New to me C55 and new to MB World
06-08-2013, 11:04 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
New to me C55 and new to MB World
Hi Folks,
I just wanted to introduce myself being new to MB World. First of all, I would like to thank you all for the posts on the C55 which reinforced my choice on the model. I picked up a 2005 C55 last month with 94K km (58k mi) blk/blk. Did all the brakes (rotors and pads), replaced MAF sensor, HID ballast and bulb, misc bulbs. Other than that, not much else as the car was in relatively good condition.
In the few days I have driven it, it has been a blast. I recall my family's MBs over the years: '58 180D (W120), '61 220S (W111), '74 280SE (W116), '79 300D (W123), '94 120E 2.6 (W201), my own '80 280 (W123) and '91 260E (W124) and marvel at how MB performance has evolved.
In the past, I have always thought what if MB had BMW power. The C55 is it. I also read with interest the engine swaps being done to the C55. I may enjoy the car for a bit before tinkering with it
.
I'm thinking E55K engine/trans/diff swap down the road. I'm looking for E55K power (not looking to go "supersonic") and reliability in a C package.
I would appreciate to have guidance on the electrics (ECU/TCU/key circuit) and other thoughts. Thanks in advance.
I just wanted to introduce myself being new to MB World. First of all, I would like to thank you all for the posts on the C55 which reinforced my choice on the model. I picked up a 2005 C55 last month with 94K km (58k mi) blk/blk. Did all the brakes (rotors and pads), replaced MAF sensor, HID ballast and bulb, misc bulbs. Other than that, not much else as the car was in relatively good condition.
In the few days I have driven it, it has been a blast. I recall my family's MBs over the years: '58 180D (W120), '61 220S (W111), '74 280SE (W116), '79 300D (W123), '94 120E 2.6 (W201), my own '80 280 (W123) and '91 260E (W124) and marvel at how MB performance has evolved.
In the past, I have always thought what if MB had BMW power. The C55 is it. I also read with interest the engine swaps being done to the C55. I may enjoy the car for a bit before tinkering with it
.I'm thinking E55K engine/trans/diff swap down the road. I'm looking for E55K power (not looking to go "supersonic") and reliability in a C package.
I would appreciate to have guidance on the electrics (ECU/TCU/key circuit) and other thoughts. Thanks in advance.
06-09-2013, 09:16 AM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
18 Posts
2013 C63 AMG P31, 2014 GMC Sierra (6.2)
Welcome to the forum and congrats on the C55! If you are interested in doing the E55 engine swap then check out the threads from hooleyboy -- they will be of some interest to you...
06-09-2013, 03:51 PM
#4
Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: AZ and Amsterdam
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'03 C32 AMG, '07 E92 335i, '85 BMW5 E28
Where are you from?
06-10-2013, 03:42 PM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Hooleyboy installed a e55 supercharger on his former c55 and it cost him an arm and a leg, but it made much more power than an aftermarket supercharger.
06-10-2013, 06:06 PM
#7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thanks for the reply RLx02. I read hooleyboy's thread on it and viewed sunman's video on the engine swap. It appears that there are more things to swap other than just the mechanicals.
I think that the high compression ratio of the NA motor limits the aftermarket boost that can be fed into the intake without pre-igniting. It essentially is the same engine, M113, but the variant number 988 on the C and the 990 on the E and the 991 on the SL differentiate between them. The offerings from the aftermarket get the 990/991 to 600 hp easy. The best the Kleeman can do based on their catalog is in the mid 400s for the 988 - essentially the same as the stock 990 (E55K).
Then, if we're talking changing pistons, I'm asking myself: wouldn't swapping in the M113.991 make sense? Box stock, assuming the engine is in good condition, the 991 was rated at 493hp.
With the engine open, could porting+flow optimization/polishing/chamber+port equalization, cams, etc be far behind? Then, there are threads talking about transmission solenoids and valve body mods. Not to mention the diff. Also the ECU/TCU may not be the same as there are other harness connections that are different between the NA and the S/C engines. It becomes complicated and expensive. . . maybe why hooleyboy changed to an SL(?). I just can't pass up the compactness of the C and the accompanying utility.
The SL trunk is good enough for touring with a toothbrush+ packed. Won't fit my clubs. The E is just plain big for my taste. I find the CLK doors are too long in tight spaces. Respecting the W203 chassis capabilities, in reading posts from those that attempted to go "supersonic", I think 500hp should be a fair target -> very close to the 113.991 stock output.
I think that the high compression ratio of the NA motor limits the aftermarket boost that can be fed into the intake without pre-igniting. It essentially is the same engine, M113, but the variant number 988 on the C and the 990 on the E and the 991 on the SL differentiate between them. The offerings from the aftermarket get the 990/991 to 600 hp easy. The best the Kleeman can do based on their catalog is in the mid 400s for the 988 - essentially the same as the stock 990 (E55K).
Then, if we're talking changing pistons, I'm asking myself: wouldn't swapping in the M113.991 make sense? Box stock, assuming the engine is in good condition, the 991 was rated at 493hp.
With the engine open, could porting+flow optimization/polishing/chamber+port equalization, cams, etc be far behind? Then, there are threads talking about transmission solenoids and valve body mods. Not to mention the diff. Also the ECU/TCU may not be the same as there are other harness connections that are different between the NA and the S/C engines. It becomes complicated and expensive. . . maybe why hooleyboy changed to an SL(?). I just can't pass up the compactness of the C and the accompanying utility.
The SL trunk is good enough for touring with a toothbrush+ packed. Won't fit my clubs. The E is just plain big for my taste. I find the CLK doors are too long in tight spaces. Respecting the W203 chassis capabilities, in reading posts from those that attempted to go "supersonic", I think 500hp should be a fair target -> very close to the 113.991 stock output.
Last edited by C55er; 06-10-2013 at 09:49 PM. Reason: Incomplete
Trending Topics
06-12-2013, 12:31 PM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
maybe why hooleyboy changed to an SL(?). I just can't pass up the compactness of the C and the accompanying utility.
The SL trunk is good enough for touring with a toothbrush+ packed. Won't fit my clubs. The E is just plain big for my taste. I find the CLK doors are too long in tight spaces. Respecting the W203 chassis capabilities, in reading posts from those that attempted to go "supersonic", I think 500hp should be a fair target -> very close to the 113.991 stock output.
The SL trunk is good enough for touring with a toothbrush+ packed. Won't fit my clubs. The E is just plain big for my taste. I find the CLK doors are too long in tight spaces. Respecting the W203 chassis capabilities, in reading posts from those that attempted to go "supersonic", I think 500hp should be a fair target -> very close to the 113.991 stock output.
I like the SL, and I have a bad weather beater to drive so backseats/trunk space isn't really a necessity but I do like the sleeper factor of a sedan to the untrained eye. I think for me, the best route would be to keep an eye out for a low mileage c63 since 500hp can be had with just a flash of the ECU. Prices should be dropping a lot on them too as the new c63 biturbo is coming out soon.
01-10-2014, 06:43 PM
#12
Member
Congrats on the purchase.
