in is the explanation for the reported problem.
If you have some more definitive information and descriptions/explanations, please enlighten us. There are many here - myself included - who would be interested to learn more about the technologies built into their cars.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Cool, see previous post for links :thumbup:
Also, sympathizing with the original poster not being able to post in his first language, that was how i interpreted his situation. I was giving his RCZ thp motor the benefit of our doubt that the lack of performance was due to the bedding and adaption process. For all we know, the OP's previous car was a porsche 911 turbo and his butt dyno is reading wrong lol :beer:
Also, sympathizing with the original poster not being able to post in his first language, that was how i interpreted his situation. I was giving his RCZ thp motor the benefit of our doubt that the lack of performance was due to the bedding and adaption process. For all we know, the OP's previous car was a porsche 911 turbo and his butt dyno is reading wrong lol :beer:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Honours in applied physics, so if i put it to you as follows, it should make more sense; if all environmental factors remain constant, including tire rolling resistance and aero etc, it would mean the specific engine needs to produce x amount of hp to propel the vehicle at a constant 100kph. In doing so, the internal combustion process requires a certain amount of fuel and oxygen per minute to produce enough power for the vehicle to maintain its speed. Now given that there are restrictions within which this engine can operate, which are also fixed e.g. Maximum amount of fuel able to provide via injectors and maximum air to mix with via turbo boost that would deduce that if the run in engine would require less fuel to propel the vehicle forward in our frictionless world and nothing changed in the fuel delivery system, the engine, which is now more efficient, must be able to produce more power at its maximum fuel delivery point.
In short, if you use less fuel to make the same power, you should make more power with the same fuel.
In short, if you use less fuel to make the same power, you should make more power with the same fuel.
pete.garratt
Member
MaX83 said:
Perfectly correct if fuel flow is the controlled variable. However, I'm not sure fuel flow is controlled so directly. The only user control is the throttle, which in modern engines can be considered a torque demand, so torque is produced, using whatever fuel flow (up to the designed limits) is needed. Thus, same torque (converted to power against the load) but less fuel to achieve it, hence improved mpg.
Or, the fuel flow is the limiting factor on engine performance, which might have been true in the past with carburettors. I would have thought modern injection systems would be capable enough not to be the limiting factor, statically or dynamically - especially to need modern emissions standards etc.
Good stuff, this!
A
Anonymous
Guest
Agree with both your sbove statements. Do you agree though that a well run in engine will provide more power as it becomes more efficient?
Regarding the fuel system being the limiting factor, that is very true but only because we can now control amount of valve lift and duration as well as airflow via the turbo much better than with older carb normally aspirated motors. I think we are saying the same, just a bit different.
Regarding the fuel system being the limiting factor, that is very true but only because we can now control amount of valve lift and duration as well as airflow via the turbo much better than with older carb normally aspirated motors. I think we are saying the same, just a bit different.
pete.garratt
Member
MaX83 said:
Max,
I have insufficient knowledge to know for sure. I can see it might be possible to get more power out as well as more efficiency but I wouldn't care to say how much or how noticeable it would be in the real world. My expectation is that it would be slight, say 3-5hp max. on the type of engines we are talking about here, about the difference you might see on different rolling road dynamo meters or due to atmospheric conditions. Educate me with some numbers if you have them - always happy to learn.
Still don't think running/bedding in explains the original posts issue, though. More likely to be hose issue as someone else suggested or, perhaps, a valve gear timing issue - like the one that's plagued the Prince series engines. I've just remembered I had an incident in my old GT200 a couple of years ago. Engine went into limp mode pulling away from a junction with the engine light on. It lasted a few minutes, then returned to normal characteristics but the engine light stayed on. I did wonder if I'd need the timing sorted out with modified parts etc., as I did on a previous 207gti.
However, the dealer diagnostics couldn't find anything, they cleared the fault and it never happened again while I had the car. Maybe the original poster is experiencing something like that, although they haven't reported any warning messages or lights, so probably not.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I wish i could give you numbers but as you saw in the links, its still a very hot topic especially if you start talking old vs modern run in. The OP said his car was NEW although registered in 2011. The thp motors are very sensitive to anything it doesnt like and would immediately go into limp mode to prevent damage. Except for timing chain slip for obvious reasons.
I drove a 308 gti thp 200 the other day, it felt dead. As in you couldnt feel the turbo come in and you couldnt even hear the throaty induction sound through the actuator. Cranking the said car for about 2 hours, then switching off, cool down and on again changed the car completely. The turbo came in hard and the engine sounded sweet through the induction actuator. The cars ecu was adapting to the way it was driven and the feel in performance was notable.
I presume the last mentioned scenario is exactly what the OP was experiencing.
I drove a 308 gti thp 200 the other day, it felt dead. As in you couldnt feel the turbo come in and you couldnt even hear the throaty induction sound through the actuator. Cranking the said car for about 2 hours, then switching off, cool down and on again changed the car completely. The turbo came in hard and the engine sounded sweet through the induction actuator. The cars ecu was adapting to the way it was driven and the feel in performance was notable.
I presume the last mentioned scenario is exactly what the OP was experiencing.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I had lag on mine until I put the Shell V Power in it.
It goes like a rocket ship now and the engine is quieter too by far.
It goes like a rocket ship now and the engine is quieter too by far.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Thanks for your reply's in my first post.. another problem that i notice is the turbo exhaust temperature is very high after 10 minutes of driving about 8 kilometers distance at night with 15 Celsius was became orange/red like the brakes of F1 formula one IS that normal ?
i will go for ecu update at the dealer and i will check again the problem with performance ......
i believe has something to do with the 2 variable engine camshaft gear.. i check in service box that they have new part number RP 0805 k1 and RP 0805 k2
i also replaced the electro valve with the new 1922 V8 version and it was better but not like the aggressive RCZ that i test
it was the same model same build year and has only 350 khm........ it was the demo test car in the showroom
i change also the engine oil with TOTAL 5w30 Full synthetic (the original oil that the manuals require)
Now i have only 900 Khm
sorry for my english
i will go for ecu update at the dealer and i will check again the problem with performance ......
i believe has something to do with the 2 variable engine camshaft gear.. i check in service box that they have new part number RP 0805 k1 and RP 0805 k2
i also replaced the electro valve with the new 1922 V8 version and it was better but not like the aggressive RCZ that i test
it was the same model same build year and has only 350 khm........ it was the demo test car in the showroom
i change also the engine oil with TOTAL 5w30 Full synthetic (the original oil that the manuals require)
Now i have only 900 Khm
sorry for my english
A
Anonymous
Guest
Maybe put your car on a dyno to see how much it is down on power and then approach your dealer for assistance. With your car not reporting any faults it can really be anything. Judging by what you are saying about new cam part numbers it can even be that peugeot made small changes to the engine between 2011 and now. Yours might be a slightly older specification to the one you drove.
Good luck and keep up posted.
Good luck and keep up posted.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hello guys the Original problem is due to a valve that controls the pressure on the turbo, the one due to design is not very well build, since its plastic when you hit hard the car the same turbo absorbs a lot of heat from the exhaust and also transmit the heat to this component, you need to replace the valve part number 1922v8 the one on the Picture bellow, and also this one because booth fail is the other fail. Part number V759327380 this one goes on the back of the engine and controls the vacuums of the waste gate.
I change mine and my car works great again but I check and it also has wear signs some days ago so I would replace the plastic part with another material the problem is I don't know what's the name in English so I would look for it and help you later.
Greetings
I change mine and my car works great again but I check and it also has wear signs some days ago so I would replace the plastic part with another material the problem is I don't know what's the name in English so I would look for it and help you later.
Greetings
