C55 Dyno please review.

Subscribe
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:27 AM
  #1  


Done a few weeks ago.

Engine Mods:
Power Chip ECU tuned for 91.
K&N Filters.
VP Racing 100 Octane Full tank.
Resonator Delete.

Seems kinda low from what others are telling me, should it have been higher? Also I just did a fresh oil change today and doing my NGK Iridiums in the morning. Just doing it for peace of mind since the car performs well.

Throwing in some car pics too.

Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:36 AM
  #2  
looks about standard car numbers maybe your dyno ?.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:40 AM
  #3  
All dynos vary, should have done a before mods run on the dyno.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:41 AM
  #4  
Quote: looks about standard car numbers maybe your dyno ?.
Well I'm mainly on Bimmerforums(don't hate prior M3 owner), anyways, I post my dyno and they compare their E34 & E39 540i with 250ish whp stock. I've read C55 have 280-300whp stock. How is it that their car's don't lose that much hp but I have magically lost around 81 horse power on a dyno? 540i are around 280-290hp.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 04:02 AM
  #5  
Quote: Well I'm mainly on Bimmerforums(don't hate prior M3 owner), anyways, I post my dyno and they compare their E34 & E39 540i with 250ish whp stock. I've read C55 have 280-300whp stock. How is it that their car's don't lose that much hp but I have magically lost around 81 horse power on a dyno? 540i are around 280-290hp.
Mercedes tends to have around 18-20% drivetrain loss, seems like e39 around 15%.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 07:17 AM
  #6  
maybe your tune ?.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 08:13 AM
  #7  
Quote: Well I'm mainly on Bimmerforums(don't hate prior M3 owner), anyways, I post my dyno and they compare their E34 & E39 540i with 250ish whp stock. I've read C55 have 280-300whp stock. How is it that their car's don't lose that much hp but I have magically lost around 81 horse power on a dyno? 540i are around 280-290hp.
I've seen the dynos of many a 32/55 and your 55 numbers are about right. I agree with the above ^^^^that the "stock" C55 seems to be going about 280-300 stock and you're on the higher side of that with the tune and 100 octane. Not to state the obvious, BUT we all agree that many dynos differ and some can even differ on various runs and days. This is why I believe a more accurate test of a cars performance is the 0-60, qtr mile and top end, rather than just strapping it to a dyno. A dyno means nothing when drag (CD) , tires, DAs, driver skill etc come into play...................
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 09:36 AM
  #8  
Car #s look fine
I would ask your tuner what gains to expect from the tune.
Now you have your base map
Reply 0

MB World Stories

The Best of Mercedes & AMG

Explore
story-0

6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)

 Verdad Gallardo
story-1

Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun

 Verdad Gallardo
story-2

Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren

 Verdad Gallardo
story-3

8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine

 Verdad Gallardo
story-4

Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction

 Verdad Gallardo
story-5

Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know

 Verdad Gallardo
story-6

Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know

 Verdad Gallardo
story-7

5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve

 Verdad Gallardo
story-8

Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping

 Verdad Gallardo
story-9

10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used

 Verdad Gallardo
Jun 27, 2011 | 10:39 AM
  #9  
What gear did you run in - 3rd or 4th?

Just for a reference point, I pulled 305HP/316LB-FT with a Renntech Airbox and K&Ns on a Mustang Dyno running in 4th gear:




Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 11:10 AM
  #10  
I notice the OP is tuned for 91 but used 100 Octane?
Why?
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 11:31 AM
  #11  
It is because you were running 100 octane! 100 octane contains more alcohol which has less energy in it. The 100 octane fuel has less energy than 91. Put some 91 in and run it on the dyno.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 12:02 PM
  #12  
Powerchip ecu, you have a choice of a 91 or 93 octane tune. Since i live in cali i chose 91. I used 100 octane for a few days because ecu are adaptive and change to suit whatever octane you have. The runs were a mixture of 3rd and 4th gear, he tried to find the sweet spot. I agree that all dynos are different. I just wish i did a before and after with the ecu tune. I dont really understand dynos so thats why i wanted you guys to look at it and let me know if i was too rich or lean or if power was inconsistent. Hopefully my next actual mod is a carbon fiber intake or supersprint exhaust.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 12:14 PM
  #13  
Quote: It is because you were running 100 octane! 100 octane contains more alcohol which has less energy in it. The 100 octane fuel has less energy than 91. Put some 91 in and run it on the dyno.
This i find hard to believe as i heard the higher the octane the more possible to gain more horsepower by upping the boost due to lower chance of pre detonation. Since im not supercharged or turboed i know gains would be minimal. True, i should have ran at 91, but i cant believe that 100 octane would worsen the dyno numbers.

Also people "claim" their cars are faster after a few gallons of race fuel. All i noticed was improved response, very minimal gains.

Anyways, did some research online and it sounds like you do lose hp for using 100 octane vs 91 octane. Next time i stick to 91. Always use the recommended octane for what your car is tuned for.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:28 PM
  #14  
My base run was 284hp and 295tq with exhaust work and K&N filters. There were some conditions that made it that low I believe.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 01:31 PM
  #15  
Quote: This i find hard to believe as i heard the higher the octane the more possible to gain more horsepower by upping the boost due to lower chance of pre detonation. Since im not supercharged or turboed i know gains would be minimal. True, i should have ran at 91, but i cant believe that 100 octane would worsen the dyno numbers.

Also people "claim" their cars are faster after a few gallons of race fuel. All i noticed was improved response, very minimal gains.

Anyways, did some research online and it sounds like you do lose hp for using 100 octane vs 91 octane. Next time i stick to 91. Always use the recommended octane for what your car is tuned for.
The reason you can up the boost is because the 100 octane is more knock retardent and can handle higher cylinder pressures without pre-igniting. You LOST power. Your ignition timing curve is tuned for a 91-93 octane burn rate. 100 octane burns slower, the higher the octane the slower burn rate. Higher octane fuels require more advanced ignition timing than lower octane fuels because of this.

I can go into it a lot further but I think you get the point now.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 02:43 PM
  #16  
Those are stock numbers..... Contact powerchip... Or try to dyno somewhere else?

hmmm
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 02:58 PM
  #17  
All dynos are different. The only way to tell is to do a before and after dyno and see the percentage gained.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 04:29 PM
  #18  
Quote: Those are stock numbers..... Contact powerchip... Or try to dyno somewhere else?

hmmm




He won't get any more on a different dyno, just different numbers. I seriously doubt that the tune he has made much of a difference and the 100 Oct only makes matters worse. If he were not NA, then the 100 oct would have allowed for more advance. I doubt the difference between the 91 and 100 will be dramatic on a NA car anyway

. I think that Mike showed us that the best you'll get out of a NA tune on the C55 is maybe 16 HP. Mike K, didn't you only get about 16 HP out of the EC tune??? He can always try a SB and think he's faster ....
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 06:02 PM
  #19  
And how hot was it when u ran on the dyno?
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 07:30 PM
  #20  
Quote: All dynos vary, should have done a before mods run on the dyno.
Quote: All dynos are different. The only way to tell is to do a before and after dyno and see the percentage gained.
+1

The dyno is a tool. Absolute values aren't particularly useful. If you don't have a "pre" run on that same dyno, then a "post" run can't really provide much insight unfortunately.

Quote: If he were not NA, then the 100 oct would have allowed for more advance.
Higher octane allows for greater timing advance regardless of N/A or F/I.

OP, I don't know how Powerchip tunes... but many tuners' programming will benefit performance-wise from dumping in some higher octane fuel. Even if you have a 91 map, the ECU will likely adapt to running as much advance as the map allows without sensing knock. C63 guys have shown it time and time again - sure, a dedicated 100 octane map is ideal, but running (or adding) some 100 octane to the tank with a pump-gas tune in the car yields greater output, shown both on the dyno and at the track.
Reply 0
Jun 27, 2011 | 11:30 PM
  #21  
I got 305hp/315tq on a dynojet with K&Ns, secondaries replaced with an X pipe and a Eurocharged tune last week for comparison. I can post a pic for you to compare if you would like.
Reply 0
Jun 29, 2011 | 03:32 PM
  #22  
yes, i got about 15 hp gain I believe with the tune. unless you count when I hit the NOS for fun and hit over 500 rwhp

Quote: [/U][/I][/B]

He won't get any more on a different dyno, just different numbers. I seriously doubt that the tune he has made much of a difference and the 100 Oct only makes matters worse. If he were not NA, then the 100 oct would have allowed for more advance. I doubt the difference between the 91 and 100 will be dramatic on a NA car anyway

. I think that Mike showed us that the best you'll get out of a NA tune on the C55 is maybe 16 HP. Mike K, didn't you only get about 16 HP out of the EC tune??? He can always try a SB and think he's faster ....
Reply 0
Jun 29, 2011 | 04:37 PM
  #23  
Quote: +1

The dyno is a tool. Absolute values aren't particularly useful. If you don't have a "pre" run on that same dyno, then a "post" run can't really provide much insight unfortunately.



Higher octane allows for greater timing advance regardless of N/A or F/I.

OP, I don't know how Powerchip tunes... but many tuners' programming will benefit performance-wise from dumping in some higher octane fuel. Even if you have a 91 map, the ECU will likely adapt to running as much advance as the map allows without sensing knock. C63 guys have shown it time and time again - sure, a dedicated 100 octane map is ideal, but running (or adding) some 100 octane to the tank with a pump-gas tune in the car yields greater output, shown both on the dyno and at the track.

** IN his case, I doubt the 100 oct is making any difference and if it does, its minimal................

On any car it'll allow for advance, BUT its much more pronounced on a FI engine. A car really ought to be tuned for it to allow for even MORE advance. Ask Jerry at EC, he'll tell you all about it. He's the one who worked on the Tune for the C55.
Reply 0
Jul 1, 2011 | 02:30 AM
  #24  
Quote: I got 305hp/315tq on a dynojet with K&Ns, secondaries replaced with an X pipe and a Eurocharged tune last week for comparison. I can post a pic for you to compare if you would like.
since my cats are stock and still in the car then our numbers are similar. i wanted to stay legal for smog in cali. also i heard that the 06' C55 had a bit more hp, is this just rumors? the car is still fast so i'm happy.
Reply 0
Jul 1, 2011 | 09:10 AM
  #25  
You should be fine in cali with smog if you take out your secondary cats..
Reply 0
Subscribe
Currently Active Users (1)
 
story-0

6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)

Slideshow: Not every Mercedes design becomes timeless, some feel stuck in the era they came from.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-05-12 18:09:07


VIEW MORE
story-1

Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun

Slideshow: Yes, Mercedes built manual cars, and some of them are far more interesting than you'd expect.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-05-02 12:36:58


VIEW MORE
story-2

Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren

Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-29 11:19:28


VIEW MORE
story-3

8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine

Slideshow: Before curves took over, Mercedes mastered the art of the straight line, and some of those shapes still look right today.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-25 12:05:49


VIEW MORE
story-4

Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction

Slideshow: The 190E Evolution II shows how a homologation necessity became a six-figure collector icon.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-22 17:53:47


VIEW MORE
story-5

Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know

Slideshow: Mercedes is turning one of its core nameplates electric, and the details show just how serious this shift is.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-21 13:58:06


VIEW MORE
story-6

Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know

Slideshow: Faster charging, longer range, and a controversial steer-by-wire system define the latest evolution of Mercedes-Benz EQS.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-15 10:35:34


VIEW MORE
story-7

5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve

Slideshow: These overlooked Mercedes-Benz models never got the spotlight, but they quietly delivered more than most remember.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-13 19:35:45


VIEW MORE
story-8

Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping

Slideshow: A well-used 1991 Mercedes-Benz 300D with more than one million miles is now looking for a new owner, and it still appears ready for more.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-10 10:05:15


VIEW MORE
story-9

10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used

Slideshow: From bulletproof sedans to surprisingly tough SUVs, these Mercedes models proved that the three-pointed star can go the distance.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-08 09:55:49


VIEW MORE