Full Bolt Ons E63 Dyno Update
09-27-2015, 08:27 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Full Bolt Ons E63 Dyno Update
EDIT: The Dyno Dynamics was set up to read similar to a Dyno Jet using a temperature correction factor. Correction is the same for all of the graphs.
So I went back to the dyno and this time I used a wideband. I should say I tried to use one. The sniffer wouldn't properly fit in the exhaust so I'm basically in the same position I was in before. The R.O.W. airbox lids make 0 more horsepower. THE TUNE IS NOT MAKING THE CAR THAT RICH. IT IS A WIDEBAND NOT READING CORRECTLY.
At 5400 rpm the AFR was 12.3 I do not know if it will continue trending downwards. This was also after 200 cell metal cats so the afr is slightly skewed. My goal was get a full pull in and send the file to Jerry to see if he felt it could be leaned out more, but that won't be able to happen until I weld a bung in.
I will need to weld a bung in the collector and data log my afr. A bone stock CLS63 made 405 whp and 377 lbs ft. My car with full bolt ons and a healthy engine made 430 whp and 414 lbs ft. My car has tune only power, if that.
The last graph is of my friends S600 with intakes, ecu/tcu tune, methanol, and some exhaust work done. Check out that torque.
My car has all the mods in my signature:
BONE STOCK CLS 63 (6.2 Liter)
S600 (Twin Turbo V12)
So I went back to the dyno and this time I used a wideband. I should say I tried to use one. The sniffer wouldn't properly fit in the exhaust so I'm basically in the same position I was in before. The R.O.W. airbox lids make 0 more horsepower. THE TUNE IS NOT MAKING THE CAR THAT RICH. IT IS A WIDEBAND NOT READING CORRECTLY.
At 5400 rpm the AFR was 12.3 I do not know if it will continue trending downwards. This was also after 200 cell metal cats so the afr is slightly skewed. My goal was get a full pull in and send the file to Jerry to see if he felt it could be leaned out more, but that won't be able to happen until I weld a bung in.
I will need to weld a bung in the collector and data log my afr. A bone stock CLS63 made 405 whp and 377 lbs ft. My car with full bolt ons and a healthy engine made 430 whp and 414 lbs ft. My car has tune only power, if that.
The last graph is of my friends S600 with intakes, ecu/tcu tune, methanol, and some exhaust work done. Check out that torque.
My car has all the mods in my signature:
BONE STOCK CLS 63 (6.2 Liter)
S600 (Twin Turbo V12)
Last edited by layzie12g; 09-27-2015 at 10:22 PM.
09-27-2015, 09:12 PM
#2
you car is making the correct power 430hp = 320kw mine mad a fraction more with a OE tune
OE tune is a little more aggressive
YOur figures are correct maybe you should opt for a OE tune if you want more power
OE tune is a little more aggressive
YOur figures are correct maybe you should opt for a OE tune if you want more power
09-27-2015, 10:17 PM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THESE ARE DYNO JET NUMBERS.
The Dynamics was set up to read much closer to a Dyno Jet then if the Dynamics was left uncorrected.
So row boxes, afe filters, Eurocharged tune, MBH long tubes, 3" exhaust to factory mufflers equates to 25 more wheel horsepower then a bone stock car???? I would have to disagree with you.
I'm not following the logic. If the car made 430 whp uncorrected I would be very happy. It would trap 120-122 mph and be making 500 whp with the correction factor these graphs were made with.
The Dynamics was set up to read much closer to a Dyno Jet then if the Dynamics was left uncorrected.
So row boxes, afe filters, Eurocharged tune, MBH long tubes, 3" exhaust to factory mufflers equates to 25 more wheel horsepower then a bone stock car???? I would have to disagree with you.
I'm not following the logic. If the car made 430 whp uncorrected I would be very happy. It would trap 120-122 mph and be making 500 whp with the correction factor these graphs were made with.
Last edited by layzie12g; 09-27-2015 at 10:21 PM.
09-27-2015, 10:26 PM
#4
so your car dynoed standard at 395?? that is very high sorry but no chance a factory car should dyno at 330 or 340whp with headers and tune 430 to 440
09-27-2015, 10:32 PM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
The numbers are irrelevant. Its the lack of power made from the work I have done. I could make the 405 horsepower the stock CLS read 1000 horsepower using the correction factor.
The cars were dyno'd one day apart. Same temperature and same correction factor on the same dyno. I wanted to get a full chart of the AFR to send to Eurocharged to lean the car out, but I was unable to do so. I will need to weld a bung in to the collector and use a wideband that way to plot a full graph.
Without the AFR being accurate a tuner has no direction to go. My car has a box tune per mods.
The cars were dyno'd one day apart. Same temperature and same correction factor on the same dyno. I wanted to get a full chart of the AFR to send to Eurocharged to lean the car out, but I was unable to do so. I will need to weld a bung in to the collector and use a wideband that way to plot a full graph.
Without the AFR being accurate a tuner has no direction to go. My car has a box tune per mods.
09-28-2015, 08:31 AM
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
I wonder if the fact that it's a box tune is part of the problem. A box tune still needs to be safe enough to factor for changes in air temp/fuel quality etc as the tuner will no doubt rather have lower power figures than blown engines.
That being said, I guess a slightly leaner mixture at WOT and a few more degree's of ignition advance will probably net you another 10hp...maybe a another 5-10hp if the VVT tuning can improve the incoming airflow.
But I feel you in the sense that regardless of the net difference, the actual gain seems quite low (25hp peak). I hear that longtubes and a custom tune gains around 50-60hp. Perhaps the tune really might be the issue man.
I have to ask...how lovely does it sound now though? Does it sound like a muscular wobbly-jelly old school v8 as you accelerate with light throttle?
That being said, I guess a slightly leaner mixture at WOT and a few more degree's of ignition advance will probably net you another 10hp...maybe a another 5-10hp if the VVT tuning can improve the incoming airflow.
But I feel you in the sense that regardless of the net difference, the actual gain seems quite low (25hp peak). I hear that longtubes and a custom tune gains around 50-60hp. Perhaps the tune really might be the issue man.
I have to ask...how lovely does it sound now though? Does it sound like a muscular wobbly-jelly old school v8 as you accelerate with light throttle?
09-28-2015, 08:35 AM
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
The numbers are irrelevant. Its the lack of power made from the work I have done. I could make the 405 horsepower the stock CLS read 1000 horsepower using the correction factor.
The cars were dyno'd one day apart. Same temperature and same correction factor on the same dyno. I wanted to get a full chart of the AFR to send to Eurocharged to lean the car out, but I was unable to do so. I will need to weld a bung in to the collector and use a wideband that way to plot a full graph.
Without the AFR being accurate a tuner has no direction to go. My car has a box tune per mods.
The cars were dyno'd one day apart. Same temperature and same correction factor on the same dyno. I wanted to get a full chart of the AFR to send to Eurocharged to lean the car out, but I was unable to do so. I will need to weld a bung in to the collector and use a wideband that way to plot a full graph.
Without the AFR being accurate a tuner has no direction to go. My car has a box tune per mods.
Trending Topics
09-28-2015, 12:50 PM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Its not the dyno. I think the tune needs to be touched up, but without of fully logged AFR the tuner will have no information to go off of. The car should be much faster then it is. It runs 12.40s consistently at 113-114 mph. It does sound cool for sure. It is straight piped instead of the x like most have. It roars.
I spoke with MHP about the lack of X pipe. They felt it may be costing me 10 hp. I have a feeling the afr continues to dive rich. I know the box tunes must be save. I have only tuned turbocharged cars. I would assume I have at least 20 horsepower to gain if the afr follows its trend downwards.
I spoke with MHP about the lack of X pipe. They felt it may be costing me 10 hp. I have a feeling the afr continues to dive rich. I know the box tunes must be save. I have only tuned turbocharged cars. I would assume I have at least 20 horsepower to gain if the afr follows its trend downwards.
Last edited by layzie12g; 09-28-2015 at 12:52 PM.
09-28-2015, 03:04 PM
#9
Its not the dyno. I think the tune needs to be touched up, but without of fully logged AFR the tuner will have no information to go off of. The car should be much faster then it is. It runs 12.40s consistently at 113-114 mph. It does sound cool for sure. It is straight piped instead of the x like most have. It roars.
I spoke with MHP about the lack of X pipe. They felt it may be costing me 10 hp. I have a feeling the afr continues to dive rich. I know the box tunes must be save. I have only tuned turbocharged cars. I would assume I have at least 20 horsepower to gain if the afr follows its trend downwards.
I spoke with MHP about the lack of X pipe. They felt it may be costing me 10 hp. I have a feeling the afr continues to dive rich. I know the box tunes must be save. I have only tuned turbocharged cars. I would assume I have at least 20 horsepower to gain if the afr follows its trend downwards.
I witnessed a similar scenario last December with a C63. He had almost exact upgrades as you with an EC canned tune and the car was weak in my opinion - (408 STD) with a very fat AFR. My [C63] car then with only removed CF and K&N and tuning (OE); made 439 with a 12.6 to 12.7 AFR...not sure where the timing is.
09-28-2015, 06:59 PM
#10
As others have said load standard tune drive around and see if you notice power decrease and then reload stage 2 tune
i read on the forums that some computers dont react well and many people have had issues with tunes not uploading properly
or maybe just go with a different tune hopefully putting it back to original and then reloading fixes your issue
i read on the forums that some computers dont react well and many people have had issues with tunes not uploading properly
or maybe just go with a different tune hopefully putting it back to original and then reloading fixes your issue
09-28-2015, 07:38 PM
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,045
Received 2,810 Likes
on
1,664 Posts
2012 P31 C63 Coupe Trackrat, 2019 GLE63S Coupe Beast
The EC tune runs a little fat - I'm in the 11.9-12.3 range at WOT to the top of 3rd and 4th (verified using a standalone dual-bank AFR gauge with dedicated wideband sensors - Innovate DLG-1). But I'm also trapping 120+ with FBO, so I'm ok with it being a bit on the safe side. You can free up some hp by leaning it out if you think it's worth it. IMO there's something else going on.
Last edited by BLKROKT; 09-28-2015 at 07:42 PM.
09-29-2015, 04:37 AM
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
When i tune N/A motors, I usually aim for 12.8 - 13.2 at WOT....but then I guess it's better to be safer I suppose. Low 12's is probably a bit too rich still though IMO.
I wonder if the cam angle might need to be be adjusted also. It's reasons like this that I don't like generic tunes. Esp for N/A motors where every little bit of CFM needs to be optimised.
Also BLKROKT....trapping 120+?? Damn, i would love it if my car can do that once modded!
I wonder if the cam angle might need to be be adjusted also. It's reasons like this that I don't like generic tunes. Esp for N/A motors where every little bit of CFM needs to be optimised.
Also BLKROKT....trapping 120+?? Damn, i would love it if my car can do that once modded!
09-29-2015, 12:04 PM
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
Did you buy your car used?
Bet it had a tune on it when you got it and just didn't know if that's the case. Happens all the time and people don't realize it.
Bet it had a tune on it when you got it and just didn't know if that's the case. Happens all the time and people don't realize it.
09-29-2015, 10:40 PM
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
What logic are you using? I reflashed it again after I did the long tubes with files straight from Jerry at Ec. No one would intentionally tune an NA car to dip in to the 11.X:1 ratio. A box tune I could see it happening because of the need to be safe.
I asked him if there was a possibility it did not load. He felt it wasnt possible because I would have had a cel since I no longer have primary cats. Ill have to wait till this weekend to get a wideband in the exhaust.
I asked him if there was a possibility it did not load. He felt it wasnt possible because I would have had a cel since I no longer have primary cats. Ill have to wait till this weekend to get a wideband in the exhaust.
09-30-2015, 12:39 AM
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
^ I'm just saying that if it was already tuned, then you wouldn't see the gains you'd expect. As in, if the car came tuned but you threw it up on a dyno and made 390whp or whatever, in your mind that is your stock baseline. I'm just saying that maybe it was already tuned, your stock baseline was around 350whp, and therefore after the headers and reflash the car really picked up 80-90whp.
See what I'm getting at? You mention in one of your posts that the numbers are irrelevant and you're more concerned about the net gain. My argument is that your car was already on its way to those gains and you just didn't know about it.
See what I'm getting at? You mention in one of your posts that the numbers are irrelevant and you're more concerned about the net gain. My argument is that your car was already on its way to those gains and you just didn't know about it.
09-30-2015, 06:52 AM
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Perhaps ^^^ but then that would mean the dyno is reading very low. To verify this, if he went elsewhere and it showed up a higher number, then yeah your idea rings true.
10-01-2015, 09:15 PM
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
A bone stock Cls the day before on the same dyno, same temp, and same correction factor made 405 whp and 373 lbs ft. His dyno graph is in the post. This is comparing apples to apples.
10-02-2015, 08:28 AM
#18
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,045
Received 2,810 Likes
on
1,664 Posts
2012 P31 C63 Coupe Trackrat, 2019 GLE63S Coupe Beast
Ok now you're just arguing over numbers endlessly. The numbers themselves are meaningless. Dynos are for tuning, not for telling you how much hp your car has. You're not happy with the performance? Then what are you doing about it. Arguing over this guys car made xxx and my car only made xxx and it should make xxx because this other car made xxx, isn't helping you or anyone else figure out what's wrong. The AFR is not the cause - many people run the EC tune, and run as rich as you are, and make more power. There's something else going on here, but you're so focused on the dyno and AFR that you're not even considering anything else.
10-02-2015, 09:25 AM
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
Not every car that rolls of the lot has the same hp. Maybe they had a strong engine from the start and yours not so much. Maybe that bone stock cls was bought use and has a tune on it from a previous owner without the owner knowing. There are a lot of variables in here.
However, the bottom line is that you shouldn't compare two completely different cars that in theory should be identical. Because they likely aren't.
Good luck moving forward. As others have recommended, start with the tune. In fact, with your setup, you should have a professional tune it on the dyno.
10-02-2015, 08:02 PM
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Your right. My buddy is getting his Dynamics set up in a few weeks and we will tune the car.
114 mph trap speed since "dynos are not for measuring horsepower".
Bad cam adjusters? Totally possible.
I think Ill have a supercharger by the time I spend anymore time with it.
114 mph trap speed since "dynos are not for measuring horsepower".
Bad cam adjusters? Totally possible.
I think Ill have a supercharger by the time I spend anymore time with it.
