Thread: Synergy 2
View Single Post
Old 16th February 2021, 21:19   #15
marinabrian
 
marinabrian's Avatar
 
MG ZT

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 20,151
Thanks: 3,565
Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRob View Post
yes, but 50 quid for a 2nd hand units or a couple of hundred for a remap. If its just to improve the pulling away then the 50 quid is well spent. If you want to get more performance then the 160 is better.
I think not, if you understand that amplifying a signal which is already higher than the one that is being input to the ECM, then the result is not more power, but more smoke, the MAFAM section of the synergy unit has one purpose, and that is to allow the use of cheaper MAF sensors designed for use in a Mercedes 308d van, a MAF sensor which does not have an inclusive IAT sensor, hence the cheap K type thermocouple on a flying lead fitted to Synergy units.

Many of the "performance enhancing" modifications championed by the vendor of the synergy unit actually damage the MAF sensor.......chopping off the concertina from the air intake, bypassing the water shedder fitted to the slam panel for instance

From a point of view of someone who has diagnosed a fair few cars with "faulty" MAF symptoms, many of these are attributable to EGR defects instead

Quote:
Originally Posted by another_clean_sheet View Post
Has the price gone up since I had mine 6 years ago?
Certainly not, the price has been the same since 2013, and it's certainly nowhere near £200

Quote:
Originally Posted by trikey View Post
Looks that way
Hoy yee !! stop stirring it


Brian
marinabrian is offline   Reply With Quote