Freelander 1 Ronbox setting
- Thread starter dog-man
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Skinny Mike
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 2,910
Yes, you'll be able to feel fairly quickly if it's too much for your car.
Only takes a minute to turn it up or down.
Mike
Only takes a minute to turn it up or down.
Mike
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 32,504
- Location
- Near Newquay
I have mine on 3. It works well and doesn't upset my auto box. I did have it at max (5 for the standard MAF) setting for a bit, but the auto hunted about, so dropped it back again.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,486
- Location
- Brit in Northern Portugal
And it will smoke like a Beeeeaaatch
- but otherwise - no, you cannot hurt anything. As mike says, you will know.Took it up to 9 and it didn't feel right, so took it back down to 8 and is ok on that setting.
No smoke on 9. I might see what happens on 10 one day when I feel brave enough.
Can someone explain exactly how the two settings are supposed to affect the engine?
Torque?
Power?
No smoke on 9. I might see what happens on 10 one day when I feel brave enough.
Can someone explain exactly how the two settings are supposed to affect the engine?
Torque?
Power?
- Posts
- 3,604
- Location
- Bradford u.k.
have had mine on 10 for the past 87k miles ..
no engine issues at all ..
has passed all mot emission tests
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and 'power' refers to rpm above 2500
as for the pierburg maf selections ..
the maf map for 10 is stronger than for 6 thru 9
and the dash switch eco settings have a milder maf map ..
( only with the pierburg maf selections )
if you've the pierburg maf and have deleted the egr valve
selections 1 thru 5 can also be used
( i assume they give the same maf output ..
( as if you'd had fitted a bosch maf ..
at least that's what it feels like when driving ..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
no engine issues at all ..
has passed all mot emission tests
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
according to the info leaflet .. 'torque' refers to rpm up to 2500 ..
and 'power' refers to rpm above 2500
as for the pierburg maf selections ..
the maf map for 10 is stronger than for 6 thru 9
and the dash switch eco settings have a milder maf map ..
( only with the pierburg maf selections )
if you've the pierburg maf and have deleted the egr valve
selections 1 thru 5 can also be used
( i assume they give the same maf output ..
( as if you'd had fitted a bosch maf ..
at least that's what it feels like when driving ..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 32,504
- Location
- Near Newquay
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 32,504
- Location
- Near Newquay
45+ Mpg. You must drive like Miss Daisy
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,486
- Location
- Brit in Northern Portugal
Not a lot really - well, ok - it does trick the ecu into raising the HPFP pressure - it also does a basic compensation for anyone that fitted their oft' touted pierburg MAF (WHY ? when others are available - but anyway //// you can have MAF amp on - which is of absolutely no use at all on it's own if the maf is working ok (It is a basic form of increasing fuelling -- - or you can have HPFP fudging to give a higher fuel pressure in the common rail giving more fuel per injector opening cycle. (a slightly better and more positive approach)
Combining the two can give you some slight benefits. - yet none that would really be noticeable. The unit is basically a fudger of the HPFP sensor with an 'added' maf amp unit. MAF issues on TD4's are really NOT that common - you only here of a few bad ones - not the multi thousands that are absolutely fine.
All the settings do are alter a small addition curve for fuelling - all the high low med power torque etc is mostly utter BS. As mike said - and others - turn the knob and see - if it feels wrong back it off.. It is a rough compromise with little finesse.
However for most it does the job - it will NEVER save you fuel - ie - it will NEVER increase MPG - only your right foot will do that. It has no control at all over the VNT turbo - which is a let down... it is a good basic fudge.
The two units are sold int he same box to try to add value when in fact - if the maf you have is ok, the maf unit settings do nothing.
Last edited:
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 32,504
- Location
- Near Newquay
I'm with Joe_H on has analysis of the Synergy unit.
It can't really save fuel and add power, because added power needs more fuel.
I have tried all the settings on my synergy, concluding that the biggest factor controlling MPG is me.
I'm lucky in that I drive just 6K a year in my Freelander, so ultimate MPG is unimportant. What is important to me is driving pleasure from the vehicle. This is where I have found the Synergy does wonders. It adds much needed throttle response to what is basically a lazy, slow revving engine. It's this improved throttle response that gives a kind of placebo effect that power has increased much more than it actually has.
I'm not dismissing the Synergy as an idea, because it does for fill a need. I would say that a proper remap will make a better improvement as all parameters can be optimised, not just bunging in more fuel.
On the MAF signal that the Synergy modifies, that's an interesting one. It basically boosts the MAF output, where the original Bosch has started to fail. Or with the Pierburg, it boosts the signal to that of a new Bosch.
Now my original Bosch MAF was down on output, by about 50% according to the specs.
So I thought I'd experiment with a cheap clone of the Bosch MAF. This clone made more difference to the way the engine runs than the Synergy did. Throttle response improved, as did low and mid Rpm torque. Wide throttle improved too, but also the gearbox change points improved (auto box). It now drops a gear under sudden throttle application, whereas on the original MAF it would simply remain in the higher gear.
So I would say that getting the MAF signal correct, is more beneficial that simple adding a Synergy to a tired, low signal MAF.
Edit:
On looking at the ECU function, the MAF signal is very important. The ECU will only allow enough fuel into the engine, that the available measured Oxygen can burn. This limits black smoke production at full throttle.
So it follows that a low MAF signal returned to the ECU will limit fuel supplied at full throttle too. This is why the correct MAF single is so important the to performance of the TD4.
It can't really save fuel and add power, because added power needs more fuel.
I have tried all the settings on my synergy, concluding that the biggest factor controlling MPG is me.
I'm lucky in that I drive just 6K a year in my Freelander, so ultimate MPG is unimportant. What is important to me is driving pleasure from the vehicle. This is where I have found the Synergy does wonders. It adds much needed throttle response to what is basically a lazy, slow revving engine. It's this improved throttle response that gives a kind of placebo effect that power has increased much more than it actually has.
I'm not dismissing the Synergy as an idea, because it does for fill a need. I would say that a proper remap will make a better improvement as all parameters can be optimised, not just bunging in more fuel.
On the MAF signal that the Synergy modifies, that's an interesting one. It basically boosts the MAF output, where the original Bosch has started to fail. Or with the Pierburg, it boosts the signal to that of a new Bosch.
Now my original Bosch MAF was down on output, by about 50% according to the specs.
So I thought I'd experiment with a cheap clone of the Bosch MAF. This clone made more difference to the way the engine runs than the Synergy did. Throttle response improved, as did low and mid Rpm torque. Wide throttle improved too, but also the gearbox change points improved (auto box). It now drops a gear under sudden throttle application, whereas on the original MAF it would simply remain in the higher gear.
So I would say that getting the MAF signal correct, is more beneficial that simple adding a Synergy to a tired, low signal MAF.
Edit:
On looking at the ECU function, the MAF signal is very important. The ECU will only allow enough fuel into the engine, that the available measured Oxygen can burn. This limits black smoke production at full throttle.
So it follows that a low MAF signal returned to the ECU will limit fuel supplied at full throttle too. This is why the correct MAF single is so important the to performance of the TD4.
Last edited:
45+ Mpg. You must drive like Miss Daisy
I drive like the clappers on the way home from work, so I am no light footed driver.
I do get it into 5th gear as soon as I can and I always slow down before I arrive at traffic lights or reasons to come to a halt.
Pompey
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 729
That is good MPG!
What fuel do you use ?
Skinny Mike
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 2,910
Don't forget where you live has a huge impact on mpg. I live in the Pennines and return 36-38mpg. When I go down Norfolk I return 45-47mpg cos it's flat with only slight undulations. Not friggin big hills like what we've got
Mike
Mike
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 32,504
- Location
- Near Newquay
Don't forget where you live has a huge impact on mpg. I live in the Pennines and return 36-38mpg. When I go down Norfolk I return 45-47mpg cos it's flat with only slight undulations. Not friggin big hills like what we've got
Mike
My TD4 only does ~30 Mpg. My daily commute has a mix of hills, duel carriageway and slow flat road. I'll see how this new MAF effects Mpg, because I'm well down on Mpg by comparison to others. I use an app to calculate my fuel usage to 2 decimal places.
Not on MPG Gary
I get about 30 Mpg out of mine
lol, mine runs around 40-42mpg on a run
seems to run better in the winter time , assuming as the air is colder the engine and turbo prefer that ??
