Dyno Tips Needed
I assume you need to shutoff the ESP with the button on the dash and set the trans to "1" instead of D and let her rip from there. Anything else I should know to optimize my experience?
If I am doing a third gear pull I assume you mean to put the trans to "3" so it will not shift up past third gear?
2. W mode selected
3. Hold shifter to left so 2 is displayed
4. Use light throttle to build up speed
5. When transmission shifts to 3rd, 3 will display
6. Continue to build up throttle pressure until about 3800 rpm when you can go all the way down on the throttle as at that engine speed, it will not shift
7. When you see 4, your done
Thanks for the detailed info! Why use "w" mode? You don't want the transmission to be down into first at all since you are just measure the power once it hits third gear?
Just the way I was told to do it. I think it is might be to avoid slipping in first gear and plus it is a little easier to keep track of just a single gear change.
Trending Topics
If I recall correctly you added Koni Yellows to complement your RENNtech springs. Out of curiousity, where did you get your shocks? I have a tough time finding anyplace showing an application for a C32 or SLK32.
I understand that the W mode will start me off in second gear so I got the idea here. Besides starting in second I don't think there are any differences between W and S so W shouldn't have any negative effects on my dyno numbers.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
If I recall correctly you added Koni Yellows to complement your RENNtech springs. Out of curiousity, where did you get your shocks? I have a tough time finding anyplace showing an application for a C32 or SLK32.
I'm willing to bet that the W203 set would work fine for you. 8741-1412Sport fronts, 26-1679Sport rears. I'm not sure how the Koni part # designation goes, but it looks like the rears are not knob adjustable... you have to drop the shock to adjust it, which is quite annoying (like my 944 setup).
I understand that the W mode will start me off in second gear so I got the idea here. Besides starting in second I don't think there are any differences between W and S so W shouldn't have any negative effects on my dyno numbers.
What's the deal with the Mustang Dyno? I saw your other post about them showing low numbers and someone else told me the same thing when the shop where I am going had a dyno pull event.
I certainly don't want to handicap my car from the start with a dyno that makes it tough to get good numbers. On the other hand a supposedly stock SLK 32 pulled 296 horspower on it's first run on the Mustang dyno; the second run saw heat soak bring it down to 290.
Last edited by Carl AMG; Feb 21, 2003 at 09:51 PM.
What's the deal with the Mustang Dyno? I saw your other post about them showing low numbers and someone else told me the same thing when the shop where I am going had a dyno pull event.
http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/...gVsDynojet.asp
I certainly don't want to handicap my car from the start with a dyno that makes it tough to get good numbers.
.On the other hand a supposedly stock SLK 32 pulled 296 horspower on it's first run on the Mustang dyno; the second run saw heat soak bring it down to 290.
. Maybe the cooler canadian weather keeps the car from heat soaking hehe.
The dyno run was unbelievable. I am attaching the graph/print out because nobody will believe it otherwise. My car is stock except for the 93 fuel setting (I watched the tech set mine on the laptop) and newly added K&N air filters. I made some runs with the filters for the first time last night before the snow so the ECU could hopefully learn the filters. I always run Sunoco Ultra 94. The best number was 323.8 hp at the wheels and 316.1 torque. I saw the same dyno and operators run a SLK 32 (it's one of the techs father's car) at a dyno pull off two weeks ago with 35 degree temps. He pulled 296 hp on the first run then dropped to 290. My car definitely looked like it was pulling stronger than the SLK 32 and I got some nice video.
I inquired about the variables and the shop said he first entered the weight at 3,400 lbs and then ran a control run for the dyno to figure the weight by how many horsepower it took to push the car at a certain speed. I don't know what to think other than the temps, fuel setting, 94 octane and clean K&N's were working.
1. How did you get the car to stay in a gear without downshifting?
2. What weight did the operator used for SLK32?
Stock C32 is around 3600 lbs. Looking at your numbers, is the reason why I am leary of Mustang and Dynapack dynos. Operator can manipulate final HP/TQ numbers by playing with a number of variable. On a DYNOJETS everything is locked.
I don't know what weight was entered as I merely witnessed the SLK run but as explained to me they put in a initial weight then run a control drive that calculates weight based on horsepower need to drive to a speed.
No one manipulated any variables after the car began to make the runs and they have no vested interest or care what my numbers were. They don't sell any Mercedes tuner products.
I must say I'm not suprised by your reaction. I wonder what the numbers would have been if I didn't lose hp with the K&N air filters?
I must say I'm not suprised by your reaction. I wonder what the numbers would have been if I didn't lose hp with the K&N air filters?
experience on a Mustang Dyno, are they even close to your experience? What weight did you use?
It is not even SAE corrected. Maybe DIN?

Norm
Your buying Carl's numbers rage2? Your the one with the
experience on a Mustang Dyno, are they even close to your experience? What weight did you use?
It is not even SAE corrected. Maybe DIN?
.But yes, dynos (not just mustangs, dynojets too) can be deceiving at times, that's why final numbers dont mean much to me at all since I don't bench race... it's the change between the mods on the same day that's important. And of course 1/4 mile and laptimes
.
This is very true on a DYNOJET, since there are no variables to play with. In other words you can not change drum mass - it is fixed, or change load by adding brake. The only variables are humidity, altitude and atmospheric pressure. And those are taken care of by SAE correction factor.
In mid90s we ran the same car on three different DYNOJETS. All three graphs overlaid one another. SO one can use DYNOJET numbers from any other DYNOJET dyno for comparision.
Carl: As far as your numbers. Do not get me wrong, but you have one of the strongest stock C32s. I am assuming it is stock, since I have not read otherwise. If it has ECU and pulleys than it is about right.
Does anyone know what the correction factor would be for SAE to put the numbers into perspective; I'd be happy to give you the variables other than I don't know what the temp was inside the shop itself (maybe 50 degrees)? I would have asked if I knew about it when I was there and would be very interested.
But in terms of questions about manipulating factors to show numbers is ridiculous. I wouldn't know how to if I wanted to, have no incentive to want to post high numbers, and I agree with rage2 about bench racing. My point about the SLK 32AMG on the same dyno was to put things into perspective. Would ten degrees warmer outside temps and a higher barometer make a 25+ horsepower difference? Could it be the 93 fuel setting, 94 octane and some high flow air filters? When I saw the SLK run at the 290+ range, though strong, that seemed reasonable with what I had heard our car's would put to the wheels.
The 93 fuel setting (with a car that has access to that fuel) seems to be such a mystery. How much of ECU bump are we getting from this setting? I don't think anyone producing and selling chips would be too thrilled if it actually had a impact. I know Vadim questioned whether people actually have this setting even when they request it but I know from my own eyes that mine was changed; I was right next to the technician and his laptop when he changed it.
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm
I got all the weather variables and altitude from NOAA's website with yesterday's readings from Dulles International Airport (which is about a mile away from the shop) and I'll ignore any issues about Mustang Dyno's showing lower numbers than a Dynojet. With an assumption that the shop temp was 45 degrees the correction factor is .943 leaving me with 305.34 hp. If I assume we were outside the shop freezing in 25 degree temps the factor is .921 leaving me with 298.21 hp.
Last edited by Carl AMG; Feb 27, 2003 at 11:35 AM.
Sometimes you do get a faster than average car, maybe you got lucky and are in the 99.9 percentile. However, the difference is so big that it indicates that something wasn't right.
Last edited by vadim@evosport; Feb 27, 2003 at 11:53 AM.
As far as me questioning your numbers if they were with ODPS, yes I would. If the numbers were SAE, than I would of wanted to know what makes a bigger difference on your car than on the others. It also works the other way, if you car did not make the power from ODPS like others than I would want to know why it is also the case.


