Dyno run today!
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Dyno run today!
2010 C63 P31
28,000 miles
V5 Eurocharged, Kleemann X-pipe, ROW airboxes with stock filters.
438 HP
28,000 miles
V5 Eurocharged, Kleemann X-pipe, ROW airboxes with stock filters.
438 HP
Last edited by Turbo442; 05-12-2015 at 07:00 PM.
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Nice! Where does the x-pipe go? Did you replace the secondary cats or the resonators? Sounds good.
Trending Topics
#9
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Factory resonator. Note the cut I had to make.
Kleemann X-pipe
Last edited by Turbo442; 05-14-2015 at 01:57 AM.
#10
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Thanks guys for the positive feedback! I am very happy with the car. I am a new C63 owner and an enjoying this car immensely!
Factory crank HP rating 481
Measured wheel HP 438
Drive line losses 17% estimated
EDIT: Estimated crank HP 528 (438/.83=528bhp)
Estimated crank 528bhp - factory crank 481 = 47 hp gain
This next part is a bit of a guess...
EDIT:30 hp from tune
EDIT:10 hp from X-pipe
EDIT:7 hp from ROW air boxes
Factory crank HP rating 481
Measured wheel HP 438
Drive line losses 17% estimated
EDIT: Estimated crank HP 528 (438/.83=528bhp)
Estimated crank 528bhp - factory crank 481 = 47 hp gain
This next part is a bit of a guess...
EDIT:30 hp from tune
EDIT:10 hp from X-pipe
EDIT:7 hp from ROW air boxes
Last edited by Turbo442; 05-14-2015 at 03:55 PM.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thanks guys for the positive feedback! I am very happy with the car. I am a new C63 owner and an enjoying this car immensely!
Factory crank HP rating 481
Measured wheel HP 438
Drive line losses 17% estimated
Estimated crank HP 512 (438x1.17)
Estimated crank 512hp - factory crank 481 = 31 hp gain
This next part is a bit of a guess...
21 hp from tune
5 hp from X-pipe
5 hp from ROW air boxes
Factory crank HP rating 481
Measured wheel HP 438
Drive line losses 17% estimated
Estimated crank HP 512 (438x1.17)
Estimated crank 512hp - factory crank 481 = 31 hp gain
This next part is a bit of a guess...
21 hp from tune
5 hp from X-pipe
5 hp from ROW air boxes
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Good numbers!
Chris you are using 17% for drive train loss? Typically I have been using 15%.
Chris you are using 17% for drive train loss? Typically I have been using 15%.
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
#14
Senior Member
Chris is correct. OP shorted himself 16 HP. New crank number should be 528, not 512.
That being said:
- Factory Rating (crank): 481
- ROW Airboxes: +10
- X-Pipe: +5
- EC V5 Tune: +32
END RESULT ---> 528 HP @ the crank
Thats my guess.
I would personally add some type of performance filters (AFE, K&N, Pipercross, etc.) to those ROW's to try & squeeze out a few more ponies.
That being said:
- Factory Rating (crank): 481
- ROW Airboxes: +10
- X-Pipe: +5
- EC V5 Tune: +32
END RESULT ---> 528 HP @ the crank
Thats my guess.
I would personally add some type of performance filters (AFE, K&N, Pipercross, etc.) to those ROW's to try & squeeze out a few more ponies.
Last edited by kjkidd21; 05-14-2015 at 09:34 AM.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Guys I'm sorry but your estimation of gain per mods is wrong.
I doubt ROW airboxes net you +10! Barely +5!
You get your main gain from the tune and the X-pipe which frees up a little bit more airflow. If you want a bit more gain you do a 2nd CAT delete.
Now OP has a performance package car so gain of +30 something over stock is correct. Depending if you originally have a strong build from factory.
Op, did you do a dyno pull stock?
I doubt ROW airboxes net you +10! Barely +5!
You get your main gain from the tune and the X-pipe which frees up a little bit more airflow. If you want a bit more gain you do a 2nd CAT delete.
Now OP has a performance package car so gain of +30 something over stock is correct. Depending if you originally have a strong build from factory.
Op, did you do a dyno pull stock?
#17
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Guys I'm sorry but your estimation of gain per mods is wrong.
I doubt ROW airboxes net you +10! Barely +5!
You get your main gain from the tune and the X-pipe which frees up a little bit more airflow. If you want a bit more gain you do a 2nd CAT delete.
Now OP has a performance package car so gain of +30 something over stock is correct. Depending if you originally have a strong build from factory.
Op, did you do a dyno pull stock?
I doubt ROW airboxes net you +10! Barely +5!
You get your main gain from the tune and the X-pipe which frees up a little bit more airflow. If you want a bit more gain you do a 2nd CAT delete.
Now OP has a performance package car so gain of +30 something over stock is correct. Depending if you originally have a strong build from factory.
Op, did you do a dyno pull stock?
Last edited by Turbo442; 05-14-2015 at 12:00 PM.
#18
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
This is obviously well documented, but I included a couple of photos I took of my original US air boxe inlet vs ROW airbox inlet.
U.S. Airbox
ROW airbox
U.S. Airbox
ROW airbox
#19
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Chris is correct. OP shorted himself 16 HP. New crank number should be 528, not 512.
That being said:
- Factory Rating (crank): 481
- ROW Airboxes: +10
- X-Pipe: +5
- EC V5 Tune: +32
END RESULT ---> 528 HP @ the crank
Thats my guess.
I would personally add some type of performance filters (AFE, K&N, Pipercross, etc.) to those ROW's to try & squeeze out a few more ponies.
That being said:
- Factory Rating (crank): 481
- ROW Airboxes: +10
- X-Pipe: +5
- EC V5 Tune: +32
END RESULT ---> 528 HP @ the crank
Thats my guess.
I would personally add some type of performance filters (AFE, K&N, Pipercross, etc.) to those ROW's to try & squeeze out a few more ponies.
#20
#21
Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Boston
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2014 C63 Polar White
What are the odds! this is an old buddy of mine that I have known for around 15 years. We haven't talked in months and he picked up a c63 6 weeks ago and I picked one up 3 weeks ago and I comment on his thread not even knowing it was him................LOL. Damn the world just shrunk
#22
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 GT-S and 2010 C63
Crazy! What's the chance of running into to someone you know randomly in your thread? I guess common interest = common forum subscriptions. I was reading your dry rot tire post and didn't realize it was you or even know you bought a C63. Weird!!!!
#23
I think it is a false assumption everybody makes where you take a constant percentage for drivetrain losses.
Drivetrain losses is the power lost from turning crank, pulleys, pumps, driveshaft, transmission gears and wheels (and everything in bvetween). When you tune the car for more power, none of the mass of the rotating parts that are part of the drivetrain losses has changed. The losses are the same because the engine/tranny/shafts/wheels are the same.
So, our engines make 450hp stock and dynos 375rwhp. Then there is 75hp used to turn the engine/tranny/wheels etc. If you tune and get 430rwhp you just add those 75hp and you get 505hp. Not 375/450=.83 or 17% hp loss then 430rwhp/.83=516hp like everybody does.
Not a huge difference, but I believe everybody is over exagerating their gains by adding % losses to the same drivetrain.
Drivetrain losses is the power lost from turning crank, pulleys, pumps, driveshaft, transmission gears and wheels (and everything in bvetween). When you tune the car for more power, none of the mass of the rotating parts that are part of the drivetrain losses has changed. The losses are the same because the engine/tranny/shafts/wheels are the same.
So, our engines make 450hp stock and dynos 375rwhp. Then there is 75hp used to turn the engine/tranny/wheels etc. If you tune and get 430rwhp you just add those 75hp and you get 505hp. Not 375/450=.83 or 17% hp loss then 430rwhp/.83=516hp like everybody does.
Not a huge difference, but I believe everybody is over exagerating their gains by adding % losses to the same drivetrain.
#24
Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
W204 C63 Bone Stock; E36 M3 Supercharged 400WHP; X5 parts eater
I think it is a false assumption everybody makes where you take a constant percentage for drivetrain losses.
Drivetrain losses is the power lost from turning crank, pulleys, pumps, driveshaft, transmission gears and wheels (and everything in bvetween). When you tune the car for more power, none of the mass of the rotating parts that are part of the drivetrain losses has changed. The losses are the same because the engine/tranny/shafts/wheels are the same.
So, our engines make 450hp stock and dynos 375rwhp. Then there is 75hp used to turn the engine/tranny/wheels etc. If you tune and get 430rwhp you just add those 75hp and you get 505hp. Not 375/450=.83 or 17% hp loss then 430rwhp/.83=516hp like everybody does.
Not a huge difference, but I believe everybody is over exagerating their gains by adding % losses to the same drivetrain.
Drivetrain losses is the power lost from turning crank, pulleys, pumps, driveshaft, transmission gears and wheels (and everything in bvetween). When you tune the car for more power, none of the mass of the rotating parts that are part of the drivetrain losses has changed. The losses are the same because the engine/tranny/shafts/wheels are the same.
So, our engines make 450hp stock and dynos 375rwhp. Then there is 75hp used to turn the engine/tranny/wheels etc. If you tune and get 430rwhp you just add those 75hp and you get 505hp. Not 375/450=.83 or 17% hp loss then 430rwhp/.83=516hp like everybody does.
Not a huge difference, but I believe everybody is over exagerating their gains by adding % losses to the same drivetrain.
Power is the rate of doing work and is time dependent. If your car goes faster and spins those drivetrain components faster (in less time) then absolute drivetrain losses goes up so then 430rwhp/.83=516hp is correct. Think about spinning the wheels from 0 to 100 in 10 seconds vs 9 secs. Those wheels are requiring more power from the engine and therefore more drivetrain loss.