When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Very interesting posts between the OP and Michael Almeyda. Seems that although they have similar quarter mile times the full ecu tune flash nets a 6+ mph trap opposed to the plug n play. Tells me the ecu tunes provide better top end power opposed to the plug n play.
Very interesting posts between the OP and Michael Almeyda. Seems that although they have similar quarter mile times the full ecu tune flash nets a 6+ mph trap opposed to the plug n play. Tells me the ecu tunes provide better top end power opposed to the plug n play.
Indeed a proper ECU tune will net in a better overall performance, of course that comes at a price. As much as I have admired cars with piggy backs I never thought about getting one myself because of the issues I hear people talking about. Non the less, piggy backs are good bang for the buck when they work.
My fat *** cab at 4200lbs with 19" rims plus my 200lbs body ran a 12.49 on my Stage 1 EC tune. I'm positive I could get a sedan (weighing 460lbs) less into 11's on a stage 1 EC tune. Pretty sad the best time AMR has on a stage 1 is 12.2 with a light (3800lbs) sedan on 18" rims.
My fat *** cab at 4200lbs with 19" rims plus my 200lbs body ran a 12.49 on my Stage 1 EC tune. I'm positive I could get a sedan (weighing 460lbs) less into 11's on a stage 1 EC tune. Pretty sad the best time AMR has on a stage 1 is 12.2 with a light (3800lbs) sedan on 18" rims.
Don't count me and my car. AMR is a better tune. I am just a terrible driver LOL
Don't count me and my car. AMR is a better tune. I am just a terrible driver LOL
On what basis is AMR a better tune? You have a stage 2 on a 3800lbs sedan and only trapped 6MPH more than my stage 1 4200lbs convertible. I've never seen a AMR sedan hit lower than 12.2. Do you really think if I trimmed the 460lbs on my car with my tune that I couldn't hit 12.0 minimum? It's basic math.
On what basis is AMR a better tune? You have a stage 2 on a 3800lbs sedan and only trapped 6MPH more than my stage 1 4200lbs convertible. I've never seen a AMR sedan hit lower than 12.2. Do you really think if I trimmed the 460lbs on my car with my tune that I couldn't hit 12.0 minimum? It's basic math.
Again,, I'm a bad driver. You are a better one.
and you are right it is basic math and numbers don't lie
Stock C450 puts down somewhere around 300whp. Mind you my car base pull already had downpipes installed and car was running lean so it put down 347.
Tuned by AMR My car made 425 whp and 510+ wheel torque.
Please show me how your better EC tune did better by posting your before/after wheel numbers
Oh and FYI Almost everyone here knows that I have three vehicle tuned by EC so don't think I am just hating on some company I don't know. Simply on this platform (C450/43) AMR is the leader.
Again,, I'm a bad driver. You are a better one.
and you are right it is basic math and numbers don't lie
Stock C450 puts down somewhere around 300whp. Mind you my car base pull already had downpipes installed and car was running lean so it put down 347.
Tuned by AMR My car made 425 whp and 510+ wheel torque.
Please show me how your better EC tune did better by posting your before/after wheel numbers
Oh and FYI Almost everyone here knows that I have three vehicle tuned by EC so don't think I am just hating on some company I don't know. Simply on this platform (C450/43) AMR is the leader.
Ive posted dyno's before on a dyno jet, not whatever AMR uses. I made 80whp and 100wtq. All of that's wonderful but I am putting down real numbers at the track. You said yourself in this thread - the best sedan you've seen posted by AMR is 12.4 at 112mph. I hit that time in a fat 4200 (460lbs more than a sedan) car that apparently has a lesser of a tune.
You might have other EC tuned cars but you should stop drinking the kool aid. Your car is stage 2 and a sedan and only trapping 6mph on top of me.
Ive posted dyno's before on a dyno jet, not whatever AMR uses. I made 80whp and 100wtq. All of that's wonderful but I am putting down real numbers at the track. You said yourself in this thread - the best sedan you've seen posted by AMR is 12.4 at 112mph. I hit that time in a fat 4200 (460lbs more than a sedan) car that apparently has a lesser of a tune.
You might have other EC tuned cars but you should stop drinking the kool aid. Your car is stage 2 and a sedan and only trapping 6mph on top of me.
Great response. Way to justify AMR being the better tune "because you said so" or because of their ****ty dyno of your stage 2 car lol
Show me a stage 1 AMR sedan doing better than 12.2. You know how my track time would translate in a sedan.
Hurts after you spend $2000USD on a tune only to find out it's not the best. Should've stuck with your boys at EC.
You again. Amazing. NO matter how much a person shows, tells or even proves that the AMR tune is more superior, you continue to act like you do not know ANYTHING.
E.T. is based off of reaction time, weight of the car, driver, etc...
MPH is based off of horsepower. Simple math. USE google.
CLEARLY AMR provides higher MPH than any other tune. I did a search on this forum and came up with more than 3 posts containing track times and timeslips.
You again. Amazing. NO matter how much a person shows, tells or even proves that the AMR tune is more superior, you continue to act like you do not know ANYTHING.
E.T. is based off of reaction time, weight of the car, driver, etc...
MPH is based off of horsepower. Simple math. USE google.
CLEARLY AMR provides higher MPH than any other tune. I did a search on this forum and came up with more than 3 posts containing track times and timeslips.
Math is your friend, learn to use it.
You're not very smart, are you?
110.5MPH trap in a 4200lb cabriolet is equivalent to a 115mph trap in a 3800lbs sedan. AMR has not trapped 117MPH on a stage 1. This car is stage 2! Get your head out of your *** just because you picked your tune for the wrong reasons.
110.5MPH trap in a 4200lb cabriolet is equivalent to a 115mph trap in a 3800lbs sedan. AMR has not trapped 117MPH on a stage 1. This car is stage 2! Get your head out of your *** just because you picked your tune for the wrong reasons.
:awn:: lack of education with the younger generation is astounding.
Obviously you continue to prove that you are a young kid who is using mommy cabriolet.
Why dont you use GOOGLE like a big boy and check for yourself.
It does matter if you don't turn "traction control" off.Even though you don't detect any wheelspin the control system will cut power & torque at the slightest hint of wheelspin.You may not feel it but the system can sense it.That is why I think using the "Dyno" mode will help.In the dyno mode all traction controls are turned off.
...... + don't go through the water box, drive around it
Is any tune safe on the stock water cooler? As far as I know it runs on engine coolant at 90°C or am I wrong?
Is there any fmic upgrade M
Regards
This car has a charge cooler located in front of the engine block directly In the middle. A charge cooler ( water used to cool compressed air) is lot more efficient than an air to air Intercooler.
I stumbled on this post, and if you filter thru the insults, I didn't see any comments about what fuel was being used. On one of my pre MB vehicles, I had an APR Stg 2 tune that responded very well to race gas, which I believe was 102 octane..
This car has a charge cooler located in front of the engine block directly In the middle. A charge cooler ( water used to cool compressed air) is lot more efficient than an air to air Intercooler.
Even on highway runs?
I've always known that water coolers were better for drag or short course tracks.
BTW, is there any water flow diagram to understand how it works on my car?
Even on highway runs?
I've always known that water coolers were better for drag or short course tracks.
BTW, is there any water flow diagram to understand how it works on my car?
Regards.
I believe there is a rudimentary flow chart of the system somewhere on this forum, that a member posted up with hand-drawn arrows overlayed on a palleted engine. I've seen it, but have no idea what the thread title was.
The air-to-liquid coolers used in drag racing and short track are almost always separate, closed systems, with a dedicated reservoir of water. And they are also usually very small volume systems, especially in drag racing scenarios where weight needs to be minimized. Heat soak is rarely a concern, as ice is added to the reservoirs between runs to keep temps down. A system like that would not be effective for extended highway use.
The M276 has a separate, low-temp [relative], reverse flow, circuit of coolant and a separate expansion tank, so it uses engine coolant on a separate circuit, which is similar to a stand-alone system, but with much higher volume and efficiency. From the logs I've seen on modified cars, the stock system on the C43 is very efficient at keeping the charge temps controlled, even on cars running 8-10 psi over stock.
I believe there is a rudimentary flow chart of the system somewhere on this forum, that a member posted up with hand-drawn arrows overlayed on a palleted engine. I've seen it, but have no idea what the thread title was.
The air-to-liquid coolers used in drag racing and short track are almost always separate, closed systems, with a dedicated reservoir of water. And they are also usually very small volume systems, especially in drag racing scenarios where weight needs to be minimized. Heat soak is rarely a concern, as ice is added to the reservoirs between runs to keep temps down. A system like that would not be effective for extended highway use.
The M276 has a separate, low-temp [relative], reverse flow, circuit of coolant and a separate expansion tank, so it uses engine coolant on a separate circuit, which is similar to a stand-alone system, but with much higher volume and efficiency. From the logs I've seen on modified cars, the stock system on the C43 is very efficient at keeping the charge temps controlled, even on cars running 8-10 psi over stock.
Finally, a good threat with NUMBERS.
Let's revive it with updated 2022 results...
1/4 mile is not common in my country.
Posting dyno results, 0-100 km/h, 100-200 km/h.
Stock ECU with pipes installed Stage 2 flash 480 hp and 700 torque Stock vs. st.2 graph Draggy 0-100 Draggy 100-200
Dyno Stock:
0-100: 4.22 sec
100-200: 10.47 sec
Dyno Stage 2:
0-100: 3.58 sec
100-200: 8.93 sec
Speck:
Downpipes: Logosmotorwork (LEM monster pipes)
Air filter: K&N
Wheels: stock R19 AMG
Tyres: Micheling pilot sport 4S
Tune: Street Unit ECU local st.2 tune
09-26-2017, 11:20 AM
awn:: lack of education with the younger generation is astounding. 
