OK so nothing for the 2006 2.5L V6 sedan?

 

Do you have a thermostat for the M111 SC'd 4 banger?

I used to do this back in the day when the only trick mfg's knew was to decrease timing to increase heat (and therefore reduce emissions we were told) and ended up with a blown head gasket.
I would put a cooler therm in, like 180 instead of 190. You could usually just go buy one from the dealer. Had one in my Toyota with a 20R 4 banger, and put one's in other small cars that had a tendency to fry on hot days.

Is that all it is, a cooler therm? Does MB make those?

 

Anyone get this kit yet from TVT? Any word on how it performs?

 

Yeah - some firsthand feedback from parties not associated with TVT directly would be nice.

 

+1

 

Im pretty sure there are quite a few people who have gotten them on their crossfires, but no one seems to like to leave indepth comments/reviews... I dont think any of the w203 community has taken the plunge either.

 

i don't think anyone will....

 

Why is that?

 

it's not proven on an actual MB C320.

Back in 2001-2002 people like Kleemann, RENNtech, evosport, Brabus, & others tried and tested their products on MB C320, C230K, C32 etc... and their products have proven successful with time. It wasn't until all that research and testing was complete and proven, that people took the plunge and applied those kits to their cars (many still under warranty).

so far this has been tested on a Chrysler. But in pretty sanitized conditions.
Most of this is based on DYNOS and people who want immediate HP.
The C320 crowd is usually a long-haul crowd meaning they don't want to run their engine to the ground. Proof over time is the real test of a workable ECU tune or additional engine modifications such as pulley kits, air boxes, etc...

 

Well I certainly am interested, but not enough to be the guinea pig. This is my only car and I can't risk having it down because of mods.

30+ horsepower is a lot to gain on a N/A motor this size, with basically just an ecu tune. I realize injectors are included as well, but this is simply done to dump more fuel into the motor. I'm a bit nervous that a tune this aggressive would have an negative effect on our converters/O2 sensors, or anything else that might be prone to throwing a code and causing running problems. There are other shortcomings to running ultra-rich a/f ratios, like cylinder wash, carbon deposits, etc. which are the long-term results of poor tuning, and result in decreased engine life.

I do like the idea of a scaled down upgrade though - I'm not really interested in a full ecu remap - just the WOT settings. If the numbers claimed are legit with an otherwise bone-stock W203, AND I can be reassured with someone else's positive experience with this setup, then I'd purchase it.

 

Okay, that makes sense.

 

The crossfire community seems to be using this kit much more than we are. If you are not familiar w/ the XF cars, they are slk (190) based cars w/ the m112 and m112k engines + MB transmissions powering them.

From my understanding of the kit, the NA m112 generally runs lean in stock form - the xf community has been able to add better breathing intakes and this only adds to the situation (190 platforms have a more restrictive stock intake system in comparison to the 203). The injectors are capable of compensating for the car running lean + the tune makes sure everything stays at the optimal AFR.

Im pretty sure I will make the dive for this kit w/in the near future... I just wish that I had someone who could give me a custom tune with the injectors, but TVT and LET are very far away I dont like the idea of taking out my ecu + sending it across the country + all of the potential down time.

 

I hear ya! TVT is in Jersey, which is fairly close to me. I was also considering this, especially if it would be as easy as driving there myself to have it done. Sorry for my ignorance, but who or what is LET?

 

Sad there's nothing like this for the 1.8 S/C M271..

 

I've read the same thing; my hesitation is somewhat based around the question of whether we will see the same improvements that the XF cars do, seeing as how we have better intakes already. And it'd be nice if there was more non-TVT feedback somewhere to read.

As far as running lean, that's kind of a sweeping statement (though not neccessarily untrue...) - do you mean lean EVERYWHERE or lean only at WOT conditions? Personally, I don't want my car any richer at part throttle, which is why I'd only be tempted to go with the cheaper WOT-only reflash. I have to assume that M-B has struck a good balance between fuel economy and engine life when it comes to part-throttle mapping. I'm sure you could lean it out a bit more, but it'd come at the expense of something. And I'm still reluctant to go to the opposite extreme of dumping tons of fuel throught the motor, unless I know that the emissions and engine management systems can handle it long-term.

 

When I think of LET (Leading Edge Technology?) I think of AMG-Jerry and 1FASTC32 from most of the mb forums. They are better known for their work on the m112k and m113k, but definitely are one of the most knowledgeable groups when it comes to the m112 and tuning MBs.

You guys got better stuff - you guys have a supercharger + pullies you can slap on for plenty of power I believe drex tried going the injectors route a while ago...

Im gonna leave TVT to respond more thoroughly about the lean comments, cuz i dunno the details TOO thoroughly. I definitely am no professional here - just gathering + redistributing what I've read around the different forums I visit.

 

Subscribing...

 

Is this modified airbox just 'gutted' out?

 

I believe so.

 

Your words from another thread:

Would you kindly post a legible dyno sheet with its test parameters disclosed?

What is your target air/fuel ratio during WOT operation?

Do you offer separate tunes to fully exploit 91 vs. 93 octane fuel differences?

If it hasn’t already, what will their investment be once the introductory offer ceases?

Have your modifications and their results been verified on any respected member’s Mercedes-Benz?


Best wishes on your continued success.

 

This has me even more confused, then....so the differences between the W203 M112 and the XF M112 is airbox AND injectors? What are the injectors you supply rated at? Are they W203 injectors, or would we still need to upgrade?

And all this makes me even MORE confused as to how they get over 250 horses from just a reflash on an otherwise stock motor.

There's only like 6 horsepower difference between the rated (yes, I know...) stock horsepower of an XF vs. a W203 (215 vs. 221) - is that all the airbox and injectors are worth?


I'm asking, but I don't feel like I'm any closer to understanding how these numbers can be accurate...

"I want to believe..."

 

hmmm, I PMed Anthony, in hope that he would clear things up. Hopefully he will chime in soon as i dont get the impression he frequents mbworld enough.

Recent news:

http://www.crossfireforum.org/forum/...130#post283130

 

I was going to say... I don't think TVT_DESIGN is even aware this thread is alive and kicking.

 

Sorry, I thought this died in June.

The major differences in the C-class and Xfire stock are in the intakes, ecu tune, and exhaust. The intake on the C is equal to what a "gutted" Xfire one would be. The C already starts with much better flow. That plus the MB vs Chrysler advertised HP numbers are what make up for the difference.

Look at the SRT and SLK32, one rated at 330 the other at 349, but both put down identical RWHP. It's all about advertising.

The stock injectors on the Xfire are the C280 injectors. They are 15.1 lbs/hr, the other M112 injectors are 15.8 lbs/hr. Is it much of a difference? No. But it is enough for the Xifre to lean out with a properly designed CAI and ECU tune. A basic flash tune leans out the AFR for increased HP. That coupled with improved flow kills the little 15 lbs/hr injectors. Could we have tuned the car using the stock injectors? Yes, we did and the best we got was 238 HP with a 13.5-14.0 AFR, which I feel is way too lean for longevity, but any richer and the gains wouldn't be worth it.

Our injectors start off as empty bodies and then are fitted to flow what we need. They are much larger then stock and the same injector body can be used up to 48 lbs/hr, or at least that's what we've tested up to.

We have had a SLK230 in for some intake fitment, but have yet to get a C class owner to lend us their car. I know the SLK230 has nothing to do with this, but I'm just letting those 4 cylinder guys know that we'll be there for them.

We're a small company, like many that advertise on this forum. What started as a business run out of local shops and over the internet has finally grown to have it's own installation facility. While it's not the 5 bay unit of many performance shops, it does the job for the size we are.

I'd be willing to install a kit on any C class at COST with NO LABOR charge and FREE DYNO TESTING. This applies to one C class so that we can have a nonbias comunity rep. It would have to be someone that is respected or at least well known on the community to avoid any bias in our direction. I would prefer to have the most skeptical person that doubts our product from the moment they drop their car off to the second before the first test drive. Those are usually the ones with the best opinions.

We are offering Group Buy prices on the Xfire forum, but if I can not get a C class in before that is closed, I will offer it again to the MC Community.

I hope I cleared some things up. I'll be checking back often to keep the unanswered questions at a minimum.

 

Well, I'm certainly sceptical (in a friendly sort of way...), but it'd be a few weeks before I could get to 'Joisey...and I'm prolly not the best known guy on the board here...

I'm not impressed by shop size - some of the best stuff I've ever seen has come from small facilities - what I want is proven gains that don't affect engine life and don't throw codes left and right. And a reasonable guarantee to return everything to stock if things aren't "right".

And I still have a few questions, but I can take this offline if preferred...