micropower99

hey, I'm taking my C300 4Matic to a place nearby that does AWD dyno's. They use the "Mustang Dyno". I'll post the results here afterwords, I have my appointment for 2:00pm Friday. Reason being is next month or in a couple weeks I want to get a PowerChip ECU tune done locally but want some figures to go along with it. (A before and after). The place I'm taking it to is called "Racing Greed" in coquitlam. Pretty reputable place and is about $90 for 3-4 pulls and is very close to where I live, which is awsome. Hope all goes well! How much % loss would I lose from the crank to the wheels? About 27%?

InTheBenz0

I am subscribed.. can't wait to see what a c300 4matic makes, before and after with a tune. You getting it tuned for 93?

imboom

Good luck!

Mustangs are normally more conservative of all the dynos out there(which is good imo). If I was to guess it would be somewhere around 165-168 awhp.

Spec_Davis

good luck! i also have to check a shop near by my house for a dyno run.

alexlev

Tuning in to see the results

Glyn M Ruck

It's going to be very difficult to get repeatable results. I've discussed this before. To stand any chance of being able to compare the results with any kind of confidence make sure they take inlet air temperature & air density readings for before and after results. You could still suffer too much float that will mask or flatter improvements.

23wt

Can't wait to see the results

micropower99

Thanks Einstein.

Glyn M Ruck

No problem. Search my posts - I have covered the issue in detail before. If you want to pay for useless information - be my guest. A certain Cosworth F1 engineer on the forum & myself have spent much time on really sophisticated dynos & could teach you a thing or two about repeatability or the lack thereof.

Don't expect the technical amonst us to believe the findings you post - we won't

You would be far better off doing before & after timed acceleration runs. Even with multi million dollar dynos operating in controlled conditions with controlled IAT & air density etc ad infinitum - achieving repeatable absolute ouput values is a minefield.

JoeVal

Glyn:

Let the kids have fun and enjoy the cars and the mods. The printouts will show the variables affecting the tests and the people who run them are generally very knowledgeable and their advise very detailed. They are not going to develop any F1 exceptional machine, just a great amateur car that lets one know who can be outrun in a race and how good of a rabbit start can be performed.

You'd be surprised at what some developing countries call lab conditions for rectifying and inspecting engines, and I'm sure South Africa is no exception. So do as we do, reserve high ground doctoral attitudes for discussions in academia. OK Herr Doktor Einstein, as you were called?

Don't be mad and enjoy the light tone.

Cheers, JV

Derspeed

At least we will finally see something regarding before and after programming. It's better than nothing. Thanks Daniel.

vcruiser

I just don't see a point in dynoing our cars unless it has had performance upgrades!

Glyn M Ruck

In a light tone - I'm staggered at the general lack of technical competence on the 204 forum. I'm sometimes dread to admit I own one. While the 203 forum has it's horrors people are generally interested in exchanging real learnings for the positive benefit of one another & the cars.

The kids must by all means have fun but the tradgedy lies in the fact that someone might believe the nonesense & garbage that will come out of an amateur American type street side dyno. I have plenty of experience of them too and their output is rubbish. I lived there for long enough.

I believe the purpose of the forum is to strive for an accurate exchange of information each giving of their specific area of knowledge for the benefit of all.

And Joe - when are you going to contribute something of value to the forum instead of your banal commentary and dumb thumbs up or down icons?

Edit: There are going to be those on the forum that prefer to listen to Fred Flintstone - I respect that. I'll back Einstein every time thanks.

Glyn M Ruck

The truth is that it could be worse than nothing. Getting dyno repeatability below 10% can be a battle. What if your mod only gives an 8% or smaller improvement? The inlet air temperature as an example increases by 4 degrees from before to after testing & you show zero or negative improvement. Then you are confused. You have wasted your time & money.

micropower99

No worries man, yeah I have yet to see many dyno's for our cars out there,so I didn't have to much to work with so I figured I'd just get it dyno. I just want to see how much of a difference the ECU tune would possibly make. As to Glyn's posts, he assumes we all have access to high tech facilities to provide extremely accurate results when in fact it is pretty damn hard to find an AWD dyno locally. I'll post here tomorrow with the results, hopefully they will be usefull in the future for others

Yeah same here, that's why I'm getting an ECU tune afterwords to get some before and after figures to play with.

I did notice after post and post and post you make it all comes down to how much you hate dyno's. Well thank you for letting us know but it is your OPINION and to be honest I could care less. I'm trying to get some numbers to go by and I'm sorry to not have the full resources as YOU. Stop trying to act so smart and provide some positive feedback once in a while rather than just trolling for the dyno threads.

Glyn M Ruck

No - you miss the point. 3 meaningful discussions on dyno testing in 4800 plus posts is not trolling for dyno threads. The above posts are just for guidance. If you check my posts I really help people with a broad range of issues that most appreciate & consider positive. One of the reasons my PM box is full half the time. I share my resources with others.

I don't hate dynos - I've spent a lot of time in some of the finest installations on the planet & trying to get repeatable absolute ouput readings even on the finest is a nightmare.

If you "could (not) care less" about the results you get so be it - don't mislead others. You are allowed to stick your head in the sand - it is your head.

Don't assume that others are trying to be "smart" when they don't agree with you. Assumption is the mother of all ****ups!

Derspeed

Once we gather more data we will be able to compare results and perhaps control for extraneous variables. Possibly not repeatable as many times as necessary, but it's a start. Most of all it's fun. I agree that there is a huge lack of knowledge on the W204 forums and especially the C63 forums. I also agree that doing timed runs on pavement is the best way to do comparisons. I will say that in my experience with my cars, forced induction and naturally aspirated, I have purchased ECU upgrades based on dyno numbers. All of my purchases were worthwhile. Naturally aspirated cars almost felt as if there were no gains, however, other than improved driveablity, smoothness and fuel mileage. Regarding cars with turbos, there is no discussion. The ECU upgrades made huge improvements in acceleration and in the aforementioned.

If Daniel's ECU upgrade gives him a better seat-of-the pants experience, that's great. If he has some kind of comparison data to go with that experience, it's even better. Maybe the numbers will confuse him and others. I still think that it is a great place for the learning experience to begin. I never consider gaining knowledge a waste of time or money. And, an exchange of ideas is always meaningful discussion.

We all know you have vast dyno experience. I think that your contributions in this thread are informative. I thank you for them. Your stance against Micro's learning for himself, however, is a bit troublesome. Let him have the experience and report on such. You can ignore it, scoff at it, or whatever. His dyno runs may prove your point.

I wish you would take your W204, your vast dyno experience, and access to F1 superstars and put something together for us. I know you wouldn't trust the results. We would still be interested in them and you would be thanked for the effort.

Good day.

Glyn M Ruck

Excellent!

micropower99

Thanks derspeed for your post. Back on to the topic and results on hand! So I went today and I managed to do 3 runs. The problem with our cars is that the car keeps downshifting and thus does not provide a nice clean graph in one gear but instead shows the downshift. Either way it provided a pretty accurate result. After 3 runs on average I managed to get 180whp and 168wtq. Which is really well IMO from what I heard.

The drivetrain and such loss would be about 25-30% which would make those numbers around 234hp and 214.5tq. And on TOP of that I heard the mustang dyno reads a lot lower than others.

Let me know what you guys think, I'll scan and post the graph in the next few minutes.

micropower99

M-bENZ

Ok now I want to see the numbers after the ECU get upgraded. lol

btw, how many runs did u do for $90 ?

Edit: Do you have the K&N fitlers intalled ? or your bone stock ?

Andy

splinter

Have you had the good fortune to pilot a properly modified AMG?

micropower99

Yeah, I got K&N Air Filters installed. Also I'm using 94 octane, dunno if that makes a difference Also, I got 3 runs for $90.


I wish I could have but unfortunately I haven't

Spec_Davis

so whats the numbers?

micropower99