Weistec highway mileage... WTF? (My new kit review, part 1 of 2)
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 640
Likes: 1
none
Weistec highway mileage... WTF? (My new kit review, part 1 of 2)
So... yeah. Since picking up my car this past Friday, I've put around 500 miles on it and this keeps happening when I drive to work:
Averaging 61mph door to door on my commute I get this insane (relatively speaking) mileage. I've never seen better than 22.6mpg over the same route in the past. When I filled up I double checked that the computer was reading right by dividing the distance travelled/gallons added, and it actually is.
Mike at Weistec partially attributes it to the lower duty cycle of the larger injectors in the Stage II kit.
Don't get me wrong, she drinks gas like an Irish alcoholic on St. Patty's day when I'm driving hard (and I have NO problem with that), but this just blew my mind. With the improved mileage I only have to drive another 153,000 highway miles for the kit to pay for itself! How awesome is that?
More of the REAL review to follow...
Josh
Averaging 61mph door to door on my commute I get this insane (relatively speaking) mileage. I've never seen better than 22.6mpg over the same route in the past. When I filled up I double checked that the computer was reading right by dividing the distance travelled/gallons added, and it actually is.
Mike at Weistec partially attributes it to the lower duty cycle of the larger injectors in the Stage II kit.
Don't get me wrong, she drinks gas like an Irish alcoholic on St. Patty's day when I'm driving hard (and I have NO problem with that), but this just blew my mind. With the improved mileage I only have to drive another 153,000 highway miles for the kit to pay for itself! How awesome is that?
More of the REAL review to follow...
Josh
Last edited by C63 Guy; May 1, 2012 at 10:19 PM.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
2011 GT3RS, C63 AMG
Just double check if the injector rescaling was performed, this is very common, as the duty cycle is lower in bigger injectors, so it will fool the computer, ''thinking'' the gas mileage is better as it doesn't pulse as much.
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 640
Likes: 1
none
Josh
Trending Topics
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
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
So... yeah. Since picking up my car this past Friday, I've put around 500 miles on it and this keeps happening when I drive to work:
Averaging 61mph door to door on my commute I get this insane (relatively speaking) mileage. I've never seen better than 22.6mpg over the same route in the past. When I filled up I double checked that the computer was reading right by dividing the distance travelled/gallons added, and it actually is.
Mike at Weistec partially attributes it to the lower duty cycle of the larger injectors in the Stage II kit.
Don't get me wrong, she drinks gas like an Irish alcoholic on St. Patty's day when I'm driving hard (and I have NO problem with that), but this just blew my mind. With the improved mileage I only have to drive another 153,000 highway miles for the kit to pay for itself! How awesome is that?
More of the REAL review to follow...
Josh
Averaging 61mph door to door on my commute I get this insane (relatively speaking) mileage. I've never seen better than 22.6mpg over the same route in the past. When I filled up I double checked that the computer was reading right by dividing the distance travelled/gallons added, and it actually is.
Mike at Weistec partially attributes it to the lower duty cycle of the larger injectors in the Stage II kit.
Don't get me wrong, she drinks gas like an Irish alcoholic on St. Patty's day when I'm driving hard (and I have NO problem with that), but this just blew my mind. With the improved mileage I only have to drive another 153,000 highway miles for the kit to pay for itself! How awesome is that?
More of the REAL review to follow...
Josh
I dont think its the larger injectors. I also noticed better gas mileage on my car after it was supercharged when driving normal.
BTW, How did you get the stage 2 injectors?
I thought they are still in R&D
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 6
From: S.E. FLA.
05 ML-500 , 03 CLK5.5 AMG has left the Garage
Fuel Mileage
Within the ecu Is a Fuel Mileage / consumption Table , which most tuners do not look at. Why would they.It is calculated by by MB e-lab Based on their dyno runs . Actual test track & Road driving .,The injector flow tables , engine & drive train data & Gas tank level senders. That table doesn't know went an injector / injectors have been installed with smaller or larger flow values , that are different that the OEM injectors . There is no fuel flow device, Reed or paddle wheel in the fuel delivery system. Like what is used in some stationary engine platforms. Best Is to pull out the calculator , Keep track on a weekly chart. Cheers _PTEngineering
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 6
360 Modena TT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Within the ecu Is a Fuel Mileage / consumption Table , which most tuners do not look at. Why would they.It is calculated by by MB e-lab Based on their dyno runs . Actual test track & Road driving .,The injector flow tables , engine & drive train data & Gas tank level senders. That table doesn't know went an injector / injectors have been installed with smaller or larger flow values , that are different that the OEM injectors . There is no fuel flow device, Reed or paddle wheel in the fuel delivery system. Like what is used in some stationary engine platforms. Best Is to pull out the calculator , Keep track on a weekly chart. Cheers _PTEngineering
99.9% sure it's a scaling error.
Do you guys honestly think, with all the regulatory and consumer pressures to improve fuel economy, that MB/AMG would've left a ton of MPG on the table that could've been easily captured by swapping to some different injectors? And that after adding the drag of spinning a blower at part-throttle closed-loop cruising, you'd somehow improve fuel economy? (Those're rhetorical.
)
Last edited by c32AMG-DTM; May 2, 2012 at 02:18 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
my wife bananas! :D
subscribed.
I've seen this debate happen across many boards. Would definitely like to see OPs followup review as well as possibly some more opinions from the tuning community
I've seen this debate happen across many boards. Would definitely like to see OPs followup review as well as possibly some more opinions from the tuning community
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 296
Likes: 1
C63
With the major shift of power to the left of the rpm band the OP is simply utilising far less rpm in his daily commute than he used to. Less rpm equal less inection cycles hence the saving in fuel economy. He said he measured the fuel physically so I do not see why there is a debate about it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Here's an easy solution - if Weistec can chime in and definitively answer: do they alter the fuel consumption tables in the ECU tune to match their aftermarket injector specs?
If yes, it can be considered accurate and we can debate the reasons. If no, it's obviously not accurate due to the scaling being incorrect.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 296
Likes: 1
C63
This theory could work, if the built transmission has gearing ratios different than OEM. If not, cruising at 70 mph would be the same rpm before and after (for example).
Here's an easy solution - if Weistec can chime in and definitively answer: do they alter the fuel consumption tables in the ECU tune to match their aftermarket injector specs?
If yes, it can be considered accurate and we can debate the reasons. If no, it's obviously not accurate due to the scaling being incorrect.
Here's an easy solution - if Weistec can chime in and definitively answer: do they alter the fuel consumption tables in the ECU tune to match their aftermarket injector specs?
If yes, it can be considered accurate and we can debate the reasons. If no, it's obviously not accurate due to the scaling being incorrect.
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 832
Likes: 3
From: Melbourne
(a)'12 C63 P/P, LSD, 19" m/spoke,comfort pack. (b)Astra SRI.
Easy way to check would be to simply fill up, take mileage, do say 100/150 miles whatever, fill up again & take the mileage, & simply calculate MPG?
Cheers, Pickles.
Cheers, Pickles.
Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 147
Likes: 1
From: Ontario, Canada
2020 A35, @021 F250, 96 Mustang
It's plausible - have seen it before on other supercharged vehicles when you're not constantly mashing the gas to get the big sh@%-eating grin 
My Mustang got better mileage when I put a Vortech V1 on it and so does a friend's M3. The disclaimer is that this is ONLY ture when running the car nice n easy or doing hiway cruising. As soon as the right foot gets a little heavier, the mileage swirls down the bowl
My Mustang got better mileage when I put a Vortech V1 on it and so does a friend's M3. The disclaimer is that this is ONLY ture when running the car nice n easy or doing hiway cruising. As soon as the right foot gets a little heavier, the mileage swirls down the bowl
