Who has 350 WRHP+ in there C43
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bay area
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43K AMG 436 rwhp moded ML55 AMG 190td 190e 2.3-16v moded EK9 Civic
Who has 350 WRHP+ in there C43
So I'm curious to find other members on here who 350 wrhp + in there c43 or c36. I would also like to find what areas they are in.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C43 AMG 5.5 - 396.4HP
With WRHP it is meant 'rear wheel horse power'. Shouldn't be the shortcut RWHP? Or is there another definition in USA as in Europe? It is confusing me since long.
Form my power diagram I can tell you, my engine power with 5.5 engine is 396 bhp, nominal power DIN is 402. My rear wheel horse power is 262,4.
To obtain 350 or 400 rear wheel horse power, the engine power should be about 600 bhp or more, I believe?
Or is the power loss more or less the same if I would install a Compressor on the engine (f.e. 400hp=262rwhp, 400+100hp=262+100rwhp)?
Form my power diagram I can tell you, my engine power with 5.5 engine is 396 bhp, nominal power DIN is 402. My rear wheel horse power is 262,4.
To obtain 350 or 400 rear wheel horse power, the engine power should be about 600 bhp or more, I believe?
Or is the power loss more or less the same if I would install a Compressor on the engine (f.e. 400hp=262rwhp, 400+100hp=262+100rwhp)?
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
I'm fairly certain he meant 'RWHP', to show power at the rear wheels (as opposed to at the crank).
I think you will find North American tuners will only show WHP in their tuning figures, as opposed to crank figures.
I think you will find North American tuners will only show WHP in their tuning figures, as opposed to crank figures.
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
With WRHP it is meant 'rear wheel horse power'. Shouldn't be the shortcut RWHP? Or is there another definition in USA as in Europe? It is confusing me since long.
Form my power diagram I can tell you, my engine power with 5.5 engine is 396 bhp, nominal power DIN is 402. My rear wheel horse power is 262,4.
To obtain 350 or 400 rear wheel horse power, the engine power should be about 600 bhp or more, I believe?
Or is the power loss more or less the same if I would install a Compressor on the engine (f.e. 400hp=262rwhp, 400+100hp=262+100rwhp)?
Form my power diagram I can tell you, my engine power with 5.5 engine is 396 bhp, nominal power DIN is 402. My rear wheel horse power is 262,4.
To obtain 350 or 400 rear wheel horse power, the engine power should be about 600 bhp or more, I believe?
Or is the power loss more or less the same if I would install a Compressor on the engine (f.e. 400hp=262rwhp, 400+100hp=262+100rwhp)?
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
This should be a short list. The only 2 I know of putting down 350+ RWHP for sure are you and Motorsport3 (370 RWHP), money-one might be close...
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
I put down 240 RWHP, my motor is rated for 302HP at the crank
302 * 80% (20% for drive train loss) = 241.6
Trending Topics
#9
Super Member
Oh boring. Measuring each others' horsepower dicks are we? *Le sigh*, I feel like a black sheep trying to race these cars, others just prefer to put shiny rims on them, take pictures and discuss the cars over coffee...
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Some people are into racing others are into aesthetics, is one better than the other? To each their own.
If you prefer racing great but if you have nothing constructive to add to the thread then don't post...
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
HAHAHAHAHAHA
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
I had 350 WHP in a dream the other day but I don't think that counts... I'll check back in here after this winter's make over though. ;-)
#14
Super Member
Not trying to start flame wars, trying to find like minded folks. To each their own, yes. I just wish this side of the preference had more than 3 members on the whole forum.
#15
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
Ok here is a different opinion ( I read all topics but I just dont have much to add to them). I enjoy having stock hp in my c36 it is fast enough i can understand that there are people who would like to have more power but still i,m happy. I enjoy just cruising my amg, somethimes I go to Germany with my dad we enjoy the no limit autobahn. My stock c36 keeps up with all kind of cars new Porsches Bmw etc we did 260 and still had rpm left this is where the old amg can show off what it still has left it keeps up with very fast modern cars. Actually from a 0-100 the difference aint even that big with a c63. But some people just want more than this so they swap the engine to the 55 they are free to do this i,m sure it is a blast to drive with the swap. But for me it is even without it. ps my dad also had a w202 c180 with a 1.8 engine 125hp and even this car does 200km/h + without being afraid that it explodes. My dream car is the w202 c36 I enjoy it very much wouldnt trade it for a c63 amg. Everybody should just do what he likes with his OWN car
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Ok here is a different opinion ( I read all topics but I just dont have much to add to them). I enjoy having stock hp in my c36 it is fast enough i can understand that there are people who would like to have more power but still i,m happy. I enjoy just cruising my amg, somethimes I go to Germany with my dad we enjoy the no limit autobahn. My stock c36 keeps up with all kind of cars new Porsches Bmw etc we did 260 and still had rpm left this is where the old amg can show off what it still has left it keeps up with very fast modern cars. Actually from a 0-100 the difference aint even that big with a c63. But some people just want more than this so they swap the engine to the 55 they are free to do this i,m sure it is a blast to drive with the swap. But for me it is even without it. ps my dad also had a w202 c180 with a 1.8 engine 125hp and even this car does 200km/h + without being afraid that it explodes. My dream car is the w202 c36 I enjoy it very much wouldnt trade it for a c63 amg. Everybody should just do what he likes with his OWN car
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
I was thinking the same thing... Unless he's not telling us something he would get CRUSHED
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: South Florida
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
1998 C43, 2017 Honda Accord Sport
Ladies, ladies, it's all about the power-to-weight ratio. I've shaved a good 100lbs off my car and still getting lighter. A 55 motor or supercharger would be nice, but the less weight makes the car go ever so slightly quicker.
#22
Super Member
As Colin Chapman noted adding power makes you quick on the straights but adding lightness makes you quick everywhere else. Unsprung weight out the door first.
#24
MBWorld Fanatic!
#25
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
The RWP differs depending on the type of dyno used .
A load dyno which places resistance on the rollers to better simulate a road surface usually shows about a 30% drivetrain loss on an automatic Merc.
About 5% less on a manual transmission Merc.
The inertia dyno which has free spinning rollers would only show about a 15%-18% drivetrain loss.
There are other factors that when dialed in can effect the RWP...car weight, ambient temp and hunidity are a few
Ed A.
A load dyno which places resistance on the rollers to better simulate a road surface usually shows about a 30% drivetrain loss on an automatic Merc.
About 5% less on a manual transmission Merc.
The inertia dyno which has free spinning rollers would only show about a 15%-18% drivetrain loss.
There are other factors that when dialed in can effect the RWP...car weight, ambient temp and hunidity are a few
Ed A.