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.
haha apparently both yourself and your installer are complete idiots...
You did a stock pull on your 507 C63 which puts out 507 crank HP, the stock C63 does 451HP...Thats a 56 crank HP difference
The kleeman kit advertises 150 crank HP gains for a STOCK 451 HP C63, so since you gained a 100HP crank OVER your already tuned 507 C63 you in reality gained 156 crank HP which is not only meets but exceeded kleemans specs.
If both of you knew anything about tuning you'd know that when you "tuned" your 507 C63 you essentially returned it to STOCK 451 HP and ADDED kleemans 150 HP gains on TOP... the main difference between your 507 C63 and stock is the ECU remapping(and forged internals to support the increased HP from the remapping), which is completely erased and REPLACED with kleemans tune.
Im surprised the kleeman rep nor anyone else in here caught this...
Same thing I was thinking skinming this, p31 and 507 don't see as big of gains from tunes since they are already tuned and was this a 507 specific tune used? Or a c63 base?
Though I am a bit surprised that the advertised gains don't mention headers, that's a must if you're going sc
haha apparently both yourself and your installer are complete idiots...
You did a stock pull on your 507 C63 which puts out 507 crank HP, the stock C63 does 451HP...Thats a 56 crank HP difference
The kleeman kit advertises 150 crank HP gains for a STOCK 451 HP C63, so since you gained a 100HP crank OVER your already tuned 507 C63 you in reality gained 156 crank HP which is not only meets but exceeded kleemans specs.
If both of you knew anything about tuning you'd know that when you "tuned" your 507 C63 you essentially returned it to STOCK 451 HP and ADDED kleemans 150 HP gains on TOP... the main difference between your 507 C63 and stock is the ECU remapping(and forged internals to support the increased HP from the remapping), which is completely erased and REPLACED with kleemans tune.
Im surprised the kleeman rep nor anyone else in here caught this...
I don't ever recall the "installer", myself or ACG saying anything negative about Kleemann, power gains, or us being disappointed in them. We installed a blower, it produces the advertised amount of boost and has a clean afr. I chimed in on our behalf only because Steve mentioned us.
I don't ever recall the "installer", myself or ACG saying anything negative about Kleemann, power gains, or us being disappointed in them. We installed a blower, it produces the advertised amount of boost and has a clean afr. I chimed in on our behalf only because Steve mentioned us.
Right so whats this?
Originally Posted by Tal@ACGAutomotive
I think Steve and myself will both agree the car is very fast and a joy to drive around town. I just know personally he feels that the advertised minimum gains are not being met, and that is a very tough pill to swallow when decide to spend the amount of money he has to upgrade his car, as any of us would be.
The next logical step of course is to remove the restrictive exhaust flow and we may very well do that in the near future if and when he is ready.
You have agreed that the power gains were not meet, and I'm sure yourself and steve were scratching your heads for weeks on why, when the answer is very obvious and any basic tuner would have known this and explained it to their customer.
This on top of your "install" error (which btw you blame on poor instructions? thats laughable i don't know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions), just point to your incompetence as a car mechanic and someone who thoroughly understands car engineering and tuning.
You have agreed that the power gains were not meet, and I'm sure yourself and steve were scratching your heads for weeks on why, when the answer is very obvious and any basic tuner would have known this and explained it to their customer.
This on top of your "install" error (which btw you blame on poor instructions? thats laughable i don't know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions), just point to your incompetence as a car mechanic and someone who thoroughly understands car engineering and tuning.
I can't see how that is me saying either or. If I gave that impression then my words came out incorrectly. I stated that I know HE is disappointed...
Again I only chimed in as Steve mentioned we installed it. I haven't been scratching my head for any reason, the blower is in the car, it works exactly as Kleemann spec'd it to... nothing for me to be confused on. Steve is disappointed in the torque number, not the horsepower number.
And finally, to touch on your last point, who wouldn't follow installation instructions provided by the manufacturer to install a product developed by them?
This thread is remarkably disturbing.
What is up with people posting words like "idiot" and calling others out like they are stupid?
Yes I think the OP overreacted by posting this in the way he did. But clearly he went with first rate hardware and installer. In my opinion two of the best in our market!
The issue seems one of interpretation of dyno numbers among different variances of the 6.2 motor.
Anyone that states that the op, Kleemann or ACG are at fault is just flat out wrong.
Anyone that states that the op, Kleemann or ACG are at fault is just flat out wrong.
/end rant
Um, what? The OP is clearly wrong and doesn't understand the way advertising in the aftermarket world works. He then took it out on Kleemann.
ACG and Kleemann are not at fault here. Clean install done, power output met, and a customer who doesn't understand that a C63 with the 507 option comes with more HP than a base model and how that translates into advertising HP gains.
Wait wait wait, are these numbers advertised with headers or just the stock exhaust??
Get that ****ty stock exhaust off and put some true long tube headers with 3" mids so this thing can breathe and you will see a big power difference! Make sure you get a new pulley and tune for the exhaust.
Originally Posted by PurpleHeartAMG
Hopefully BBB and FTC can use Google and find this thread.
You take a 507 (And a strong one according to ACG), obviously more HP stock than a baseline C63, and then don't even add headers which is almost the most crucial part of a S/C application?
Add headers and a new tune.
So much for this not being your first rodeo...
And damn, do I HATE thread titles like these.
It is hard to believe OP is not in his first "rodeo" modding cars. Long tube headers are a must have in any supercharger install to take advantage of the increased air flow.
I just think this thread could have been avoided. I mean you can be disappointed with the output numbers (if they are legit) but before bashing publicly on a vendor you want to make sure you have exhausted all the possible options.
I hope OP gets what he is looking for. GL
First off, even if being angry, to get your panties in a bunch, cry like a little baby b/c he thinks he didn't get what he paid for is ridiculous.
BUT, taking it to this well versed, extremely respected, knowledgeable, and useful site...only to headline post with "BEWARE OF KLEEMANN" is somewhat akin to the boy who cried wolf. Those are harsh words and really unnecessary to all of us on this forum. And the dirty tampon that he has inserted didn't help either. Like a little kid, "I'm calling the BBB and the FTC, and anyone else that can help me because I'm so frustrated at this point." Call you mom while you're at it too. To me, this has no place in scare tactics on the forum.
Here is a HUGE mistake and something that this "so-called veteran" is not taking into account. First rodeo, right. YOU NEED LONG-TUBE HEADERS!!!!!! It's a must with SC. Are you a numbskull? Really? Come on!!
However, I can see waiting until all the tests are completed and giving Kleemann a chance to help troubleshoot and possibly rectify the situation along with the help from ACG, THEN I might be upset and voice a frustration on this forum with them. But, you haven't even let time take it's course.
You are acting like a baby that didn't get it his way on first onset and now wants to contact every any any consumer legality agency to cry to them. Give it time little one. ACG is highly respectable. Kleemann is highly respectable. Let those guys trouble shoot and get to the end of what they can do. If both companies can't do any more after some tinkering, well, maybe you're pissed and can list a frustration.
But an initial "BEWARE of KLEEMANN" post here, combined with the BBB and FTC is just childish and ludicrous. Let them help you before you start crying to authorities and bashing a great vendor here.
I doubt your post is going to deter anyone from staying away from Kleemann.
PS> Go check out this thread. Here is a REAL man that was interested in insight and working with other to help resolve his issue. He didn't start crying little a little boy. he is exhibiting patience and not running to the authorities. Take note
You have agreed that the power gains were not meet, and I'm sure yourself and steve were scratching your heads for weeks on why, when the answer is very obvious and any basic tuner would have known this and explained it to their customer.
This on top of your "install" error (which btw you blame on poor instructions? thats laughable i don't know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions), just point to your incompetence as a car mechanic and someone who thoroughly understands car engineering and tuning.
wow guy, I like being abrasive too some times but now you're just being a dick.
The tuning and install was by ACG in San Diego, an extremely professional concern. They have had lots of experience with both firms and I wanted Kleemann because of the advertised performance, my mistake. ACG is a great tuner and I would recommend them highly, it was not their fault Kleemann's supercharger is not what is advertised.
Who talked into this one
Always do research before pulling the trigger....just a little friendly advise
There is a lot to digest here so i'll try to be as through as possible.
These are my personal interpretations of quoted words, if I have interpreted incorrect, the owner of each quote please let me know.
Originally Posted by Steve MacB
The staff at Kleemann are super nice, especially Cory. That is the good news, The bad news is that you can not believe what is on the web site. I purchased a Kleemann supercharger for my 2014 C 63 at a cost of over $11,000. Instead of the advertised gain of a minimum 162 lb of torque, my car gained 75 lbs. Instead of the advertised minimum gain of 155 hp, my car gained 100hp. I have complained to the Better Business Bureau and soon to the FTC for false advertising.----Nice people, even a nice looking product--it just does not produce the desired performance that you are buying.----STAY AWAY--FAR AWAY
The main issue here is that package did not live up to the advertised numbers. If you take what kleemann advertises literally, it states that power gains are to be 155-255hp, and 162-228 lb ft on an otherwise completely stock vehicle.
We all know that the 507 makes more power then a standard C63, that however is not noted in these horsepower gains. One would think that with the range so wide, that the most power motors would be the ones making the lower marks of 155hp/162lb-ft, while a detuned motor would reach the higher marks.
Originally Posted by loungn14
I am pretty sure kleeman advertises crank hp
That is correct, i would assume the same.
Originally Posted by cnterline
I've been dealing with Kleemann for 10 yrs , they are a top notch operation , never had a problem ,in fact they have bent over backwards for me ,and Cory is a straight shooter NO BS with him,I had a supercharger kit for my SL500 and ,I have all of their bolt ons for my SL55 with the exception of a 90mm TB ,and they are helping me with a race only tune on second ECU I have ,I have the quickest and fastest SL55 on dragtimes and it's got their BOX TUNE on it.they answer all of my e mails the same day or next ,if I call the only time I can't get Cory on the phone is if he is off or on lunch ,and he calls me right back,best vendor I have dealt with modding my R230 s
I couldn't agree more.
Originally Posted by ///AchMeinGott
You're using two different kinds of dynos, trying to say it's apples to apples, and are complaining to the BBB?
Your panties. They are bunching...
I'd also like to see these supposed claims. I've only ever seen "up to" claims by manufacturers, to avoid situations like this.
Pre and post dynos were completed on the same dynojet, and the same mustang dyno.
Originally Posted by ///AchMeinGott
Thanks for clearly explaining the situation. I'm sure the OP is flustered, but he left half the story to the imagination, and the other half vaguely explained.
So, even knowing that Mustang dyno's can be serious heart breakers, 507 at the crank and 390 at the wheels sounds awfully low, 23% loss in fact for those that hate math.
None the less, that does give a baseline. Add 80whp and we're at 470whp. 470/.77 is 610 at the crank. Indeed a 100hp gain. 100hp for that motor should be all of 3psi honestly.
I know you have no control over it, it just sounds like he's jumping the gun here a bit... of course maybe he did talk to Kleeman and just didn't explain that. Did the dyno runs come out perfect? Not that their should be, but any possible belt slip?
No belt slip what so ever, boost pressure logs show a solid 5-6psi smooth throughout the complete run.
Brandon from KLEEMANN here, I have to post under this pseudonym because when I tried to log into my normal MBWorld account, I was told I have been banned for life, with "no reason was specified". Thats an interesting turn of events, and even internet brands cant tell me WHY.
Steve is not happy with his dynos. What no one mentioned here is that the DynoJet dyno he is referring to was done with faults present. Early on in this adventure, Steve got this low dyno. The immediate call for action was that we write another ECU file. I refused to do so because I am that confident the file is correct. A few emails/tele calls back and forth,and low and behold an installation error was found, and it was corrected. The car now "...seems to be running smoothly..." and has no MILs and by ACGs own account runs incredibly well. NO further dynos have been done, if they have, no one has given them to me.
We stand behind what we produce and will go over and above to find the source of any results that are not typical of what the product has historically produced in the past. I think our own 14 yr history on and off this board will back that claim up.
My suggestion is to get the car back to ACG, do another test on a dyno the car has been on before, determine where the power is now, and we can move forward with a correction path.
We're hoping to pick up Steve's vehicle later today or tomorrow to do another dyno. This next dyno will be with the kleemann supercharger, ROW airboxes and weistec filters.
I am wondering if the power difference between denmark and the US could be attributed to the airboxes and charcoal filters remaining on the original post dynos.
Originally Posted by OC6.3AMG
Have few friends who have done business with KLEEMANN, and they have nothing but great things to say about them. It looks like they're willing to work with you, I'd say go back to ACG and have them run the dyno again.
I'm very interested to know about the installation error.
This so called "installation error" or CEL is for a tank ventilation fault.
As you can see on step 38, the factory tank ventilation line which is connected to the "y" section of the intake manfold is cut, but then what?
Based on the photo of step 34, it "appears" that this tank ventilation line does back into the factory location back on the "y" port. This however is incorrect as it is not a vacuum source. We had to dig deeper when Steve notified us of a gas cap warning he was receiving. Looking at the factory intake manifold, even tho the location of the tank ventilation line is in the same location, there is a hard line that runs from this port post TB into a vacuum source. Once we provided a vacuum source to the tank vent the warning and gas cap fault resolved itself.
Originally Posted by Andy0331
This post should be moved to the appropriate forum; this is for the new W205 C63. There will probably be more activity in the W204 section & possibly more insight as a few other guys have Kleemann superchargers.
While I don't doubt you've modded cars before, in your first post you talk about advertised "minimum gains". I can't find any minimum gains on their website, only "63 AMG (M156) KSS
63-K1S: Kleemann Kompressor System. Up to 680 HP and 850 Nm (630 lb-ft) of torque."
Also, since it probably got overlooked on the first page, you mentioned spending "over 11k"; how much "over" and did you get it through ACG or direct from Kleemann? At 11k, it still seems like a bargain (as far as modding AMG's goes). I might be convinced to pass on another watch & supercharge my CL.
If you actually click on the supercharger from the link you provided you'll see where Steve got his expected gains from.
Originally Posted by jstefanop
haha apparently both yourself and your installer are complete idiots...
You did a stock pull on your 507 C63 which puts out 507 crank HP, the stock C63 does 451HP...Thats a 56 crank HP difference
The kleeman kit advertises 150 crank HP gains for a STOCK 451 HP C63, so since you gained a 100HP crank OVER your already tuned 507 C63 you in reality gained 156 crank HP which is not only meets but exceeded kleemans specs.
If both of you knew anything about tuning you'd know that when you "tuned" your 507 C63 you essentially returned it to STOCK 451 HP and ADDED kleemans 150 HP gains on TOP... the main difference between your 507 C63 and stock is the ECU remapping(and forged internals to support the increased HP from the remapping), which is completely erased and REPLACED with kleemans tune.
Im surprised the kleeman rep nor anyone else in here caught this...
Lets not be childish and resort to name calling, to be quite honestly its irrelevant whether he has a 507, as the advertisement did not state anywhere about a stock C63, the numbers provided could be for a C63BS, E63, SL63 etc.
Originally Posted by Jasonoff
Kleeman should display the estimated final numbers instead of gains with a footnote specifying gains between model options (P31/507 etc) will differ.
I agree, would help alleviate the confusion.
Originally Posted by Merc63
Wait wait wait, are these numbers advertised with headers or just the stock exhaust??
Get that ****ty stock exhaust off and put some true long tube headers with 3" mids so this thing can breathe and you will see a big power difference! Make sure you get a new pulley and tune for the exhaust.
Numbers are based on a completely stock vehicle. LTH header gains would be higher.
Originally Posted by jstefanop
Right so whats this?
You have agreed that the power gains were not meet, and I'm sure yourself and steve were scratching your heads for weeks on why, when the answer is very obvious and any basic tuner would have known this and explained it to their customer.
This on top of your "install" error (which btw you blame on poor instructions? thats laughable i don't know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions), just point to your incompetence as a car mechanic and someone who thoroughly understands car engineering and tuning.
Don't even know where to begin. What exactly is this "very obvious" explanation? That the owner has a 507? How about a E63 which also comes with 507hp, would this customer also not expect to gain between 155-255hp along with 162-228lb tq?
Would the difference in power be as simply as a MAF beginning to fail, possibly the charcoal filters? Could the difference in power between the C63 507 and an E63 simply be because the E/CLS63 have 3" exhaust piping? There are many different answers and possibilities, there issue that Steve is having, and correct me if I'm wrong but if his C63 507 is not going to gain the advertised claims because its a 507 then that should honestly be noted.
In my opinion, an ROW airbox and filters should have been provided with the blower, but if the minimal gains are to be met by the minimal parts, they should do so.
As for your nonsense remark that you do not know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions, that is just
2008 CLK63 Black Series 2012 C63 Black Series 2014 SLS Black Series
Originally Posted by SL55_Forever
Kleemann does not play around, the installer is most likely the culprit here.
You have been around here nearly as long as I have so you should know ACG is one of a small handfull of highly reputable shops/tuners on this forum. You never hear or read anything negative about them. Not to say people can not make mistakes once in a while but I would bet that the installer is NOT the culprit here.
You have agreed that the power gains were not meet, and I'm sure yourself and steve were scratching your heads for weeks on why, when the answer is very obvious and any basic tuner would have known this and explained it to their customer.
This on top of your "install" error (which btw you blame on poor instructions? thats laughable i don't know any tuners that need to "follow" instructions), just point to your incompetence as a car mechanic and someone who thoroughly understands car engineering and tuning.
I personally would not fret so much on the dyno numbers. Especially when you factor in, 507 vs Base, and the issue on install. Dynos are a tuning tool. While the results are fun and interesting, I find 1/4 MPH to be a good indicator of power gained. (Given same track and similar D/A)
My friend had a Viper GTS, installed long tube headers, TB's, and exhaust. Same dyno, he gained a whopping 8whp. Not a typo. That 8whp must be the most efficient hp in the world because he gained 6-7mph in the 1/4mi. At that point does the minimal horsepower gains on the dyno even mean anything?
I worked with with Cory from Kleemann, his service and products are nothing short of top notch from my experience.
The tuning and install was by ACG in San Diego, an extremely professional concern. They have had lots of experience with both firms and I wanted Kleemann because of the advertised performance, my mistake. ACG is a great tuner and I would recommend them highly, it was not their fault Kleemann's supercharger is not what is advertised.
Well I could tell you some personal stories about my own cars and my own C63 supercharger from Weistec that ACG messed up that might have you thinking differently. I wouldnt trust them to install floor mats.
You have been around here nearly as long as I have so you should know ACG is one of a small handfull of highly reputable shops/tuners on this forum. You never hear or read anything negative about them. Not to say people can not make mistakes once in a while but I would bet that the installer is NOT the culprit here.
I would disagree with JCart although I thought that too, until I was forced to make my own detailed thread about how they left microfibers in my M5's shock tower, improperly installed wheels on my C63 which resulted in lug bolts flying off on the freeway, ripping the paint of my M5's front bumper when they were trying to remove 3M tape...
01-17-2015, 12:25 PM
We're hoping to pick up Steve's vehicle later today or tomorrow to do another dyno. This next dyno will be with the kleemann supercharger, ROW airboxes and weistec filters.
