[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

The cat is now out of the bag as to who Dhanushs really is. I hope you guys noticed the author of this....

Lets just say that a digital version of Dhanush is sitting inside a Thar \ Roxx`s computer brains - as long as you do not fight it, the vehicle will get you out of most places. Keep the tires straight and push the pedal, that is all one needs to do.

[Red Liner]

Originally Posted by (Alok)

here is the a picture from parts catalogue.https://oriparts.com/4/329/1828/545007


Attachment 2749201

How often does this need "cleaning"?

[(Alok)]

Originally Posted by Red Liner

How often does this need "cleaning"?

This should be cleaned/ replaced on observing and blowby smoke from dipstick hole or 50k kms as preventive maintenance.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by Red Liner

How often does this need "cleaning"?

If it was always run on OEM engine oil then probably you can check it post 1L kms to see if any cleaning is required, otherwise leave it alone.

[x-o-b]

Originally Posted by Red Liner

All good and everything but WHERE the heck are the pictures??!

Soon.

Originally Posted by x-o-b

UPDATE: My remapped ECU will be delivered today. I can't wait to plug it back in.

1. The first thing I noticed post remap was engine cranking. It simply starts in microseconds even when cold. Previously, it took a few seconds to crank the engine.
2. The throttle response has become better. Engine definitely runs smoother.
3. Idle RPM hovers around 1000-1100. Previously, it was at 800-950 range.
4. I haven't taken it out for a hill drive yet. I'll post the noticeable changes after I take it out, especially the low-ed torque improvements - which this thread is all about. Don't forget that the EGR has already been blanked out.

Guys, could someone point me to the location of boost sensor in the Thar CRDe. I don't seem to find it anywhere. Does it even exist in our models?

[Red Liner]

Originally Posted by x-o-b

Hi fellas,



Take care fellas.

How much really does that BMC air intake actually help in performance? Is there some actual real science there? Other than letting in a whole lot of extra dust into that engine offroad. Am I missing something?

The stock air filter costs an amazing 530 bucks and needs no cleaning. Unless this BMC propels me to the speed of light, paying over 15 times the cost needs a lot of justifying other than bro science.

[x-o-b]

Originally Posted by Red Liner

How much really does that BMC air intake actually help in performance? Is there some actual real science there? Other than letting in a whole lot of extra dust into that engine offroad. Am I missing something?

The stock air filter costs an amazing 530 bucks and needs no cleaning. Unless this BMC propels me to the speed of light, paying over 15 times the cost needs a lot of justifying other than bro science.

I don't wish to advertise BMC for free here, so I'll call these "performance air filters" . There's a two part answer to this "common" question:

1. First, the performance part:
   
   Performance air filters filter out very fine dust particles up to 7 microns against 10 microns or higher by stock filters. The whole engine intake system gets to breathe cleaner air. Additionally, the volume of air that these filters let through is also higher. So, higher volume of cleaner air is available to the turbo/engine which directly translates to better performance.
   .
2. Second, the cost justification:
   
   Performance air filters are re-usable while a stock filter will have to be replaced at regular intervals. A high-quality performance filter, if maintained properly, can theoretically last the lifespan of the vehicle. The initial high cost is broken even eventually.

Hope that answers, not just the physics but some economics too. Cheers

BUMP: could someone point me to the location of boost sensor in the Thar CRDe, please. I checked near the inter-cooler too, it is absent.

[dhanushs]

Originally Posted by x-o-b

...
Performance air filters filter out very fine dust particles up to 7 microns against 10 microns or higher by stock filters. ..

You know, it costs an OEM really nothing to improve/better the Air Filter. ..

One advantage with these aftermarket filters are the intake sound they make, which OEM filters are designed to nullify. A great addition to an enthusiast.

could someone point me to the location of boost sensor in the Thar CRDe, please. I checked near the inter-cooler too, it is absent

Check for a rubber vaccume hose from the turbo/manifold to a sensor.

[x-o-b]

Originally Posted by dhanushs

Check for a rubber vaccume hose from the turbo/manifold to a sensor.

In most vehicles the boost sensor is right after the inter-cooler or near/on top of the intake manifold, but in our case it's near the turbocharger. That's interesting.

However, I still couldn't locate it, and hence that proves that I'm a moron.
Thanks anyways.

[Red Liner]

Originally Posted by x-o-b

Performance air filters filter out very fine dust particles up to 7 microns against 10 microns or higher by stock filters. The whole engine intake system gets to breathe cleaner air. Additionally, the volume of air that these filters let through is also higher. So, higher volume of cleaner air is available to the turbo/engine which directly translates to better performance.

Just a few thoughts,
1. Volume of air is directly proportional to either the size of the particulate holes in the filter or the size of the filter itself. Considering that the BMC filter has to fit where the stock filter fits, the latter is void. Therefore the particulate hole size must be bigger to justify more air.
2. If therefore the only way to let in more air, is a bigger size particulate hole in the stock body, how can it filter smaller micron dirt? Does the filter allow more volume of air to pass through while trapping smaller microns of dust? If the total surface area of the filter is the same as the stock, the only way to make more air go in is by a bigger particulate hole, and that directly contradicts the claim of being able to filter very fine dust?

Much reading on 4x4 forums in south africa and australia suggest that such filters are best avoided in dusty/offroad conditions...which is the entire surface area of India.

Originally Posted by x-o-b

.[*]Second, the cost justification:

Performance air filters are re-usable while a stock filter will have to be replaced at regular intervals. A high-quality performance filter, if maintained properly, can theoretically last the lifespan of the vehicle. The initial high cost is broken even eventually.[/list]Hope that answers, not just the physics but some economics too. Cheers

Lets see, the stock filter costs about 500 bucks when I checked last with a claimed life of 40,000 kms. Lets assume, since stock is not the best the life is only a paltry 10,000 kms. The BMC filter costs 8,000. This means I can buy 16 OEM filters for the price of one BMC. 16 filters will give me a range of 160,000 kms. So the breakeven for a BMC filter is really 160,000 kms post which the savings begin accruing - provided the driver and the thar and the filter are still in a serviceable condition

Do also note I dont spend any downtime washing and cleaning that filthy rag!

Just banter brother. I know some of these things are just wishlists and wants in our heads and hearts for the rigs we drive. I thoroughly enjoyed your DIY over the last few posts. Looking forward to your drive report after the ECU update..initial feedback seems encouraging.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by Red Liner

Just banter brother. I know some of these things are just wishlists and wants in our heads and hearts for the rigs we drive. I thoroughly enjoyed your DIY over the last few posts. Looking forward to your drive report after the ECU update..initial feedback seems encouraging.

Once upon a time I remember the red indicator on the air filter box, thinking that its done with its life I took it to the ASC who found a piece of rag stuck to the intake. Obviously kept there by a nice car washing boy.

Removed that piece of cloth and air filter indicator is normal , these things are definitely oversized from the factory.

Talk about wishlist - any known case of an AT CRDe? I think Scorpio did come with an AT box.

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by x-o-b

In most vehicles the boost sensor is right after the inter-cooler or near/on top of the intake manifold, but in our case it's near the turbocharger. That's interesting.

However, I still couldn't locate it, and hence that proves that I'm a moron.
Thanks anyways.

Apparently the boost-sensor only came in later production, perhaps 2015-up and/or BS4 versions. My 2013 Getaway CRDe doesn't have one and it is not shown in the control system schematics either. I've not scoured the thread here to know the year of your vehicle, but you may not be a moron!

As for the efficacy of these AM performance filters, I am (along with others) skeptical of typical claims, unless as others note, actual filter surface area has been somehow increased.

K&N for its part has to be one of the most hyped brands/ products on the planet, and while I wouldn't deny they probably flow somewhat better, a close look at the element up against a backlight, even without magnification, makes it hard to believe it could filter anywhere near as well.

The difference in micron sizes you cite is not IMO significant, even if that were accurate.

I do want to experiment a bit with the Getaway's filter, but am not very hopeful even if I could come up withba very free-flowing one. We are discussing LOW-end performance here, and at the low end, relatively less airflow is required anyway.

I have tried just about everything ever suggested in this forum and more - top-mount intercooler (for reduced plumbing volume), K04 turbo (for allegedly more flow), MAF cleaning, MAF disconnect (made mid/top-range worse in my case), EGR blanking (biggest help, I think), and most recently a Windbooster throttle controller... also added a boost gauge so I can move beyond "bro science" to at least some kind of reality.

Still with all this the car is sluggish till at least 1500-1800 rpm. It does make a LITTLE boost right from 1100-1200 under certain conditions, enough to maintain speed or accelerate mildly on light inclines, but not enough to feel truly healthy or responsive.

If you read the Mahindra shop manual (which I have in PDF), in the Bosch fuel system description it states very clearly that they have deemed it not OK to grant fuelling that matches driver demand. This so as to control emissions (#1 reason), and purportedly also to limit loading on mechanical components, blah, blah, blah (which is a joke as none of those components were prone to breakage in pre-CRDe versions of the same engine, where you could stomp the accelerator and with minimal lag at very low revs, just GO!!!).

A re-map - and a GOOD one done by knowledgeable people at that - is probably the only thing that will truly perk up one of these engines. and having done that, it will probably smoke a bit off-idle if it's really doing its job. Because some more exhaust pressure is needed to spin up that turbo earlier and start it boosting, and that's primarily going to happen when some more fuel is burning and creating that pressure.

It is POSSIBLE that the fuel temp or ambient temp sensors contained in the MAF could be tricked into thinking temps were lower, air or fuel denser, and thus more fuel or fuel pressure required. I've not found it easy to find explicit info on this kind of mod so haven't tried it (yet?).

I am not going to say that freeflow exhaust and filter wouldn't help at all, but definitely have no basis for expecting they'd be transformative.

I REALLY wish this thing had been mapped differently, would go so far as to consider the sluggishness and even the subsequent sharp surge a safety issue...

-Eric

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

... I don't know the physics or non-physics of this AMF unplug. I just did what this fellow suggested and my little red Thar runs like a scalded goose and after many tens of thousands of kilometers I have no ill effects. Others have tried this on other model cars and it has resulted in serious oil leaks.

It works by basically alerting the ECU that a sensor input signal is missing and thus it must default to a predefined fuelling map based on strictly rpm and throttle position only, that just happens to allow more fuel at those low revs. As this is a sort of ""limp home mode", it was not required to conform to emissions limits. When you unplug that 5-wire connector, you are also disconnecting the ambient air temp sensor, and the ECU is directed again to assume a default value of 20°C. Which probably has little or no effect in comparison to the change introduced in the primary fuel map.

All this becomes fairly clear if you read the Bosch/ M&M service manuals.

Secondly, the oil leaks are allegedly associated with the EGR delete, not the MAF disconnect. But not grasping the mechanism of this supposed effect, and never having witnessed it on my own vehicle or read about it in overseas forums, I am a little skeptical.

That said, many performance tuners over there do not recommend EGR deletes for other reasons, and if the EGR mapping is right (Mahindra's probably wasn't), it should improve emissions with no hit whatsoever on performance.

-Eric

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by x-o-b

.

1. I haven't taken it out for a hill drive yet. I'll post the noticeable changes after I take it out, especially the low-end torque improvements - which this thread is all about. .

Am very eager to hear your remap results specifically in the context of hill driving and low revs. And ALSO measured FE change, if any, as I'm at my tolerance limit right now.

Was in Sikkim a couple times years ago and rode up/down some inclines about as crazy as what's common here in Aizawl. Getaway with 2.6 struggles in many situations, I can usually get by with judicious gear-changing and a little half-clutching here and there, occasionally 4Lo - but I feel I'm always having to THINK about it too much, whereas if it were pulling well by 1300rpms, I could drive a LOT more "passively" and pleasureably. Getaway, more than a Thar, is supposed to be a hauler, and as we''re trying to be something like farmers out here ourselves, it can be important. I know exactly what you were saying about the Bolero Pik-Up, as I too used to drive one and found it great.

I hate the prospect of dumping ₹24k on a 12-year-old vehicle, considering the unpredictability of gov especiallly, but assuming i can get a renewal later, wouldn't mind, it would help save my clutches, too.

-Eric

[x-o-b]

Originally Posted by ringoism

Apparently the boost-sensor only came in later production, perhaps 2015-up and/or BS4 versions. My 2013 Getaway CRDe doesn't have one and it is not shown in the control system schematics either. I've not scoured the thread here to know the year of your vehicle, but you may not be a moron!

Moron is what I must be because my Thar is a 2017 model CRDe and what an oversight I had when I sent my ECU for remap without checking the boost sensor first knowing that one of the several remap's parameters is also about tweaking the ECU based on the boost value.

I checked the location that @dhanushs hinted at and found nothing. The "usual" logical location for the sensor is after the inter-cooler. The Scorpio CRDe with a similar setup has the sensor mounted at the intake manifold. With the Thar the problem is, the inter-cooler is so deeply hidden behind the radiator shroud and very difficult to inspect. Checking at Oriparts diagrams (https://oriparts.com/4/329/1828/545033#item_11286113), there's a picture of the sensor but it's isolated and isn't connected anywhere. Nevertheless, I will keep looking.

Originally Posted by ringoism

It is POSSIBLE that the fuel temp or ambient temp sensors contained in the MAF could be tricked into thinking temps were lower, air or fuel denser, and thus more fuel or fuel pressure required. I've not found it easy to find explicit info on this kind of mod so haven't tried it (yet?).
-Eric

Originally Posted by ringoism

It works by basically alerting the ECU that a sensor input signal is missing and thus it must default to a predefined fuelling map based on strictly rpm and throttle position only, that just happens to allow more fuel at those low revs. As this is a sort of ""limp home mode", it was not required to conform to emissions limits. When you unplug that 5-wire connector, you are also disconnecting the ambient air temp sensor, and the ECU is directed again to assume a default value of 20°C.

Finally, some plausible physics that I was yearning for.

Originally Posted by ringoism

...but I feel I'm always having to THINK about it too much, whereas if it were pulling well by 1300rpms, I could drive a LOT more "passively" and pleasureably.

-Eric

We know "exactly" what you mean. My truck trips have kept me busy and I haven't had the chance to take the Thar out yet. I'll revert with a post when I do so.