- 126
- MI
- ongowa
The winner is Ballast!
Did some testing with the Aston Martin DP-100 to try to determine how best to lose 20PP with least amount of impact to performance and fuel economy - only comparing Ballast, ECU, and Power Restrictor.
Adding 200kg of Ballast had almost no impact to performance (max speed) or fuel economy while reducing PP by about 20 points. Granted this was measuring on SSRX, so I did not measure any handling impact.
Reducing ECU or Power to shave off ~20pp both reduced performance almost the same, with reduction in ECU leaving a little more in the gas tank.
Now let's factor in the Fuel Map. Each "notch" in the Fuel Map (2 - 6) increased Time to Empty by 12 - 15%. Going from 1 to 6 nearly doubled the run time (186%) with no PP adjustment.
Adding Ballast had almost negligible impact to the Fuel Map results.
Reducing Power Restrictor values gave slightly better performance than ECU adjustments, but ECU gave better fuel Economy.
So, my take on this (admittedly very small sample size) result is to add Ballast first to reduce PP, if fuel range is desired reduce ECU next, else reduce Power Restrictor for slightly better performance.
Did some testing with the Aston Martin DP-100 to try to determine how best to lose 20PP with least amount of impact to performance and fuel economy - only comparing Ballast, ECU, and Power Restrictor.
Adding 200kg of Ballast had almost no impact to performance (max speed) or fuel economy while reducing PP by about 20 points. Granted this was measuring on SSRX, so I did not measure any handling impact.
Reducing ECU or Power to shave off ~20pp both reduced performance almost the same, with reduction in ECU leaving a little more in the gas tank.
Now let's factor in the Fuel Map. Each "notch" in the Fuel Map (2 - 6) increased Time to Empty by 12 - 15%. Going from 1 to 6 nearly doubled the run time (186%) with no PP adjustment.
Adding Ballast had almost negligible impact to the Fuel Map results.
Reducing Power Restrictor values gave slightly better performance than ECU adjustments, but ECU gave better fuel Economy.
So, my take on this (admittedly very small sample size) result is to add Ballast first to reduce PP, if fuel range is desired reduce ECU next, else reduce Power Restrictor for slightly better performance.