Thor2j

Playing devil's advocate, how do we know the other 507 isn't a weak one?

Fung63

to make it absolutely crystal clear, we are talking about dynos on the same day.. in the same shop... by the same tech. so it will be as close as you can get with conditions.


paul's 507 is just a natural beast. what we are trying to get at is that there might be a decently material variance of power coming out of the factory.



fair point... it could also be this. which still points to the possibility of a variance in power


*as a note.. both owners of the two 507s are first owners of the car

Roswell

Yes guys, all those numbers were recorded on the same day same dyno same shop.

So I was just curious to know if another "stock only" 507 with "V5 EC tune only" would have made the same power as OP on the same day same dyno same shop?

If no, then does it means each cars come with different output from factory? (Which I doubt)

Does the tech handling/performing the dynos have a margin for errors in collecting the numbers?

daemo

If my 507 dynos 5-6% lower than OP's, for sure I would hope tech/operator explains most of that variance, not the engine itself

odonnks

What difference would be expected with fuel quality/octane variations?

Fung63

I wonder what mb factory QA tests are like... common sense dictates that when something is 'handmade' there will be a variance. however we are talking about trained techs and engines here. so again I wonder how MB does their QA on this. from the medical device world, sometimes the test is just to ensure it meets a minimum standard. anything above there is fair game. other times we are looking at a top range too. however what is consistent is that there is usually a small range that would be considered acceptable.

alexmtl

Just out of curiosity OP, what's the name of the guy who built your engine ?

itzjonjon69

Eurocharged group buy is now live! We need 10 people minimum everyone jump in!

https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w...63-tuning.html

Ezec63

This deff shows that's there's differences In these hand built engine as stated previously. I remember when I dynoed my car 2 years ago before I got headers with my only mods being eurocharge tune, row airbox with Bmc filters and evosport under drive pulley. My car put down power from 464 to 470 whp over 7 runs. Keep in mind this was on a dynojet in 50 degree northeast weather at sea level so conditions were very good but everyone screamed BS at the time. Going to go back to the same dyno to measure results after headers, throttle bodies, intake, full exhaust and custom tune. Great numbers OP strong car to start from

Mcc420

I would suspect the operator is screwing with the settings. Just a gut feeling and personal experience dealing with these guys. No disrespect to the op. It's easy to show big gains by changing numbers in between sessions. I'm not saying there tunes aren't strong esp v5. But something seems fishy. There was a post about someone who had dirty air filters and got big gains after changing them. Just my opinion don't mean to offend anyone.

odonnks

Still asking ....

AutohausAZ-Mike

Those are great numbers, very impressive!

Kriston

You need to re-read the post. These dyno's were done on the same day. Multiple C63's dyno'd that day. These variances were found because multiple Tuned 507's with the SAME V5 tune was dyno'd on the same day / same variances in temp etc.


No operator error, the Eurocharged Canada guys are pretty stand up gents.

RNS-11Z

They should all have a run against each other and record it. That would be awesome.

odonnks

Attempting to answer my own question...

From the article...

"The results were more dramatic with the test cars that require premium fuel. The turbocharged Saab's sophisticated Trionic engine-control system dialed the power back 9.8 percent on regular gas, and performance dropped 10.1 percent at the track. Burning regular in our BMW M3 diminished track performance by 6.6 percent, but neither the BMW nor the Saab suffered any drivability problems while burning regular unleaded fuel. Unfortunately, the M3's sophisticated electronics made it impossible to test the car on the dyno (see caption at top)."

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/regular-or-premium

Therefore... With either turbo or NA engines employing engine management a fairly large difference in performance can be seen with variations in fuel quality.

I do realize that once the quality of fuel reaches the point where the ECU does not detect knock any increase in fuel quality will add little to no performance improvement.

noodleman

were both 507s on the same octane gas? that could explain the difference as well.

Guilty

It's just the gas.... one of the car had bad gas probably.. empty both tanks and fill them with the same gas and see what happens....

Kriston

Your right,


I actually noticed a dramatic difference running 94 compared to 91 on the V5 tune.


94 is where its at, the car runs much better with it opposed to 91 octane.

noodleman

i've only been using 91, i'm going to have to try one day with 94 and see if the butt dyno notices.

yeswife

how come its not close to 507 HP ?

Kriston

The power is measured at the wheels, the factory rates the cars at the crank. The important number is the Wheel HP.

Roswell

I've only been using Ultra 94 from day 1.. Since I don't have a tune, is there a benefit of keep using 94 or am I wasting my money?

And is 94 octane burns faster than 91. I'm only getting around 250 km city driving (mild to aggressive acceleration) on a tank (around 500 km with hwy)?

abcut973

^ This. I would add the number advertized by the manufacturer are crank numbers. Dyno reads Wheel Horse Power (WHP) which is what the car actually puts down when you factor in the drivetrain lost (transmission). Usually 20%. So a 507HP car is only capable to transfer roughly 400HP to the wheels. You can have whatever big HP at the crank but if you are not able to put it down it will be pretty much worhtless.
That is why AWD system have a little advantage against RWD.

Kriston

Meng no harm in trying 91 to see if you feel a noticeable difference.

At the end of the day, the cost difference between 91 and 94 here in Toronto is negligible, just makes sense to use the 94. I try to only use 94, unless its not available I substitute with 91. When i do use the 91, the car feels a tad sluggish. Noticed it more-so post V5 tune.

Roswell

Good infos Kriston, I'll stick with 94 then as the power is good. And yes price wise, it's not much more since I fill up once a month. Lol