carbon fiber Driveshaft
06-11-2008, 12:20 AM
#26
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
C55,SL55,C63
the results from lightweight flywheels and lightweight crank pulley is typically more than ltw driveshaft b/c radius plays a much greater impact than weight b/c Inertia = mass x radius^2, so its the radius that is more crucial than weight itself. With that said it still plays a factor, Carbon driveshafts can handle tons of power and supposedly they greatly reduce the amount of vibrations/harmonics felt through the chassis that most people don't even realize are b/c of the driveshaft. In addition its much safer than aluminum driveshafts (which can be downright dangerous b/c they are more prone to snapping and turning into a polevault). CF shafts simply turn back to fiber when they snap and do not hurt anything. That said... its pricey.. and not many people do it. But if you have the cash and you like to tune for efficiency as well as power, its a great way to go.
The more I read online about them the more i want one
06-11-2008, 02:12 AM
#28
Again its one of those efficiency mods that gives you a real sensation of performance that is very difficult to describe, and may not necessarily show all its strengths on a dyno sheet, but in real life gives tremendous performance. If you have the cash... get it.
Plus in this day in age with every increasing gas mileage, any mod that improved gas mileage efficiency will pay itself off quickly thereby essentially making the modification free simply by paying for itself in fuel savings.
Plus in this day in age with every increasing gas mileage, any mod that improved gas mileage efficiency will pay itself off quickly thereby essentially making the modification free simply by paying for itself in fuel savings.
06-11-2008, 02:45 AM
#29
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
C55,SL55,C63
Again its one of those efficiency mods that gives you a real sensation of performance that is very difficult to describe, and may not necessarily show all its strengths on a dyno sheet, but in real life gives tremendous performance. If you have the cash... get it.
Plus in this day in age with every increasing gas mileage, any mod that improved gas mileage efficiency will pay itself off quickly thereby essentially making the modification free simply by paying for itself in fuel savings.
Plus in this day in age with every increasing gas mileage, any mod that improved gas mileage efficiency will pay itself off quickly thereby essentially making the modification free simply by paying for itself in fuel savings.
A mod like this is available but its not something you can just buy off a website. Other cars you can but not for our benz's I see this as a mod that you will have to do own your own on a custom shop level. I would also bet if a company had a C/F drive-shaft for say an E55 those guys would be all over it. It just seems like a good way to cut weight, gain power, and not risk your motors health. then to take it a step further you could have carbon fiber axles made up that would maybe yield benefits too.
06-11-2008, 06:59 AM
#30
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Delran, NJ
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C55
the c55 shaft looks downright puny to be honest. its basically a straight tube with four feet that bolt down at the ouput shaft and pinion. it definitely is not your typical half round/full round with a slip yoke. im not sure if you would even be able to source that kind of end. they might have to cut off the ends from the factory shaft, and epoxy them into your tube. ever consider moly tubing? might be a lot easier. most of the driveshafts that people replace are big/heavy clunkers, like in a mustang/camaro. the c55 shaft is probably 20% the size of one of them. i think its an interesting concept, but i m not sure you would gain much on the performance end. they do an excellent job with dampening driveline harmonics, but i personally have no problem with them. guess someone is just gonna have to try it to see. easiest way would be to find a c55 shaft from a salvage yard and send it to the driveline shop. that way if they have to cut it apart, and it doesnt work, you still have your ride 
06-11-2008, 08:15 AM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
06-11-2008, 12:46 PM
#33
Custom CF driveshafts are actually fairly common place so you might be able to get a CF driveshaft manufacturer to make one for you, It usually isn't that much more expensive to go custom. Its much better though to do a batch of 10 or more to keep costs down and eventually make it a normal product for the C55 boys. Just a thought.
(don't look at me, I'm not doing a CF driveshaft haha).
(don't look at me, I'm not doing a CF driveshaft haha).
06-11-2008, 07:19 PM
#35
Super Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 E550, 02 C32, 91 300E
Eh it will take a long time to break even on the capital cost considering fuel efficiency will likely not be too much better. I dont ever look at mods as saving money in gas cause they make you go faster.
06-12-2008, 03:40 AM
#37
Super Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 E550, 02 C32, 91 300E
06-12-2008, 11:55 AM
#38
not true, A little gain of only 2mpg will save you over $600 over two years using avg mileage (10k miles/year) and gas prices of 3.50 (which are long gone). It adds up very quickly, especially at these prices.
06-12-2008, 03:51 PM
#39
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
06-12-2008, 08:52 PM
#42
Moderator Alumni
Well... this is an oversimplification... and in this particular case, completely untrue.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
I did the same kinda math - it takes a very long time for a lightened parts (crank pulley, fly wheels, drive shaft, and axles) to "pay themselves back," in terms of $$ for fuel, but from the reviews of lightened drive parts - the
aspect of these efficiency mods repay themselves off quickly 
I think Hooley should do it because he seems to be a pioneer w/ the whole NA w203 AMG section
His results w/ the lightened crank pulley showed good dollar/hp numbers. Maybe we'll get the same thing here on the drive shaft!
06-12-2008, 09:20 PM
#43
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
C55,SL55,C63
Now what if, the price of gasoline continues to rise combined w/ the falling dollar, rise of inflation, while the wind blows 60mph in the opposite direction of an on coming train going 30mph on a rainy day........ wait, wrong question..
I did the same kinda math - it takes a very long time for a lightened parts (crank pulley, fly wheels, drive shaft, and axles) to "pay themselves back," in terms of $$ for fuel, but from the reviews of lightened drive parts - the aspect of these efficiency mods repay themselves off quickly
I think Hooley should do it because he seems to be a pioneer w/ the whole NA w203 AMG section His results w/ the lightened crank pulley showed good dollar/hp numbers. Maybe we'll get the same thing here on the drive shaft!
I did the same kinda math - it takes a very long time for a lightened parts (crank pulley, fly wheels, drive shaft, and axles) to "pay themselves back," in terms of $$ for fuel, but from the reviews of lightened drive parts - the
aspect of these efficiency mods repay themselves off quickly I think Hooley should do it because he seems to be a pioneer w/ the whole NA w203 AMG section
His results w/ the lightened crank pulley showed good dollar/hp numbers. Maybe we'll get the same thing here on the drive shaft!I will Do it. and I will do it sooner rather than later. I would bet you would see a gain of some sort.
HINT HINT.....
06-12-2008, 10:36 PM
#44
Well... this is an oversimplification... and in this particular case, completely untrue.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
06-12-2008, 10:47 PM
#45
Well... this is an oversimplification... and in this particular case, completely untrue.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
2 mpg improvement isn't the whole story... it depends on where you start. If you have a vehicle that gets 2 mpg, going from 2 mpg to 4 mpg is a 100% improvement... conversely, if you have a vehicle that gets 100 mpg, going to 102 mpg is a negligible difference.
For sake of argument, let's say a C55 gets 20 mpg in mixed driving. If the CF driveshaft caused a 10% boost in fuel efficiency (IMHO, a lot), the mpg would jump to 22 mpg. If the same CF driveshaft cost $1,500 (as mentioned earlier), let's look at how long it'd take to pay for itself:
First, convert fuel efficiency (mpg) to fuel consumption (gpm). 20 mpg = 0.0500 gpm. 22 mpg = 0.0455 gpm.
So, this jump in efficiency would be a savings of 0.0045 gallons per mile (i.e. 0.0500 - 0.0455). If a gallon of premium is $4.50, this is a cost savings of $0.02 per mile. $1,500 cost of modification divided by $0.02 savings per mile = 75,000 post-mod miles of driving to break even.
In conclusion, DarkXerox is right... do this because it makes your car faster - but if you're talking yourself into it because of fuel efficiency, your kidding yourself.
06-12-2008, 10:57 PM
#46
Now what if, the price of gasoline continues to rise combined w/ the falling dollar, rise of inflation, while the wind blows 60mph in the opposite direction of an on coming train going 30mph on a rainy day........ wait, wrong question..
I did the same kinda math - it takes a very long time for a lightened parts (crank pulley, fly wheels, drive shaft, and axles) to "pay themselves back," in terms of $$ for fuel, but from the reviews of lightened drive parts - the aspect of these efficiency mods repay themselves off quickly
I think Hooley should do it because he seems to be a pioneer w/ the whole NA w203 AMG section His results w/ the lightened crank pulley showed good dollar/hp numbers. Maybe we'll get the same thing here on the drive shaft!
I did the same kinda math - it takes a very long time for a lightened parts (crank pulley, fly wheels, drive shaft, and axles) to "pay themselves back," in terms of $$ for fuel, but from the reviews of lightened drive parts - the
aspect of these efficiency mods repay themselves off quickly I think Hooley should do it because he seems to be a pioneer w/ the whole NA w203 AMG section
His results w/ the lightened crank pulley showed good dollar/hp numbers. Maybe we'll get the same thing here on the drive shaft!Essentially the both do the same thing, they increase engine efficiency and get more of the engines power to the rear wheels. Neither truly "makes" power in the conventional sense, they simply reduce the amount of power robbed by the inefficient stock components, it lowers the drivetrain losses.
06-12-2008, 10:59 PM
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Not to mention the fairly large assumption you're making in improved fuel efficiency - an improvement in excess of 13% from the CF driveshaft alone... which I doubt we'd see. Even if it wound up being an improvement of 5% (more likely, IMHO), in that case it wouldn't even amount to 1 mpg more, assuming starting with 15 mpg as you mentioned.
Anyway, enough with the OT fuel efficiency rant... hooleyboy, I look forward to seeing your results! Keep the great info coming, my friend
06-13-2008, 01:18 PM
#48
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Diamond Bar & Anaheim, CA
Posts: 1,194
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 C-Class Sportcoupe
ACPT in huntington beach supposedly makes a better cf driveshaft; they also do work for aerospace. my shop installed a cf driveshaft on a mustang from PST and it vibrated like crazy at certain rpm range. so he took it off and installed an aluminum driveshaft and it worked fine. a cf driveshaft is supposed to work better than a solid metal one because it can flex and absorb the rotational stress better than aluminum. Plus when it breaks, it will shatter into bits instead of damaging the car like a solid metal one.
06-13-2008, 01:45 PM
#49
Moderator Alumni
06-13-2008, 01:55 PM
#50
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Diamond Bar & Anaheim, CA
Posts: 1,194
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 C-Class Sportcoupe
Another positive is that if someone does start producing a cf driveshaft for the C32 AMG, it will probably fit all the other c-classes. Only difference between the variants would be dimensions of the prop flange, so the manufacturer would just order a different set of end pieces. Best way to make sure would be to measure the driveshaft length and compare, but I know for a fact that the C320 has a smaller prop flange than the C32.
