C36 AMG with Piggyback ECU Upgrade
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
C36 AMG with Piggyback ECU Upgrade
Hey guys,
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Hey guys,
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
And then you woke up!!!
Those #'s to the wheel tq wise are similar to SRT8 #'s. That's even more rw/tq than a E60 M5,E39 M5,AMG N/A 55's.
Please bro ,try again!
Over 300ft lbs of TQ! Cmon dude you r insulting the intelligence of some good folks here.
Last edited by ProjectC55; Jul 6, 2008 at 07:02 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 17
From: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
With just a chip!
And then you woke up!!!
Those #'s to the wheel tq wise are similar to SRT8 #'s. That's even more rw/tq than a E60 M5,E39 M5,AMG N/A 55's.
Please bro ,try again! Over 300ft lbs of TQ! Cmon dude you r insulting the intelligence of some good folks here.
And then you woke up!!!
Those #'s to the wheel tq wise are similar to SRT8 #'s. That's even more rw/tq than a E60 M5,E39 M5,AMG N/A 55's.
Please bro ,try again!
Over 300ft lbs of TQ! Cmon dude you r insulting the intelligence of some good folks here.I must be really, really, really missing something....
Didn't at one time in the real world torque equal horsepower at 5252 RPM ????
And that torque was always greater then hp below 5252 amd horsepower always higher then torque above 5252 rpm ????
If I pick a point on the posted dyno chart, let's say post chip 200HP @ 4000RPM and use the tried and true indistputable formula:
Torque = HP x RPM / 5252
T =200 x 4000 / 5252
800000/5252 = 152 lbft of torque.
But stranger then fiction the dyno reads 350 lbft of torque....
A bit of messing with the dyno, in reality not much better then stock
Sounds like another test done in Sweden....
Last edited by RBYCC; Jul 6, 2008 at 07:23 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
The tq graph is on the left and the hp graph is on the right.
Last edited by ProjectC55; Jul 6, 2008 at 07:17 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 17
From: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Hey guys,
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
One of my customers wanted me to share this with the C36 community. He doesn't frequent the forums but he got some pretty amazing results on his C36. Here is the dyno graph. This just further proves just how much potential these C36 AMG engines have. The HP gains weren't huge but the torque gains were phenomenal. enjoy
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
wow you guys really are something special, those TQ numbers are in NM!!! look at the damn scale haha.
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
this is almost sad, you know for modding "experts" you guys should have picked up on something as simple as that before looking like a bunch of fools jeeeez . I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys.
p.s. owned
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
this is almost sad, you know for modding "experts" you guys should have picked up on something as simple as that before looking like a bunch of fools jeeeez
. I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys. p.s. owned
Last edited by Dr. C36; Jul 6, 2008 at 09:29 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
No, I don't really think that anyone would have just picked up on that. That's great that you are getting good pulls, but you seriously should leave the angry attitude at the door. We are all on the same team here.
I don't claim to be an expert by any means, but the other guys who have posted in this thread do have quite a bit of experience. Trust me, I want to believe this just as much as the next guy, as I will hopefully be getting into a 3.6L 190e sometime relatively soon (like I said in a different thread). This kind of power would turn a w201 into a rocket-ship
edit: so are the HP #'s in Ps then? Because that would be the only reason why N-m would be reasonable units to use....
I don't claim to be an expert by any means, but the other guys who have posted in this thread do have quite a bit of experience. Trust me, I want to believe this just as much as the next guy, as I will hopefully be getting into a 3.6L 190e sometime relatively soon (like I said in a different thread). This kind of power would turn a w201 into a rocket-ship
edit: so are the HP #'s in Ps then? Because that would be the only reason why N-m would be reasonable units to use....
Last edited by FLYNAVY; Jul 6, 2008 at 09:57 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
wow you guys really are something special, those TQ numbers are in NM!!! look at the damn scale haha.
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
p.s. owned
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
p.s. owned
1. 302hp 302ftlbs of tq for C43
2. C36 is heavier than a C43
3. 2.82 or 2.87 diff in the C36 vs 3.06 diff in the C43
Why don't you compare a modded C43 vs a modded C36,both with equivalent mods and then harass us!
Also,is this the only dyno you have?
What was the piggyback system that this customer used?
Show me a N/A C36 running high 13's as well.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 17
From: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
Firstly what kind of dyno measures NM and converts to HP instead of the standard KW ??????
I'll stand by my previous calculation as below:
Torque = HP x RPM / 5252
T =200 x 4000 / 5252
800000/5252 = 152 lbft of torque.
Do the calculation at 5000 RPM and you get 238 lbft via calculation, but chart indicates 355.3NM 0r 355.3 x .737 = 262lbft ?????
By all the laws of physics, give HP, RPM and as above you solve for torque.
Chart that you posted still doesn't work out as both figures don't equal at 5252 RPM, even after the conversion.
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
this is almost sad, you know for modding "experts" you guys should have picked up on something as simple as that before looking like a bunch of fools jeeeez . I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys.
p.s. owned
. I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys. p.s. owned
If you know anything about dynos , it's very easy to manipulate output on an inertia type.
No ambient temp or humidity is indicated, no knowledge of heat soak and type of cooling fan.
Out of curiousity how fast has your modded C36 gone, easiest to prove would be an 1/8 or 1/4 time slip.
Dyno numbers are just tuning tools and don't reflect real world conditions
Last edited by RBYCC; Jul 7, 2008 at 02:10 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
I think there is only one fool in this room, as your numbers are bogus...
If you know anything about dynos , it's very easy to manipulate output on an inertia type.
No ambient temp or humidity is indicated, no knowledge of heat soak and type of cooling fan.
Out of curiousity how fast has your modded C36 gone, easiest to prove would be an 1/8 or 1/4 time slip.
Dyno numbers are just tuning tools and don't refelect real world conditions
He needs to be put on time out for constantly posting misinformation,(lies)exaggerations.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 5
From: Kirkland, WA
500E Signal Rot
Dyno chart says Unichip, after checking their site, they don't list any applications for their piggy back ECU that fit the C36.
I would like to know more about how this was done.
I would like to know more about how this was done.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
From: Rochester, MN
sounds like airplane
and how much doubt does it cast on all of his other numbers he posts?
I've said it many times now- the "DR" makes himself seem unprofessional and full of crap all the time (and obviously knows nothing himself). His products (which obviously aren't made by him) might provide improvements to the cars etc., and i would like to think that's the case--- the problem is that he is constantly doing his best to discredit himself.
I've said it many times now- the "DR" makes himself seem unprofessional and full of crap all the time (and obviously knows nothing himself). His products (which obviously aren't made by him) might provide improvements to the cars etc., and i would like to think that's the case--- the problem is that he is constantly doing his best to discredit himself.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 17
From: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
wow you guys really are something special, those TQ numbers are in NM!!! look at the damn scale haha.
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
this is almost sad, you know for modding "experts" you guys should have picked up on something as simple as that before looking like a bunch of fools jeeeez . I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys.
p.s. owned
If you convert to ft lbs. it is 246TQ before & 265ft lbs afterwards. The car was slightly modded on the before and this was done on an chassis dyno which usually reads a bit higher than dynojets, using a low drivetrain loss that puts it in the low 300s TQ and high 200s HP (using 15% loss comes out to about 298HP/310TQ), completely realistic for a piggy back system w/ intake & exhaust.
this is almost sad, you know for modding "experts" you guys should have picked up on something as simple as that before looking like a bunch of fools jeeeez
. I will be expecting an apology from each one of you (not that i'll ever get one). Man I'd be embarrassed if I were you guys. p.s. owned
"Chip: I've never seen 20+ HP from ANY chip on ANY benz minus the forced induction guys, on an NA engine the most you will see is probably 8-10 crank HP ( notice he stated "crank" not RWP from a dyno
)and even then thats very optimistic numbers. Also After seeing how unbelievably rock solid the stock ECUs Air/Fuel numbers were (literally dead on @ 13.0:1 across the entire power band pretty much) I really don't think it will help honestly, I would spend my money elsewhere). " And then he clearly stated:
"Honestly I was VERY impressed with the build quality, These really were the true hand built AMG engines with HWA stamps on everything. They really over built that motor to the extreme. The heads seemed very free flowing, I doubt you could get much more power out of them with a port and polish (maybe 5HP tops). "
So who should we believe...you? or you?
What is it???
Your "expert" ability to produce mega power or did the real "expert" AMG do about all they could on the old M104
So much for speaking out of both sides of your mouth
Ed A.
P.S.
Don't get me started on your "ricer" crank pulley on an engine that if the pulley is not under driven still has gobs of parasitic losses.
I'm not an "expert' as you...just another "foolish novice"
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 5
From: Kirkland, WA
500E Signal Rot
BTW, the Unichip piggy back adapter is not a "chip", it is a fully programmable piggy back ECU, that if tuned on a dyno, can yield some excellent gains, but according to Unichip, they don't make a piggy back adapter for the C36 or most of the common applications (didn't look up all MB models).
As I don't want to get into this particular flame war, I just want to know;
1. Is this a stock Unichip piggy back ecu made for the C36 or another MB?
2. If it was modified, what needed to be done to interface it into the OE harness.
3. What is the A/F after tuning?
4. Part number of the Unichip piggy back adapter?
As I don't want to get into this particular flame war, I just want to know;
1. Is this a stock Unichip piggy back ecu made for the C36 or another MB?
2. If it was modified, what needed to be done to interface it into the OE harness.
3. What is the A/F after tuning?
4. Part number of the Unichip piggy back adapter?
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
'98 C43 AMG. Obsidian Blk w/2 tone slvr/blk interior
what the hell is the matter with you people, stop bashing the guy, he never picks apart your posts and tells you youre wrong for whatever reasons, he just posts some incredulous claims sometimes... who cares, we all like to dream sometimes, no?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
For yrs,post after post after post the Alias Omey,Alias Dr.C36.alias E55PWR, has been posting misinformation on several occassions. At one time I believe he was banned from this forum (Alias Omey Homey).
We are here to read and learn not create foolishness with misinformation so yes some of us DO care..
Nobody here just randomly pics on his threads for the hell of it. Why do you think he posts with TWO different handles as well. is that weird or is that silly.
B4 you comment as you have above you should know the whole history first, b4 you try chastising the members on this forum.
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 807
Likes: 0
From: CA BayArea
1997 C36AMG
yea man
he's got a point, u spread stupid **** on here, people believe it n try it, blow there engine or sumting.....but hey, u gotta be smart n every man to his own, Dr.c36 has always been a help to me, n if sumting seems wrong u ask ?'s that all.
