I've been really skittish about chipping my Stelvio in part because of my concern about reliability, and in part because I don't know the real benefit. I've read about the Euro and Madness systems, which are HIGHLY advocated by members of those organizations througout these message boards, but I wonder, after all this time... what actual owners think as they reflect back, about the actual difference it makes to their driving experience, because regardless of whether you get 20, 30, or 60 HP (claims are all over the place) my gut tells me a 2.0 with near 300 HP is pretty maxed out already, so I wonder what actual owners that have chipped their car have to say.
After all the engine upgrades (Stage 2, 3, whatever) what's the REAL performance gains ?
Lkng-4-Stlvio-Frm-Pvt-Pty
21 - 34 of 34 Posts
Does anyone know if the StelQV has a speed limiter of 155mph state of CA and if so how to go around?
Joined
·
4 Posts
Hello VV,
See below. Stelvio Ti '18 inc. 20" wheels & panoramic sunroof. First run is stock, 2nd is JB4 running Burger's 'Map3' tune (latest firmware as of this post). Both on regular fuel 98RON, taken on days with ambient temp 15-20 celsius and launched in same manner. Hope this helps.
EDIT: I don't know why Draggy omits the temp. data on results sometimes. Regardless, here's today's temps (comparable to the day the 4.82 run was done)
Joined
·
9,636 Posts
The slope going from 12% (slightly uphill) to -.64% (pretty much flat with a slight downhill) probably had as much to do with the speed increase as the tune.
Only way those numbers work to compare is if everything is the same but the tune. Same car, same run, same weather, run once, each direction (2 times total) for both, then compare numbers. Anything else is fun and gives a good idea but is far from definitive.
Draggy omits results sometimes because it's a consumer product not an actual testing device whose numbers are reliable. It does give a good idea of things though..not saying it's bad, it super sweet for sure..but it doesn't substitute for actual testing and isn't infallible.
Not trying to dog on your numbers, sure there is a legit improvement, definitely looks like it. Just..important to make sure the slope is the same when comparing runs.
Only way those numbers work to compare is if everything is the same but the tune. Same car, same run, same weather, run once, each direction (2 times total) for both, then compare numbers. Anything else is fun and gives a good idea but is far from definitive.
Draggy omits results sometimes because it's a consumer product not an actual testing device whose numbers are reliable. It does give a good idea of things though..not saying it's bad, it super sweet for sure..but it doesn't substitute for actual testing and isn't infallible.
Not trying to dog on your numbers, sure there is a legit improvement, definitely looks like it. Just..important to make sure the slope is the same when comparing runs.
There are so many people that have tested dragy against timing lights its almost hard to have overlook it. I always take it to the track with me and on hundreds of passes its always been within .05 and .5mph.
Dragy has been tested against vbox by many people including myself and its shown to be as or more accurate. Vbox is used in professional timing.
Attachments
Joined
·
4 Posts
Hi AOR,
I don't believe the slope is the significant factor here.
It's really the same stretch of road, there are a few traffic lights along there. I've attached another run for your reference as well as a summary of runs all along that road at various times over the last few months. You're of course correct wrt Draggy - it's just a hobbyist tool but it does seem to capture performance deltas very well and I think does well to address questions like the OPs too (you can compare the results from various tunes there). You can also see clusters in the times between stock vs tuned vs quads, as well as Giulias vs (slower) Stelvios.
Nice results. I agree with alfaoffroad that its important to control results.
That said i think yours are pretty in line with what people see. 0-60 is just so hard to compare though as it depends at least half on your launch technique which yiuve shown you are pretty darn consistent with. Nice work. I assume awd as its much easier to get consistent 30mph or 60 foots with awd.
When i do comparison testing i do it same day with weather data to include windspeed.
There are some tuners that post their results from before and after their tuning but from different days of testing. When you do this you're letting in many more confounding variables from air pressure 8n tires that impacts acceleration friction and rolling resistance to time on oil that can impact viscosity to any number of weather variables.
Additionally i have the car running telemetry when i do comparison runs.
This is extremely important and why you can see one tuner show an 80whp difference with their tune and every other tuner show a 30whp difference. Telemetry will show you WHATS impacting your power output. If you start with an intake temp just one single degree on the wrong side of an intake temp protection map you can easily see a 30whp difference with making no modification at all to the car. For this reason i coast the car at 60mph before all comparison runs to get starting intake temps even for all runs. Very important.
On the stelvio im seeing the same as the giulia for acceleration gains. 2.5mph increase in trap speed.
That said i think yours are pretty in line with what people see. 0-60 is just so hard to compare though as it depends at least half on your launch technique which yiuve shown you are pretty darn consistent with. Nice work. I assume awd as its much easier to get consistent 30mph or 60 foots with awd.
When i do comparison testing i do it same day with weather data to include windspeed.
There are some tuners that post their results from before and after their tuning but from different days of testing. When you do this you're letting in many more confounding variables from air pressure 8n tires that impacts acceleration friction and rolling resistance to time on oil that can impact viscosity to any number of weather variables.
Additionally i have the car running telemetry when i do comparison runs.
This is extremely important and why you can see one tuner show an 80whp difference with their tune and every other tuner show a 30whp difference. Telemetry will show you WHATS impacting your power output. If you start with an intake temp just one single degree on the wrong side of an intake temp protection map you can easily see a 30whp difference with making no modification at all to the car. For this reason i coast the car at 60mph before all comparison runs to get starting intake temps even for all runs. Very important.
On the stelvio im seeing the same as the giulia for acceleration gains. 2.5mph increase in trap speed.
Joined
·
9,636 Posts
Wouldn't be surprised if a large part of the improvement is less HP/torque increases, and more faster lockup of the tranny from a standing stop and holding 1st longer. Always felt to me like first gear is under-utilized/doesn't lock up fast enough, with the factory programming even when the car is floored. Same with the upshift to 2nd, seems like it could slip less going in.
I'm assuming the tune does more than just mess with turbo mapping.
Is slope a significant factor? I don't know..really. how do you define significant? In 0-60 times a change of .2 is significant to some people. A minor slope can effect that. It's why you really want to lock down the variables, not that there is anything wrong with a general idea or seat-of-the-pants. Just good to know what your dealing with and allow for the resulting margin of error. (Or try)
Again, not dogging, interested. Now the car's paid off might mess with it some.
I'm assuming the tune does more than just mess with turbo mapping.
Is slope a significant factor? I don't know..really. how do you define significant? In 0-60 times a change of .2 is significant to some people. A minor slope can effect that. It's why you really want to lock down the variables, not that there is anything wrong with a general idea or seat-of-the-pants. Just good to know what your dealing with and allow for the resulting margin of error. (Or try)
Again, not dogging, interested. Now the car's paid off might mess with it some.
Slope matters.
Where i see it really gets junk dats though is where people try and do runs at places like on ramps where it slopes down more than 1 percent but then slightly back up again by the end of the run enough to show a valid 1/4 mile slip but an invalid 1/8 mile. To me those should be completely invalid runs. Dragy invalidates everything over neg 1 percent. Its not a dragy issue there as its being accurate but rather people collecting bad data by not selecting a flat surface.
Launch impacts 0-60 so much i ignore it. Launch doesnt impact
1. Trap speed
2. Back half mph increases (comparing trap speed increases between the eighth and quarter)
3. 40-100, 60-130 etc
Those are the measures i like to use.
Where i see it really gets junk dats though is where people try and do runs at places like on ramps where it slopes down more than 1 percent but then slightly back up again by the end of the run enough to show a valid 1/4 mile slip but an invalid 1/8 mile. To me those should be completely invalid runs. Dragy invalidates everything over neg 1 percent. Its not a dragy issue there as its being accurate but rather people collecting bad data by not selecting a flat surface.
Launch impacts 0-60 so much i ignore it. Launch doesnt impact
1. Trap speed
2. Back half mph increases (comparing trap speed increases between the eighth and quarter)
3. 40-100, 60-130 etc
Those are the measures i like to use.
Joined
·
104 Posts
Excellent video - My conclusions are that the risk to reward ratio is not worth it, not to mention the ROI in dollars or hours. That doesn't even factor in the unknowns.
The truck is certainly quick enough without it.
That said imo the extra punch is worth the squeeze.
Takes 10 min to install and has the added benefit of smoothing out the stock cold start stumbling. Removes even quicker and you can sell it for about 150 less than you paid for it. Cheapest real 30hp and 60tq ive ever gotten. In my case i bought this one used and ill sell it for what i paid so ultimately its free.
That said imo the extra punch is worth the squeeze.
Takes 10 min to install and has the added benefit of smoothing out the stock cold start stumbling. Removes even quicker and you can sell it for about 150 less than you paid for it. Cheapest real 30hp and 60tq ive ever gotten. In my case i bought this one used and ill sell it for what i paid so ultimately its free.
Joined
·
4 Posts
FWIW, the piggyback (JB4 in my case) is something of an unholy hack but I'm impressed with what it delivers for the cost. That said, the gain really isn't a huge game-changer in enjoying the car's performance - it still feels breathless and underwhelming when pushed frankly. I'm amazed what can be squeezed from a 4cyl. these days and the car handles beautifully for what it is but I think if you're looking for seat-of-your-pants performance then you'll want to go for the v6 and not bother with tweaking this engine as you'll not escape its inherent limitations.
Joined
·
104 Posts
Good point... we got rear ended a week ago... minor so while it's in the shop we got a Dodge Durango rental for a week... and you can't imagine how I miss the handling. I think the handling is as important if not more important than power which is pretty good for an Suv. I agree that pushing it further is not worth it for that I would have just gotten the V6
Just to add incase it is helpful. I have done very tightly controlled acceleration testing as I modify my 2.0 stelvio. This table has my results, which I post on my thread. 0-60 improvement from stock to current modifications (see table for list of mods) is a 0.18 second improvement. A better measure of acceleration, controlling more for traction - 40mph to 100mph - shows an improvement of 0.46 seconds. My car is extremely well maintained at Alfa Romeo dealerships. I'm enjoying the mods.
For ease of understanding the table, "P2" means eurocomp phase 2 tune. Therefore, these improvements are Eurocomp p2 tune, cold air intake, upgraded diverter valve, relative to stock. Adding the exhaust next week, and will add those comparisons.
For ease of understanding the table, "P2" means eurocomp phase 2 tune. Therefore, these improvements are Eurocomp p2 tune, cold air intake, upgraded diverter valve, relative to stock. Adding the exhaust next week, and will add those comparisons.
Attachments
If I am understanding the chart correctly, the fastest times were obtained with the tune only and the tune with "upgraded" hardware was slightly slower?
21 - 34 of 34 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
