12.1@115.2mph with a piggyback
BTW, I was at Atco last Saturday and ran 12.035 with a 1.73-60' ....... it's so close, but not there yet!
Below is a pic of the launch, the camera is tilted a little which makes it look it's picking up the front wheel. Original track pic here http://www.davemilcarek.com/112517a/...20R4%20044.htm
BTW, I was at Atco last Saturday and ran 12.035 with a 1.73-60' ....... it's so close, but not there yet!
Below is a pic of the launch, the camera is tilted a little which makes it look it's picking up the front wheel. Original track pic here http://www.davemilcarek.com/112517a/...20R4%20044.htm
Great pic, thanks for pushing the limits of this car! really appreciate all your input so far as I have followed in your footsteps with every move and will run e30 next! and map 6
Great pic, thanks for pushing the limits of this car! really appreciate all your input so far as I have followed in your footsteps with every move and will run e30 next! and map 6
Not sure
Well, it's 70% RWD
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
From trap speed, the engine seems to like it, but not the transmission. 1st run, the track was very cold, spun 1st and a little in 2nd. The other 2 runs, the car hooked, but the transmission was freaking out and hesitating from 2nd to 3rd, I guess the rpm got up too quick for its liking.
BMS needs to do a little more development and activate the rest of the options, AFR reading, boost by gear, etc... and this thing will be a killer! There is hope \/ \/ but I'm not holding my breath.

From trap speed, the engine seems to like it, but not the transmission. 1st run, the track was very cold, spun 1st and a little in 2nd. The other 2 runs, the car hooked, but the transmission was freaking out and hesitating from 2nd to 3rd, I guess the rpm got up too quick for its liking.
BMS needs to do a little more development and activate the rest of the options, AFR reading, boost by gear, etc... and this thing will be a killer! There is hope \/ \/ but I'm not holding my breath.

Either way, 116-117mph with just a piggyback isn't bad
Because with the boost levels you are running, you have done nothing to the A/F ratio. So it would be fair to say that the engine is running really really lean. That really does not sound good to me, unless you know of something different.
Dunno man. If anything blows up God forbid, Mercedes by the way logs peak Turbo pressure in the logs. And disconnecting the battery would not get rid of it. I am telling this from my very recent experience with the warranty dept in Germany. It is unfrigging real the parameters these guys can pull. Things no one even knew about with these new cars Mercedes was logging in the background. I will do a write up of my experience when I get some time. But yeah. Just giving you a heads up.
Because with the boost levels you are running, you have done nothing to the A/F ratio. So it would be fair to say that the engine is running really really lean. That really does not sound good to me, unless you know of something different.
Dunno man. If anything blows up God forbid, Mercedes by the way logs peak Turbo pressure in the logs. And disconnecting the battery would not get rid of it. I am telling this from my very recent experience with the warranty dept in Germany. It is unfrigging real the parameters these guys can pull. Things no one even knew about with these new cars Mercedes was logging in the background. I will do a write up of my experience when I get some time. But yeah. Just giving you a heads up.
THese piggy back ECUs work off the ECM and ensure A/F is ideal prior to raising boost. you aren't overwriting the factory codes just tricking it into feeding more boost while keeping a consistent A/F. Terry can explain more but we do not have full control like a flash tune that would overwrite the parameters entirely, then you should be concerned,
https://mbworld.org/forums/c450-c43-...ml#post7309364
... it really applies to any piggyback tuning device, not just the RaceChip product.
https://mbworld.org/forums/c450-c43-...ml#post7309364
... it really applies to any piggyback tuning device, not just the RaceChip product.
For 91 octane, stick with map1. 93 octane and above, map 2. map6 can be used to raise or lower boost curves in 500rpm increments. For example, if map1 is not enough to get you a good launch and map2 is too much, you can mimic map2 setting with slightly less boost around 2krpm curve. You can also make a map that's in between 1 and 2. While map6 is and end user map, it still has built in safeties, you can request as much boost as you want, it doesn't mean it will allow you.
As for Mercedes and ECU logs, this applies to any tune, especially full ECU tunes. However, piggybacks are designed to fool the boost sensor, so basically the ECU is logging the "fooled" values, unlike full ECU tunes. But, I'm sure Mercedes
Additionally, none of the US tuners actually "tune", they just buy European canned tunes and bench jigs to flash ECU's.... even the ones who claim "custom dyno tune"
Search for a car here, and it will list re-sellers the European tune guys use: https://www.evc.de/en/product/ols/re...earch=mercedes
Lastly, wear and tear applies any time you tune and/or push your car, regardless of the tune. If you don't want to take any chances, just keep your car stock.
For 91 octane, stick with map1. 93 octane and above, map 2. map6 can be used to raise or lower boost curves in 500rpm increments. For example, if map1 is not enough to get you a good launch and map2 is too much, you can mimic map2 setting with slightly less boost around 2krpm curve. You can also make a map that's in between 1 and 2. While map6 is and end user map, it still has built in safeties, you can request as much boost as you want, it doesn't mean it will allow you.
As for Mercedes and ECU logs, this applies to any tune, especially full ECU tunes. However, piggybacks are designed to fool the boost sensor, so basically the ECU is logging the "fooled" values, unlike full ECU tunes. But, I'm sure Mercedes
Additionally, none of the US tuners actually "tune", they just buy European canned tunes and bench jigs to flash ECU's.... even the ones who claim "custom dyno tune"
Search for a car here, and it will list re-sellers the European tune guys use: https://www.evc.de/en/product/ols/re...earch=mercedes
Lastly, wear and tear applies any time you tune and/or push your car, regardless of the tune. If you don't want to take any chances, just keep your car stock.
For 91 octane, stick with map1. 93 octane and above, map 2. map6 can be used to raise or lower boost curves in 500rpm increments. For example, if map1 is not enough to get you a good launch and map2 is too much, you can mimic map2 setting with slightly less boost around 2krpm curve. You can also make a map that's in between 1 and 2. While map6 is and end user map, it still has built in safeties, you can request as much boost as you want, it doesn't mean it will allow you.
As for Mercedes and ECU logs, this applies to any tune, especially full ECU tunes. However, piggybacks are designed to fool the boost sensor, so basically the ECU is logging the "fooled" values, unlike full ECU tunes. But, I'm sure Mercedes
Additionally, none of the US tuners actually "tune", they just buy European canned tunes and bench jigs to flash ECU's.... even the ones who claim "custom dyno tune"
Search for a car here, and it will list re-sellers the European tune guys use: https://www.evc.de/en/product/ols/re...earch=mercedes
Lastly, wear and tear applies any time you tune and/or push your car, regardless of the tune. If you don't want to take any chances, just keep your car stock.
If BMS decides to continue development to JB4, it will have a lot more capabilities. It might not be open-source \/ capabilities, but anything will be appreciated.
I had that on past cars too and I currently have one on my evo, but since I'm not constantly "tuning" and tweaking I don't feel it's necessary on this car.
If BMS decides to continue development to JB4, it will have a lot more capabilities. It might not be open-source \/ capabilities, but anything will be appreciated.
Map0/Stock--222whp/274wtq
Map1----------352whp/376wtq
Map2----------358whp/392wtq
Map6----------374whp/407wtq
However, doesn't the Map0/Stock number look entirely out of whack? Assuming the car's rating of about 362 HP is somewhat accurate, 222 HP at the wheels would mean about a 38% drivetrain loss (and the other readings don't look overly conservative, so a stingy-reading dyno doesn't appear to be the issue). Given that the 9G-tronic design specifically targets efficiency, I'd guess that the drivetrain losses are nicely under 20%. In addition, that would mean that the Map1 wheel HP was a 63% improvement over the Map0/Stock's 222 wheel HP.
All the other numbers seem to be in line, at least with respect to each other. Whether it's actually 374 wheel HP or not is less important than the relationships and percentage differences ... oh, and the results which, in your case, seem to be well proven.
Had you given any thought to this? Did the "dyno people" share any insight on this?
However, doesn't the Map0/Stock number look entirely out of whack? Assuming the car's rating of about 362 HP is somewhat accurate, 222 HP at the wheels would mean about a 38% drivetrain loss (and the other readings don't look overly conservative, so a stingy-reading dyno doesn't appear to be the issue). Given that the 9G-tronic design specifically targets efficiency, I'd guess that the drivetrain losses are nicely under 20%. In addition, that would mean that the Map1 wheel HP was a 63% improvement over the Map0/Stock's 222 wheel HP.
All the other numbers seem to be in line, at least with respect to each other. Whether it's actually 374 wheel HP or not is less important than the relationships and percentage differences ... oh, and the results which, in your case, seem to be well proven.
Had you given any thought to this? Did the "dyno people" share any insight on this?









