C 320 with brabus 3.8s engine
01-24-2009, 08:24 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Beirut Lebanon
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32AMG.335 e92 fbo.protomotive996 gt2
C 320 with brabus 3.8s engine
i installed the BRABUS 3.8s engine with all electronics in my c320(2001).i will post the pictures very soon
01-24-2009, 12:19 PM
#2
Super Member
"There is no replacement for displacement"!
I wonder if this is similar to the 3.8L stroker motor that RennTech had available for the M112 320 motor.
I'd love to see this be a viable option for the M112K; however, the main problem is that the supercharger would be over its limit with this conversion and we would also have to change the pistons to lower the compression ratio.
01-24-2009, 03:02 PM
#4
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
waiting for pics
01-24-2009, 03:07 PM
#5
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Absolutely - lets have some photos.
"There is no replacement for displacement"!
I wonder if this is similar to the 3.8L stroker motor that RennTech had available for the M112 320 motor.
I'd love to see this be a viable option for the M112K; however, the main problem is that the supercharger would be over its limit with this conversion and we would also have to change the pistons to lower the compression ratio.
"There is no replacement for displacement"!
I wonder if this is similar to the 3.8L stroker motor that RennTech had available for the M112 320 motor.
I'd love to see this be a viable option for the M112K; however, the main problem is that the supercharger would be over its limit with this conversion and we would also have to change the pistons to lower the compression ratio.
Trending Topics
01-24-2009, 04:08 PM
#8
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Beirut Lebanon
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32AMG.335 e92 fbo.protomotive996 gt2
i bought the parts from a local junk yard and still have all my stock parts.i installed everything in my workshop(Autodynamics garage)
01-24-2009, 05:34 PM
#10
Super Member
Good point Frank; here's my reasoning (or lack thereof!):
For the M112K, you end up with a total displacement of 3.7L and a net gain of 50 horsepower (354 to 404 hp - a whopping 14% increase in horsepower)! To my knowledge, the OE supercharger is retained.
Although we are dealing with two different beasts here (M112 vs M112K) and slightly increased displacement (3.7 vs 3.8), if one considers the gains obtained from the N/A M112 3.2 - 3.8S conversion (215 - 300 hp for a 40% increase in horsepower), it would point to at least one (probably more) system being limiting in the M112K:
I would contend that our stock supercharger is one such limiting factor:
Our OE superchargers have a displacement of 1.6 L. What would be the gain on a 3.7 L stroker motor if a larger displacement supercharger were used? For example, perhaps the gains would be greater if a 2.3 L or 2.6 L supercharger were used? If for nothing else, one would expect the efficiency of a larger displacement supercharger to be advantageous. At least, that's how I would expect the supercharger P/V plot to behave given the increased displacement of the 3.7L engine.
Then, let's assume that one was not satisfied after shelling out more than $10K for a 50 hp gain (e.g. me!):
You would want to add intake and overdrive pulley modifications. I would say that would definitely push the stock supercharger over the limit in terms of efficiency (i.e. volume and temperature of the charged air). Certainly, laws pertaining to the adiabatic process will dictate the efficiency.
[Of course, I'm assuming that the engine internals post-conversion are up to the task - i.e. pistons, crank, camshaft, valves, etc.!]
Side question: What are the new compression ratios of the 3.7L M112K and the 3.8 S M112?
01-25-2009, 03:43 PM
#17
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Apologies to Ali for hijacking his thread!
Good point Frank; here's my reasoning (or lack thereof!):
For the M112K, you end up with a total displacement of 3.7L and a net gain of 50 horsepower (354 to 404 hp - a whopping 14% increase in horsepower)! To my knowledge, the OE supercharger is retained.
Although we are dealing with two different beasts here (M112 vs M112K) and slightly increased displacement (3.7 vs 3.8), if one considers the gains obtained from the N/A M112 3.2 - 3.8S conversion (215 - 300 hp for a 40% increase in horsepower), it would point to at least one (probably more) system being limiting in the M112K:
I would contend that our stock supercharger is one such limiting factor:
Our OE superchargers have a displacement of 1.6 L. What would be the gain on a 3.7 L stroker motor if a larger displacement supercharger were used? For example, perhaps the gains would be greater if a 2.3 L or 2.6 L supercharger were used? If for nothing else, one would expect the efficiency of a larger displacement supercharger to be advantageous. At least, that's how I would expect the supercharger P/V plot to behave given the increased displacement of the 3.7L engine.
Then, let's assume that one was not satisfied after shelling out more than $10K for a 50 hp gain (e.g. me!):
You would want to add intake and overdrive pulley modifications. I would say that would definitely push the stock supercharger over the limit in terms of efficiency (i.e. volume and temperature of the charged air). Certainly, laws pertaining to the adiabatic process will dictate the efficiency.
[Of course, I'm assuming that the engine internals post-conversion are up to the task - i.e. pistons, crank, camshaft, valves, etc.!]
Side question: What are the new compression ratios of the 3.7L M112K and the 3.8 S M112?
Good point Frank; here's my reasoning (or lack thereof!):
For the M112K, you end up with a total displacement of 3.7L and a net gain of 50 horsepower (354 to 404 hp - a whopping 14% increase in horsepower)! To my knowledge, the OE supercharger is retained.
Although we are dealing with two different beasts here (M112 vs M112K) and slightly increased displacement (3.7 vs 3.8), if one considers the gains obtained from the N/A M112 3.2 - 3.8S conversion (215 - 300 hp for a 40% increase in horsepower), it would point to at least one (probably more) system being limiting in the M112K:
I would contend that our stock supercharger is one such limiting factor:
Our OE superchargers have a displacement of 1.6 L. What would be the gain on a 3.7 L stroker motor if a larger displacement supercharger were used? For example, perhaps the gains would be greater if a 2.3 L or 2.6 L supercharger were used? If for nothing else, one would expect the efficiency of a larger displacement supercharger to be advantageous. At least, that's how I would expect the supercharger P/V plot to behave given the increased displacement of the 3.7L engine.
Then, let's assume that one was not satisfied after shelling out more than $10K for a 50 hp gain (e.g. me!):
You would want to add intake and overdrive pulley modifications. I would say that would definitely push the stock supercharger over the limit in terms of efficiency (i.e. volume and temperature of the charged air). Certainly, laws pertaining to the adiabatic process will dictate the efficiency.
[Of course, I'm assuming that the engine internals post-conversion are up to the task - i.e. pistons, crank, camshaft, valves, etc.!]
Side question: What are the new compression ratios of the 3.7L M112K and the 3.8 S M112?
you can catch a glimps of the valve cover being red too like brabus engine should. 
, anyway you can take pictures without the airbox on?
lol
