Tuning 100HP: Unichip

Currently reading:
Tuning 100HP: Unichip

No good for mine, can't really extract much in the way of power.

I'm going to remove the rear seat, parcel tray, & fit one of these.


Although, as MEP would say, I need to inform my insurance.:D

I'm sure someone will be along in a minute with a more sensible answer......(y)
 
Last edited:
That's one of the weirdest power curves I've ever seen. It shows a totally flat torque figure from 2000 to 5000 rpm (power going up in a straight line against revs = constant torque) - which seems more than a bit unlikely except on a steam engine, and would certainly be different from the standard article. Is there any indication of whether this is more or less powerful than a standard 100HP?
 
I am assuming the blue line is the "standard" 100HP power curve, whilst the red line indicates the "Unichipped" 100HP power curve.

I am sure this is a relatively rudimentary graph image, probably plugged into Excel by hand. I think the important part of this chart is the gain shown across the rev range. Hard to tell exactly what gains there are - I'm guessing about 3-5bhp - but the power gains are right across the board.
 
Just by the by, I am almost certain to get my Panda "Unichipped" in the next month or so. Although I am still posing questions to a couple of local installers, the general feedback is that I can expect an 8-10% gain in power. Exactly where I'll gain that is still unknown, but the fact that they offer a 30-day moneyback guarantee, along with before and after dyno readings, might make this a no-brainer. I'll keep you updated as to my progress.
 
Just by the by, I am almost certain to get my Panda "Unichipped" in the next month or so. Although I am still posing questions to a couple of local installers, the general feedback is that I can expect an 8-10% gain in power. Exactly where I'll gain that is still unknown, but the fact that they offer a 30-day moneyback guarantee, along with before and after dyno readings, might make this a no-brainer. I'll keep you updated as to my progress.

Will be very interesting.. is your car "stock" otherwise??
 
if they can get it to work with a closed loop ecu then fairplay to them. no one has so far as i know and beleive me ive looked and researched. even if they get it to work see if it'll work with drive by wire and i bet it wont go together without further work. let us know how it goes m8
 
Indeed - do let us know how you get on. I have a UNI-Q on my supercharged 1.2, plus their I-Driver box to fly the injectors. All works OK, but we haven't properly cracked the Closed Loop nuisance thing yet. HQ in South Africa did a lot of research for my conversion and as far as I was aware, they still are.

I look forward to your update!
 
What exactly are the symptoms of the closed loop ECU on a Unichip? You say that it works fine, but the closed loop is still a nuisance. Pardon my ignorance here, but what does that mean in terms of driving the car around on a daily basis?
 
Closed Loop means that the ECU constantly uses values returned from the Lambda Sensors (two - one pre- and one post-CAT) to set AFR's. An N/A engine wants to achieve stoichiometric combustion - one where all the fuel in a charge is burned 100% by just-the-right-amount of air available - and this is generally accepted to be 14.7:1. A normally aspirated engine likes 14.7:1 overall and Closed Loop will broadly maintain this. It will richen up a little under full chuff (maybe down to 13.7:1), but that's about all.

There are 2 issues - one of which affects you and one me and others who think it was a great idea to supercharge or turbo the current FIRE engine....

Firstly, most remap techniques will rejig the map of fuelling and timing in an ECU to optimise things for improved performance. There's loads of safety margin built into standard maps in cars and these margins are exploited for both NA and Turbo motors. 90% of engine ECU's move from CLOSED to OPEN loop at about 50-60% throttle/load and start running on the inbuilt 3D map to ensure full control over AFR and timing - typically because ECUs couldn't react fast enough to the Lambda sensor signals to guarantee perfect mixture at really high revs and load. All well and good, as this exposed the 3D map during OPEN loop and every remap around exploited this. Rock and Roll.

But come the improved and faster ECU technology and CLOSED loop CAN be managed super-fast, hence the problem with the Bosch and Marelli systems in the Pandas. UNI-Q is a piggy back so it tries to interpret and then modify-on-the-fly the signals from various sensors to allow after-market optimisation of the parameters to improve performance. But Lambda is NOT one of those parameters typically, as it's never been necessary - until now. So what we now get is an ECU that will ONLY listen to the lambdas to set AFR and this is no good for aftermarket tuning or Forced Induction.....

Which is where I get screwed as I want about 12.7:1 AFR for my blown engine under high load and we had one hell of a job to get the thing into OPEN loop to prevent the ECU from constantly trying to correct things. We put in more fuel and the ECU backs it out again. We intercept the fuelling signals to increase the delivery and the ECU backs off the signals it sends from its settings as the lambdas are saying it's too rich. That's the nuisance!

We've had to do some dodgy wiring on my lambdas to get the ECU into limp-mode - at which point it has no choice but to run on the 3D map and go OPEN loop. Now that puppy is mine and the UNI-Q can do its stuff - 110bhp and 103torx in my case - but with the poxy EML light on all the time. It's still mapped to blow rose-smelling air out of the exhaust and runs CAT and everything - except it would fail an MoT if presented like that now. Reconnect the lambdas and out goes the light, but so does my AFR control at high load, so I don't ask for it.

I am looking into that fuel computer that was mentioned on here a while back that allows a full fat disguise of the lambda signals going back to the ECU, which means the ECU runs blind, but thinks it's got a nice 14.7:1 and is happy. We can then jig with fuelling and all should be good.

That's the theory - well you did ask! I have a lot of faith in Dastek and their UNI-Q and for your purposes they might be able to assist and indeed the unit you're looking to fit will be their latest and may have indeed cracked the issue. If so, then your input into this discussion will be vital!

Like I said, do report back and let us know how you get on. Good Luck (y)
 
Thanks for the detailed response, mate... it's much appreciated.

I've just got off the phone with the tuner who'll be responsible for the Unichip installation and tuning, and he sounded confident that he'll be able to get some good gains out. I asked him about the closed loop ECU, and he echoed your comment that at anything under around 50% throttle, the car's ECU would manage the AFM, although he did say the Unichip could control timing at this stage. Once the throttle goes beyond 50%, the Unichip can control everything. Essentially, as far as my layman mind can ascertain, the performance gains that I am looking for would only really be required at full throttle, so it might work out just fine for me.

They will do a before and after dyno, and my "proof is in the pudding" moment will be when I run the car at the next trackday early November. I am going to use a pretty simple measurement. If the laptimes posted are faster than the ones I posted last Sunday, together with VMAX measurements at the splits, then I'll be happy.

I can also have up to 5 different map settings but the tuner reckons that, because the car is naturally aspirated and in a normal state of tune, they are pretty much pointless.

I will keep you updated as to my progress, but will only know anything concrete mid-October...
 
I've got a citroen c1 running a k04 blower using AEM FIC Piggyback. The car runs closed loop even at wide open throttle until the revs rise (approx 3000 iirc) then it switches to open loop. The solution to excessive boost under stoich mixture was the sizing of the turbo and it's location to the left of the engine via a fairly long pipe. This induces enough low rpm lag to ensure the dynamic compression (increased greatly at low RPM by VVT) doesn't go through the roof.
It works really well and also means fuel economy is unaffected when pootling around.
Modern turbo engines seem to take a very different approach - huge pressure ratios at very low rpm to create lots of low down grunt. Fine if you design like this but not a recipe for long life on a 10.5: compression without complete ECU control.

Trouble with the UNICHIP is it won't to the best of my knowledge be able to advance spark only retard so it's really best suited to boosted engines.
 
Nice C1 mod mate! Ironically it was TTS's Rotrex conversion kit for th C1/107/Aygo that hooked me into doing the same thing to my Panda, so I am sure you've got a cracking car. Trouble with the Panda is that it NEVER goes into Open loop, so it needs a far firmer hand to make it work. I will look at one of those magic Lambda Sensor emulators, provided I can work out what signal wave the ECU expects to see from the OEM O2.
 
OK, so my car is booked in for its Unichip tomorrow, but I popped round the workshop yesterday so that the lads could give it a going over beforehand. Ran it on the dyno and it ran surprisingly close to manufacturer's claims - it registered 72.9kw and 129Nm!

It seems that the standard fueling is very good on the 100HP, so the gains of Unichipping will, in all likelihood, not be that great. The power graph is not very uniform though - there are lots of little undulations along the revrange - so the Unichip will sort that out for sure. Kosie Swanepoel, who is one of the foremost tuners in Cape Town and a genius with the Unichip, is anticipating no more than a 10% gain in power. Either way, he'll do the installation, tune the car, run it on the dyno, and will simply remove the Unichip if the gains are not satisfactory.

More to come soon...
 
Right, so got the Unichip installed yesterday...

The "stock" dyno run showed the following peak figures:

72.9kw
126Nm

After the Unichip was installed, the dyno run showed the following:

77.9kw
135Nm

So roughly a 7% increase in power and torque. Not shooting the lights out amazing, but pretty reasonable nonetheless.

As you can see on the dyno sheet, there's a decent increase in lowdown torque, and a decent gain in midrange power, although all figures are up across the board. If you look closely, you can also see that the torque is delivered quite a bit more smoothly than standard.

I haven't been able to give the car a proper shakedown, but I can definitely feel that it's stronger and more consistent. Not quite like turning the boost up from 0.5 bar to 1.0 bar, but there's absolutely a noticeable difference.

All in all, I'm pretty happy with the outcome, and believe that the car will be much nippier under full throttle, which is obviously where you want it to have more poke. Because of the closed loop ECU, things remain absolutely boggo when you're not caning it, so economy should remain largely unaffected during day-to-day driving.

I am going to unleash the beast (haha) at the next local trackday in a few weeks' time, and will ultimately judge the efficacy of the chipping by my laptimes and v-max recordings. I'll keep you guys updated...
 

Attachments

  • Panda100HP.pdf
    69.9 KB · Views: 169
Cheers, Demi! Yeah, I must say, I'm really impressed so far. I know it's only a 7% gain, but the delivery of power is markedly better. Much smoother, and I can feel the increased strength particularly in full throttle acceleration in 3rd gear, from around 50mph up.

I am in South Africa, so costs and installation agents are irrelevant to you, I guess. For what it's worth, I paid a tad over 200 quid for the chip itself, installation, tuning and before and after dyno runs.

For your local guys, take a look at http://www.unichipeurope.co.uk/dealer-network.asp. No clue who is considered a Unichip expert in your parts though, I'm afraid.
 
Back
Top