Bigger Throttle Bodies, Please Comment




I'll have a think about it today and get back to you later when I'm with my laptop. Cellphone FTL.
Also...do you have a pair of either smaller, narrower or lighter front wheels?




ahhh I thought it was a drag strip...
Yeah, as Skratch said, back to back pulls with the airboxes would be the first bet. I'd take the airflow readings with a pinch of salt though, because the bluetooth logger isn't entirely accurate all the time (even with a 0.1s refresh rate) there's a chance that the peak figures (or even the set of data from 5000-fuel cut) might not be entirely faithful, esp seeing as the peak figure on his last outing was 368g/s. If it was a drag strip, i'd have been more interested in seeing if the results from Superlubricty years ago are able to be replicated (ie, 1 tenth and 1mph).
Other than that, I'd have been interested in knowing how many mph it's worth to have narrower wheels, but I suppose that's not applicable for now either due to not being on a dragstrip. I'm going to be buying some lighter wheels soon (after my game-changer mod soon) and probably a slightly narrower width on the front, but it'll be a small reduction (going from 8.5" to 8.0")....Granted 'skinnies' on the front no doubt help with higher trap speeds, I was just curious to see if a slightly narrower wheel compared to stock would make any meaningful difference

If you want to be nice still.....perhaps just log your first laps when air and engine temps are what you'd consider to be 'cool' for what's normal in your climate. Then perhaps log after it's either heat-soaked or running high IATs after sitting idle for a bit. I'd just like to know how much timing your particular tune wants to pull when the engine is running hot/breathing hot air.
Either way - have fun and be safe buddy.




2:08 best lap and consistent 2:10-2:12’s. Almost 1.5g’s cornering. The wing made an enormous difference. It’s just so planted and stable now, goes exactly where I want it to go and the understeer is gone. It’s a dream to drive on track, not so much fun on the street anymore.
But I had some major issues today. I’m starting to break weird stuff and need to really rethink what I’m doing with this car because it’s getting dangerous with how fast it’s capable of going. I’ve basically found the limit of Mercedes engineering, maybe Michelin too. More later, it’s been a long day but I’ll leave this here for now...
Last edited by BLKROKT; Apr 25, 2018 at 12:22 AM.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG




https://m.tirerack.com/tires/tiretec....jsp?techid=35
Last edited by BLKROKT; Apr 25, 2018 at 09:29 AM.
More than enough. 96Y(XL) means it should be good to 1565lbs (on that corner) and 186mph, in addition to being extra reinforced (XL). I’m going after Michelin. That should never happen.
https://m.tirerack.com/tires/tiretec....jsp?techid=35
Not specifically directed at you, but this is why safety equipment is so important. You can never anticipate mechanical failure but you can hopefully at least be prepared for it.




The TBs made a big difference though. Massively better torque down low which is exactly what I needed.
Not specifically directed at you, but this is why safety equipment is so important. You can never anticipate mechanical failure but you can hopefully at least be prepared for it.
Yes I was smashing the rumble strips but that’s what they’re made for.
Thanks dude




When you approach Michelin, make sure you get in the F1 2005 jab...
If you want more low down torque and more snap on initial throttle tip in, you need a custom VVT tune. I'm sure you'll get it done eventually and love it. I find that I'm driving my car more 'gently' nowadays (ie, not revving much above 3000-4000rpm for a fun (but not fast) drive) because the low down response is so much better than before now.
It's a pity that information about the bigger throttle bodies and the ability to properly tune an M156 to the max wasn't available a few years ago. Still, i suppose at least it means the marque still has the ability to mix it with the big guns in the era of newer turbo cars (well, sort of).
on 30d 104 oct tune and 93 fuel the car ran hot! I mean really hot and would hit 201 engine coolant temps really easy and engine oil temps were a solid 10d higher.
10whp is not worth it and back to old file
on 30d 104 oct tune and 93 fuel the car ran hot! I mean really hot and would hit 201 engine coolant temps really easy and engine oil temps were a solid 10d higher.
10whp is not worth it and back to old file
Without wanting to sound mean though..why would you run 93 octane fuel on a tune designed for 104 octane...? Or have I missed something here..?
tune might also be a little leaner.




It'll be impossible to gauge the angles and exact contours from the pics, but i'm just keen to understand what's different enough to yield the 1mph that Superlubricity wrote about years ago. Desperate to get as close as possible to a car capable of a ~127 trap speed somehow.






