1st Step of M271 Pulley Kit development Complete!
#226
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South Coast Metro/Cerritos/Yorba Linda California
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C230K '10 GLK350 '13 SMART
It's good to know I'm not the only one with M271 pulleys on the brain ![smash](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smashfreak.gif)
Maybe they will be out in 2 more months
![smash](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smashfreak.gif)
Maybe they will be out in 2 more months
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
#229
there may be no peak gains from the pulley, however there are up to 15hp worth of power band gains from 2000 to 5500 rpms ...
that's worth something. .. however renntech is already producing that basic pulley kit
the m45/mp45 is small and punchy... if you want power... you either make the m45/mp45 operate at lower psi's (Where it's more effecient) ...which means head work, cams, and larger displacement... there is potentially 30hp in that path and a reduction in inlet temps by 40*s (pre intercooler temps).
the other way to go is a centrifugal or m62 conversion pacakge
so if i were to make anything for the car i'd make cams, and a 7500 rpm chip :p
that's worth something. .. however renntech is already producing that basic pulley kit
the m45/mp45 is small and punchy... if you want power... you either make the m45/mp45 operate at lower psi's (Where it's more effecient) ...which means head work, cams, and larger displacement... there is potentially 30hp in that path and a reduction in inlet temps by 40*s (pre intercooler temps).
the other way to go is a centrifugal or m62 conversion pacakge
so if i were to make anything for the car i'd make cams, and a 7500 rpm chip :p
#230
Interesting.
I have a shop willing to port my mp45 and a member on MBKlasse that posted a 8hp gain from this mod.
There is a lot of room for low-end gain before the ECU kills high-end, especially with making flow better (header, bore TB, port SC) and that would make the car a lot more fun as a daily driver even if peak HP never increases.
I only worry about the ECU kicking in the timing kill earlier (it happens @ ~5.5K with the Renntech pulley dynos) with more boost being generated.
The M271 needs a ECU solution before big gains can be attempted.
I have a shop willing to port my mp45 and a member on MBKlasse that posted a 8hp gain from this mod.
There is a lot of room for low-end gain before the ECU kills high-end, especially with making flow better (header, bore TB, port SC) and that would make the car a lot more fun as a daily driver even if peak HP never increases.
I only worry about the ECU kicking in the timing kill earlier (it happens @ ~5.5K with the Renntech pulley dynos) with more boost being generated.
The M271 needs a ECU solution before big gains can be attempted.
#232
I think its dead, no word from EvoSport.
The Renntech pulley is a great alternative for now, and some have started having luck with ECU piggyback devices like Kleemann's KBox.
At this point I'd bite the bullet and buy the Kleemann pulley + KBox, then wait on the header dyno from CarLab.
The Renntech pulley is a great alternative for now, and some have started having luck with ECU piggyback devices like Kleemann's KBox.
At this point I'd bite the bullet and buy the Kleemann pulley + KBox, then wait on the header dyno from CarLab.
#233
MBWorld Founder
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ones too fast according to CHP!
none of the pulleys on the market are making real reliable power. The add-on boxes do not control the torque limiter, all they do is add fuel. That is why some are seeing gains - more fuel.
We have a pulley done and can sell it with an add-on like the others, but it is artificial and you will not get what you are paying for.
Until we can get a real solution to the ECU, we will not put our name on a product in the market.
Thanks
Brad
We have a pulley done and can sell it with an add-on like the others, but it is artificial and you will not get what you are paying for.
Until we can get a real solution to the ECU, we will not put our name on a product in the market.
Thanks
Brad
#234
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Socal
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVE
I think its dead, no word from EvoSport.
The Renntech pulley is a great alternative for now, and some have started having luck with ECU piggyback devices like Kleemann's KBox.
At this point I'd bite the bullet and buy the Kleemann pulley + KBox, then wait on the header dyno from CarLab.
The Renntech pulley is a great alternative for now, and some have started having luck with ECU piggyback devices like Kleemann's KBox.
At this point I'd bite the bullet and buy the Kleemann pulley + KBox, then wait on the header dyno from CarLab.
The infamous banned Taylor192 (now only found on the other forum) has the Renntech pulley and headers - all I think he'd need is for someone to figure out fuel pressure and come up with a good ECU tune - but his progress is notable and I'm following along quite diligently
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
flip
#235
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Socal
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVE
none of the pulleys on the market are making real reliable power. The add-on boxes do not control the torque limiter, all they do is add fuel. That is why some are seeing gains - more fuel.
We have a pulley done and can sell it with an add-on like the others, but it is artificial and you will not get what you are paying for.
Until we can get a real solution to the ECU, we will not put our name on a product in the market.
Thanks
Brad
We have a pulley done and can sell it with an add-on like the others, but it is artificial and you will not get what you are paying for.
Until we can get a real solution to the ECU, we will not put our name on a product in the market.
Thanks
Brad
flip
#236
MBWorld Founder
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ones too fast according to CHP!
I do have a pulley available. If you want to do some independent testing, I can arrange a special one time deal most likely - email me!
Thanks
Brad
Thanks
Brad
#237
Are you willing to comment on PowerChip's progress on the Seimens ECU? and/or Evosports relationship with PowerChip to try to get this done - ie is PowerChip independently investigating this and Evosport awaiting results, or is Evosport sponsoring this and can maybe lend some muscle to getting it done?
Could you possibly explain in detail a little more about why the ECU solution is preferred over just dumping more fuel and fooling the ECU to not back off timing? I'm new to this yet would love to learn more.
#238
Super Moderator Alumni
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: West Los Angeles
Posts: 7,684
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
5 Posts
Midnight Blue 2004.5 C230 Kompressor Sport Sedan. 2002 w210 E320, 2009 w211 E350 Sport
While we're all at it, I'll be looking into a C230 with a combination of the Renntech pulley, custom FPR, custom headers and custom chip tuning (to eliminate the need of a piggy back) in the near future. I personally had some pretty good luck with the Kleemann pulley kit + KBox (but I too had some chip tuning on top of it).
The infamous banned Taylor192 (now only found on the other forum) has the Renntech pulley and headers - all I think he'd need is for someone to figure out fuel pressure and come up with a good ECU tune - but his progress is notable and I'm following along quite diligently
.
flip
The infamous banned Taylor192 (now only found on the other forum) has the Renntech pulley and headers - all I think he'd need is for someone to figure out fuel pressure and come up with a good ECU tune - but his progress is notable and I'm following along quite diligently
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
flip
#242
I'm interested in what Brad meant. All the dynos have indicated a pulley loses HP at the high end, yet we all thought it was pulling fuel and timing and the piggyback ECus fooll the ECU into not doing this.
What do you mean by "torque limiter"? I thought this term was used in trannies and clutches to hold power while shifting...???
#243
MBWorld Founder
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ones too fast according to CHP!
Sorry guys, been tied up for the last few days.
I am willing to comment. Powerchip and evosport are BOTH investigating this, in unison and independently. We are utilizing all resources (domestic and abroad) to get the code to make this happen. However, the only sources the may have it are VERY expensive and are not able to guarantee that they can address the torque limiting issue.
More or less fuel and/or timing is great. However, the torque limiting feature built into this car will actually bleed boost off before the motor. If it sees that the motor is producing torque in excess of the window the factory sets, it will bleed of the boost. Therefore, more fuel and timing will not do anything but waste money (fuel) and make the motor ping (detonation from too much timing and not the proper air/fuel ratio).
BTW, the piggy-back boxes that are used by many (including us on some applications) are only able to control fuel. Some VERY new ones can do timing, but they are prototypes and not in wide circulation.
Thanks, I tend to agree with you. For those that do not know, we are a very serious tuner with full engine building on site, an engineering department, access to the most sophisticated machines and technical resources, here and in europe and japan.
However, to break this torque limiting code is a serious order. It really takes a back-door into Siemans (someone who is willing to give the code out), and that it VERY expensive (ten's of thousands of dollars). Now, we do have access to people, but 1. they are not sure they can support helping in finding the code that will address torque limitation (Mercedes invested a lot of IP to make this a part of the code, and it is not a simple on or off switch) and 2. we are not sure we could sell enough to recoup the costs of such information.
Does thie clear it up for you guys? I hope so. It IS a bit esoteric and very frustrating.
Thanks
Brad
Fair enough.
Are you willing to comment on PowerChip's progress on the Seimens ECU? and/or Evosports relationship with PowerChip to try to get this done - ie is PowerChip independently investigating this and Evosport awaiting results, or is Evosport sponsoring this and can maybe lend some muscle to getting it done?
Could you possibly explain in detail a little more about why the ECU solution is preferred over just dumping more fuel and fooling the ECU to not back off timing? I'm new to this yet would love to learn more.
Are you willing to comment on PowerChip's progress on the Seimens ECU? and/or Evosports relationship with PowerChip to try to get this done - ie is PowerChip independently investigating this and Evosport awaiting results, or is Evosport sponsoring this and can maybe lend some muscle to getting it done?
Could you possibly explain in detail a little more about why the ECU solution is preferred over just dumping more fuel and fooling the ECU to not back off timing? I'm new to this yet would love to learn more.
More or less fuel and/or timing is great. However, the torque limiting feature built into this car will actually bleed boost off before the motor. If it sees that the motor is producing torque in excess of the window the factory sets, it will bleed of the boost. Therefore, more fuel and timing will not do anything but waste money (fuel) and make the motor ping (detonation from too much timing and not the proper air/fuel ratio).
BTW, the piggy-back boxes that are used by many (including us on some applications) are only able to control fuel. Some VERY new ones can do timing, but they are prototypes and not in wide circulation.
No we don't, we need a more serious car community that is willing to pay for this mod. We were all spoiled with the ease to mod the 2.3L cheap and no-one wants to pony up the $$$ to mod the 1.8L.
I'm interested in what Brad meant. All the dynos have indicated a pulley loses HP at the high end, yet we all thought it was pulling fuel and timing and the piggyback ECus fooll the ECU into not doing this.
What do you mean by "torque limiter"? I thought this term was used in trannies and clutches to hold power while shifting...???
I'm interested in what Brad meant. All the dynos have indicated a pulley loses HP at the high end, yet we all thought it was pulling fuel and timing and the piggyback ECus fooll the ECU into not doing this.
What do you mean by "torque limiter"? I thought this term was used in trannies and clutches to hold power while shifting...???
However, to break this torque limiting code is a serious order. It really takes a back-door into Siemans (someone who is willing to give the code out), and that it VERY expensive (ten's of thousands of dollars). Now, we do have access to people, but 1. they are not sure they can support helping in finding the code that will address torque limitation (Mercedes invested a lot of IP to make this a part of the code, and it is not a simple on or off switch) and 2. we are not sure we could sell enough to recoup the costs of such information.
Does thie clear it up for you guys? I hope so. It IS a bit esoteric and very frustrating.
![wall](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/banghead.gif)
Thanks
Brad
#245
Thanks Brad,
That was very informative, yet I'm afraid to ask a stupid question: why not tackle the boost bleed off (purge valve?) with a piggy back ECU rather than timing and fuel?
I wish I worked for Seimens. I wonder why MB is so secretive with this when they are in a HP war with other manufacturers. You'd think if there's more power to be had they'd let us access to it, do they do the same with the other engines? Do you think this engine can handle 250-300 crank hp on stock internals?
Cheers!
That was very informative, yet I'm afraid to ask a stupid question: why not tackle the boost bleed off (purge valve?) with a piggy back ECU rather than timing and fuel?
I wish I worked for Seimens. I wonder why MB is so secretive with this when they are in a HP war with other manufacturers. You'd think if there's more power to be had they'd let us access to it, do they do the same with the other engines? Do you think this engine can handle 250-300 crank hp on stock internals?
Cheers!
#246
MBWorld Founder
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ones too fast according to CHP!
I wish it was that simple. A piggy-back will not accomplish that, I wish it did.
They do the same with ALL cars in the range now. All the makers are really anti-aftermarket these days.
Frustrating is that we have about 5-6K tied up in development so far and may never be able to sell anything.
Thanks
Brad
They do the same with ALL cars in the range now. All the makers are really anti-aftermarket these days.
Frustrating is that we have about 5-6K tied up in development so far and may never be able to sell anything.
![Frown](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/frown.gif)
Thanks
Brad
#247
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: GREECE, Thessaloniki
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W203 M111.955 2.0 kompressor
Any tuning puts extra stress on the engine, done "properly" or not. The problem that many see with M271 vs. M111 is that it is already tuned to a much higher degree and may not take the extra boost too well. The most noticeable hint - and you reported it yourself - the loss of power with each consecutive dyno run (not so prominent in case of M111!). If you add even more boost, it will likely be nullified by the inefficient intercooler. Another point is the supercharger itself - it has an RPM limit, after which it loses its efficiency and starts robbing the engine of power.
I am not trying to rain on many folks' so-much-anticipated parade - just warning that there may be a few clowds that may spoil the party.
You should have read debates of this kind when pullies for the M111 were still in the works - PC screens were glowing of heat. It turned out that the M111 has an ample tuning capacity, and this has been proven by time. I sure hope that the M271 will fare just as well.
I am not trying to rain on many folks' so-much-anticipated parade - just warning that there may be a few clowds that may spoil the party.
You should have read debates of this kind when pullies for the M111 were still in the works - PC screens were glowing of heat. It turned out that the M111 has an ample tuning capacity, and this has been proven by time. I sure hope that the M271 will fare just as well.
#248
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West Los Angeles
Posts: 988
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cobra/E55
Sorry guys, been tied up for the last few days.
I am willing to comment. Powerchip and evosport are BOTH investigating this, in unison and independently. We are utilizing all resources (domestic and abroad) to get the code to make this happen. However, the only sources the may have it are VERY expensive and are not able to guarantee that they can address the torque limiting issue.
More or less fuel and/or timing is great. However, the torque limiting feature built into this car will actually bleed boost off before the motor. If it sees that the motor is producing torque in excess of the window the factory sets, it will bleed of the boost. Therefore, more fuel and timing will not do anything but waste money (fuel) and make the motor ping (detonation from too much timing and not the proper air/fuel ratio).
BTW, the piggy-back boxes that are used by many (including us on some applications) are only able to control fuel. Some VERY new ones can do timing, but they are prototypes and not in wide circulation.
Thanks, I tend to agree with you. For those that do not know, we are a very serious tuner with full engine building on site, an engineering department, access to the most sophisticated machines and technical resources, here and in europe and japan.
However, to break this torque limiting code is a serious order. It really takes a back-door into Siemans (someone who is willing to give the code out), and that it VERY expensive (ten's of thousands of dollars). Now, we do have access to people, but 1. they are not sure they can support helping in finding the code that will address torque limitation (Mercedes invested a lot of IP to make this a part of the code, and it is not a simple on or off switch) and 2. we are not sure we could sell enough to recoup the costs of such information.
Does thie clear it up for you guys? I hope so. It IS a bit esoteric and very frustrating.
Thanks
Brad
I am willing to comment. Powerchip and evosport are BOTH investigating this, in unison and independently. We are utilizing all resources (domestic and abroad) to get the code to make this happen. However, the only sources the may have it are VERY expensive and are not able to guarantee that they can address the torque limiting issue.
More or less fuel and/or timing is great. However, the torque limiting feature built into this car will actually bleed boost off before the motor. If it sees that the motor is producing torque in excess of the window the factory sets, it will bleed of the boost. Therefore, more fuel and timing will not do anything but waste money (fuel) and make the motor ping (detonation from too much timing and not the proper air/fuel ratio).
BTW, the piggy-back boxes that are used by many (including us on some applications) are only able to control fuel. Some VERY new ones can do timing, but they are prototypes and not in wide circulation.
Thanks, I tend to agree with you. For those that do not know, we are a very serious tuner with full engine building on site, an engineering department, access to the most sophisticated machines and technical resources, here and in europe and japan.
However, to break this torque limiting code is a serious order. It really takes a back-door into Siemans (someone who is willing to give the code out), and that it VERY expensive (ten's of thousands of dollars). Now, we do have access to people, but 1. they are not sure they can support helping in finding the code that will address torque limitation (Mercedes invested a lot of IP to make this a part of the code, and it is not a simple on or off switch) and 2. we are not sure we could sell enough to recoup the costs of such information.
Does thie clear it up for you guys? I hope so. It IS a bit esoteric and very frustrating.
![wall](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/banghead.gif)
Thanks
Brad
WELL SAID!
![bow](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/bowdown.gif)
![bow](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/bowdown.gif)
-Aaron
#250
Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mine 2005 C230 Kompressor, Dad's 2005 ML350