Another Eurocharged V5 Review
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG & 2015 Lexus RX350
Another Eurocharged V5 Review
So, I couldn't help myself and jumped on the Eurocharged group buy. Jerry and the crew at Eurocharged were great. I left a VM asking for shipping info a few days after sending the PayPal money. They returned my call the next day with the tracking number.
On 6/9/14 I received the handheld and within 2 hours, Jerry and crew had authorized my handheld allowing me to get my base file, and provided me my new V5 tune.
Today, I took my C63 down to the local tuner shop that uses a Dynapack.
Before installing the tune, we baselined the car at 367.6 HP and 365 Torque after a handful of runs
We then tuned the car and he used his Star diagnostic to reset some old adaptive data.
After running a few pulls, we we were consistently pulling 423.3 HP and 380 Torque.
As for the hyped "Blip", it kicks ***.
That is a gain of 55.7 HP and 15 Torque.
Overall, I am thrilled with the tune and service from Eurocharged.
On 6/9/14 I received the handheld and within 2 hours, Jerry and crew had authorized my handheld allowing me to get my base file, and provided me my new V5 tune.
Today, I took my C63 down to the local tuner shop that uses a Dynapack.
Before installing the tune, we baselined the car at 367.6 HP and 365 Torque after a handful of runs
We then tuned the car and he used his Star diagnostic to reset some old adaptive data.
After running a few pulls, we we were consistently pulling 423.3 HP and 380 Torque.
As for the hyped "Blip", it kicks ***.
That is a gain of 55.7 HP and 15 Torque.
Overall, I am thrilled with the tune and service from Eurocharged.
Last edited by SmittyAMG; 06-11-2014 at 11:04 AM.
#2
Super Member
How does this dyno differ from say a mustang or dynojet numbers wise? What is the typical powertrain loss for this car? 14%? Great gains btw.
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Not sure what a DynaPack is, but if it is accurate I am impressed!
Marlin - If the tune is left on the car and your ecu is checked for any reason and they catch the tune, they "can" flag your car. If you flash back to stock before taking the car into service, I understand the tune to be virtually undetectable.
Marlin - If the tune is left on the car and your ecu is checked for any reason and they catch the tune, they "can" flag your car. If you flash back to stock before taking the car into service, I understand the tune to be virtually undetectable.
#5
Super Member
Was just trying to get a gage for baseline. Usually mustang dynos yield lower numbers than dynojets, not sure about the dynapacks. But was also trying to factor in the powertrain loss, on average on LS based manual gearboxes, something like 10~12%, the loss increases with automatic trannies usually, up to 15% loss in some cases. Great car and greater motor.
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Are those torque gains a little low or about right?
Regardless, that's a very, very, solid horsepower gain.
I mean, this is a NA motor (I'm used to seeing tuned turbocharged motors), so maybe I'm being too greedy haha.
Regardless, that's a very, very, solid horsepower gain.
I mean, this is a NA motor (I'm used to seeing tuned turbocharged motors), so maybe I'm being too greedy haha.
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Torque gains do seem low.
Trending Topics
#8
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG & 2015 Lexus RX350
While a local Dynojet may have me more closer to 400ish, the gain I got was the real story. 55HP with a quick and painless mod.
As for loss through the drivetrain, based on rated BHP of the car and seeing the numbers around the forum, I have to assume the drivetrain loss on a C63 is pretty high. My guess is around 20%.
Last edited by SmittyAMG; 06-11-2014 at 11:30 AM.
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
Dynapacks normally yield numbers higher than Dynojets. My understanding is it can very due to the around of resistance they use. The key is not to compare my car to another car, but to see the increase between before tune and after tune done on the same day, same machine, same resistance.
While a local Dynojet may have me more closer to 400ish, the gain I got was the real story. 55HP with a quick and painless mod.
As for loss through the drivetrain, based on rated BHP of the car and seeing the numbers around the forum, I have to assume the drivetrain loss on a C63 is pretty high. My guess is around 20%.
While a local Dynojet may have me more closer to 400ish, the gain I got was the real story. 55HP with a quick and painless mod.
As for loss through the drivetrain, based on rated BHP of the car and seeing the numbers around the forum, I have to assume the drivetrain loss on a C63 is pretty high. My guess is around 20%.
#10
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG & 2015 Lexus RX350
I agree the torque numbers look low so I checked out the DynoDynamics chart Eurocharged posted. If I am reading it correctly, the highest stock vs highest tuned is around 10ish.
#12
. The key is not to compare my car to another car, but to see the increase between before tune and after tune done on the same day, same machine, same resistance.
While a local Dynojet may have me more closer to 400ish, the gain I got was the real story. 55HP with a quick and painless mod.
While a local Dynojet may have me more closer to 400ish, the gain I got was the real story. 55HP with a quick and painless mod.
Thanks for the review
#13
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG & 2015 Lexus RX350
Another thing to note is we did the delta on highest peak vs highest peak. Not based on highest peak of the tune vs the output at the same RPM for non tune. If that was done, the numbers would look even larger.
#15
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG & 2015 Lexus RX350
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
I'm just going to toss my two cents in here...
Got the V5 tune, and I had a base 451 hp C63.
Man what a difference! At first I didn't feel anything and thought I might have not loaded the tune correctly. Then I noticed the shifts were a bit smoother but more importantly, right around 2-2.5k rpm the engine REALLY kicks in, throws me back in my seat, didn't use to feel it that good.
Also, while I used to love the downshifts its another animal now. Much louder, more aggressive, more pops and burbles. Love it!
Got the V5 tune, and I had a base 451 hp C63.
Man what a difference! At first I didn't feel anything and thought I might have not loaded the tune correctly. Then I noticed the shifts were a bit smoother but more importantly, right around 2-2.5k rpm the engine REALLY kicks in, throws me back in my seat, didn't use to feel it that good.
Also, while I used to love the downshifts its another animal now. Much louder, more aggressive, more pops and burbles. Love it!
#17
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 c63 P30
I'm just going to toss my two cents in here...
Got the V5 tune, and I had a base 451 hp C63.
Man what a difference! At first I didn't feel anything and thought I might have not loaded the tune correctly. Then I noticed the shifts were a bit smoother but more importantly, right around 2-2.5k rpm the engine REALLY kicks in, throws me back in my seat, didn't use to feel it that good.
Also, while I used to love the downshifts its another animal now. Much louder, more aggressive, more pops and burbles. Love it!
Got the V5 tune, and I had a base 451 hp C63.
Man what a difference! At first I didn't feel anything and thought I might have not loaded the tune correctly. Then I noticed the shifts were a bit smoother but more importantly, right around 2-2.5k rpm the engine REALLY kicks in, throws me back in my seat, didn't use to feel it that good.
Also, while I used to love the downshifts its another animal now. Much louder, more aggressive, more pops and burbles. Love it!
Saph, glad you finally got to install your's haha. I feel the exact same thing at that rpm and it only get's better the deeper your foot goes
#18
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,517
Received 434 Likes
on
357 Posts
2012 C63;1971 280SE 3.5(Sold);2023 EQS 450 SUV 4 Matic (Wife's)
Powertrain loss is usually accepted at 18% for a C63 with the 7Speed not sure with the 7 speed MCT. Stock power in the OP graph = 367.6 hp /.82 = 448.29BHP so pretty close in this case.
#19
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: North East
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
2011 C63 AW
Not sure what a DynaPack is, but if it is accurate I am impressed!
Marlin - If the tune is left on the car and your ecu is checked for any reason and they catch the tune, they "can" flag your car. If you flash back to stock before taking the car into service, I understand the tune to be virtually undetectable.
Marlin - If the tune is left on the car and your ecu is checked for any reason and they catch the tune, they "can" flag your car. If you flash back to stock before taking the car into service, I understand the tune to be virtually undetectable.
I realize this is hypothetical and I have no intentions on doing a flash, but I'm curious.
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
On the other hand, they can't deny any warranty claim simply because the car has some mod. But increasing engine torque, for instance, will allow them to deny warranty claims against transmission wear, for instance, and the law will back them up. If your climate control craps out, they'd have a hard time justifying a denial because of engine mods though.
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
8 Posts
Porcelain Bus
Yes, except the database is in Germany so it's international. Any query against the VIN will show that the car has modifications.
On the other hand, they can't deny any warranty claim simply because the car has some mod. But increasing engine torque, for instance, will allow them to deny warranty claims against transmission wear, for instance, and the law will back them up. If your climate control craps out, they'd have a hard time justifying a denial because of engine mods though.
On the other hand, they can't deny any warranty claim simply because the car has some mod. But increasing engine torque, for instance, will allow them to deny warranty claims against transmission wear, for instance, and the law will back them up. If your climate control craps out, they'd have a hard time justifying a denial because of engine mods though.
Now, will MB follow the same practices? Who knows what the future will bring.
#22
Senior Member
#23
Super Member
I often see Mustang dyno #s lower than these and Dynojet #s the same or higher depending on how the dyno is calibrated and local conditions.
Powertrain loss is usually accepted at 18% for a C63 with the 7Speed not sure with the 7 speed MCT. Stock power in the OP graph = 367.6 hp /.82 = 448.29BHP so pretty close in this case.
Powertrain loss is usually accepted at 18% for a C63 with the 7Speed not sure with the 7 speed MCT. Stock power in the OP graph = 367.6 hp /.82 = 448.29BHP so pretty close in this case.
#24
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R35 Alpha 12 GTR, MB C63 Amg Estate
The only dyno comparable between different shops is the Dynojet. Mustang dynos can be manipulated to read whatever you want. In general though, dyno charts don't matter. Only before/after 60-130 times and 1/4 ET's and trap speeds. You know you picked up power if you are trapping a lot higher.
Most dyno charts are just marketing bull****.
Most dyno charts are just marketing bull****.