Good morning all,
Kandlbarrett, little info the turbo on the 210 is the newer one, more reactive than the old 200BHP one.
The Garett GTB2056V is better than the old Borg Warner, the "barking" limit is further to the left on the chart, so can be loaded earlier. Also the injectors are different on the 210.
30-32MPG is a realistic figure if you drive it on a very good rythm, 36 it's Mway driving @ 70 with cruise and no traffic.
I agree with you, the remaps don't pay for themselves, the DPF removal, will take the whole car life to repay it.
Anyway if anyone tries to beat MPG records with a 2.4, he/she is going to have problems ery quickly, this engine is made to be pushed, 60 mph @1500 she won't like it.
For those who get really optimistic values on the computrised fuel consumption, it means the remap. has touched the injectors calibration map, thus fooling the computer in thinking you use less fuel. Which in fact you're not. To improve fuel consumption we have to play on the SOI, Rail pressure, Pturbo in the normal cruising range, but to a limited effect, as you use the power.
What really makes an impact on the MPG is the DPF removal.
However you can remap and remove EGR, but keep DPF, I have remapped mine personally (got the tools) and kept the DPF, and not touched the calibration map. The computerised MPG is matching the real one. +/- 2% max.
And the car shifts, anyone who tried it cannot believe the engine's response, I have had car specialists try it, not normal everyday drivers, like we are. (ex-rally driver)
I have remapped a few 159, and it is possible to get good performance without having to modify the calibration map. (that is the quick and easy way to do).
I have made a few runs with Dynobd, sorry I have not got a rolling road, altough quite optimiste the soft shows the torque response.