Figuero

Correction .... about 1.5 hp..... to much pencil sharpening or beer....which ever.

ejsheltra

Good job Figuero. Now go to sleep. It is too late to be exercising your brain this way. Besides the dog is going to wake up in a few hours and then you'll be toast for the day and all for 1.5hp. Oh s#@t I think I woke the dog!! Gotta go walk the pooch now and it is only 13 degrees outside. Now I did it...

AMS Performance

Hello Firguero,

In the world of aftermarket performance tuning all modifications must answer to the dyno to see how they perform in the real world. Many times things that work in theory don't work in the real world and vice versa. Ultimately, it is the real world dyno results that are the only thing that really matters.

If you are skeptic thats fine, simply don't buy the product. We are by no means putting pressure on you, we only want customers who want to try our products to buy them. You are more than welcome to participate in our Dyno Rewards program as so many have if you like to test the pulley yourself. Our products have been independently dyno tested in the real world by our customers to prove they work, if that isn't enough proof for you than you can buy other performance products.

Thank you for your time, have a nice day.

ejsheltra

Do have have M112 E320 V6 dyno stats you can post of your ECU, Header and Pulley Products? I have only seen posted the E55 pulley results...

Figuero

I was hoping your engineering folks could shed some light on the disparity between Sir Isaac's laws quoted on your web site and the dyno results you claim. It's an interesting proposition though.
Thanks and good luck.

loubapache

Good work. Actually your argument is even more convincing if you consider:

1) the power needed in your example is only 1.1 HP.

2) You assumed it is a hoop (all mass around the rim) but there is mass at < 4" so the moment of inertia is even lower and power needed is less than 1 HP (should be around 0.6 - 0.8 HP).

So this is not a big deal compared to the big picture and a little reduced mass will not have such a large (claimed) increase.

<<
9.2 newton = 2.1 ft lbs of torque.
>>
Only one small correction. newton is a unit for force and ft lbs is a unit for torque so they are different things. Force times lever arm (radius in this case) is equal to torque.

Figuero

9.2 newton = 2.1 ft lbs of torque.
>>
Only one small correction. newton is a unit for force and ft lbs is a unit for torque so they are different things. Force times lever arm (radius in this case) is equal to torque.

How about if I convert to Ncm and then to ftlbs?
2" = 5.2cm
9.2N * 5.1cm = 46.2Ncm.
Converting to ftlbs = 1Ncm = 0.007376ftlbs

46.2Ncm = .34ft lbs?
(3,500 *.34) / 5252 = 1/4hp?

loubapache

Yes, very close. Here you assumed the force is applied at the 2" from the center of the pulley, which is reasonable.

When it comes to power calculation, there is always an easier way to calculate by using the concept of energy rather than force.

So in this example, we can calculate the energy needed to increase the pulley from 2000 rpm to 6000 rpm. Then we divide that energy by time and we get the average power.

To get the energy (from 2000 rpm to 6000 rpm), we can use the work energy theorem. Basically the difference in kinetic energy at 6000 rpm and 2000 rpm is the work (energy) needed to do this so the energy is

0.5*I*(w2)^2 - 0.5*I*(w1)^2

Here I is the moment of inertia of the pulley. This depends on the mass distribution. If we treat it as a rim (all mass at the rim), then it is equal to M*R^2 (M is the mass and R the radius). If we treat it as a uniform disk, then it is 0.5*M*R^2 (another 0.5). In reality, it is somewhere between 0.5 and 1 times the M*R^2.

w2 is the final angular speed and w1 is the initial angular speed.

Now he units are going to be another challenge. In the 21st century, we really should use metric units. Just imagine a GM engineer tries to explain things to a Toyota engineer, LOL.

Figuero

Just imagine a Chrysler engineer trying to explain something to a Diamler engineer.

loubapache

The result is


early models of W211.

1ohknats

Any parts for a W210 E55?

Air Marshall Eldritch

What W211 years are to be avoided for an E55, as I'm thinking of buying one.

loubapache

Me too, Brenton.

The consensus is to avoid 03 and 04. Those who have owned these cars said the quality improved starting 05 MY.

However, for me I will not touch the SBC system (03 - 06). Starting 07 MY, SBC is gone and the car also received a face lift.

Now I see MB Canada rolled out the last model year W211 with a lot of free options. Basically they fully equip the car but charges the base price.

I have not seen this in USA yet but it may come. With the economy condition, the future 09s might be the one to buy. A dealer in SC is selling the remaining 08s with at least $10k off MSRP.

Air Marshall Eldritch

What are the issues with SBC? (I'm going to get a RTFF for that, I know)

I'm looking on the cheap end as to minimize interference from the 'boss', which means the '06 and later are a bit out of my budget.

loubapache

The SBC basically is an electric controlled hydraulic braking system. So think about what if there is an electric problem. All it takes is a bad contact.

The connector and wires have been recalled and Mercedes has also extended the warranty on the pump. There have been reports of total brake failure in the W211 forums.

There is also a case of fire 18 hours after engine got shut off. There was no conclusive evidence as what caused it but the fire started in the general area of the SBC pump and there really is no device in the car that is still "hot" 18 hours after shut off.

The 06 and 07 are in the mid $20k range. I see one 06 below $20k but I am looking for 07 or newer.

Air Marshall Eldritch

They are that low now?? Wow! I'll switch my rheumy Eye of Mordor over to the '06s then.

HLG600

There is no such thing as an '07 E55, as that was the first year the E63 was introduced. Not as mod-friendly as a 55, but has a better built motor with some sharp cosmetic updates.

loubapache

Well, things have deteriorated (or was it better for those of us looking?)

Here are some random searches and the price has dropped by another a couple $k since I looked a couple weeks ago. There are plenty of these.

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false

Sorry, I missed that you were looking for a V8. I was talking about W211 in general.

There is a W211 E550 and that would be the equivalent of the E430 as in W210.