BLKROKT

^ Exactly

charliekay

This. Even though mr747 is not running tri-ys, if you look at the list, 4 out of the top 5 fastest C63s in the world are running tri-ys, the 5th one is DadsC63.

The fastest Stage 2 SC M156 which is a CLK63BS is running the same headers as me. This is 10.48 out of a Stage 2.

These headers started as MBH headers but they are modified, not only to fit RHD but also modified for power.

MBH motorsports

Strange because Vlad at Eurocharged Canada literally told me the exact opposite to that.

Merc63

Just looked at dragtimes, this car is running the same as a stage 3 with built engine and 18lbs boost, also a tenth off a stage 3 with 14lbs boost and a 100shot of NOS.

Something is not adding up to me?

RNS-11Z

With out doubt Charlie's car is making solid power. I can't wait to have my stage 3 fitted and see what times I run. My set up will be identical to his how ever im fitting head studs and my headers are 4-1 LTh. It will be a great comparison and wel be able to help each other break more records! Wait till mid next year, I think us Aussies will be floating in the 9s.

charliekay

I agree, plus the fact that the stage 3 with built engine also had some weight reduction.

But then again there is also a stage 3 with built engine also running 18psi that has run 9.90 but that was built recently.

I honestly think it has something to do with the new version of the tranny plus the flow of the headers.

This will be a very good comparison because we will be running at the same track, and if we can get out on the same day that will even be better. Head studs help with reliability, but shouldn't affect the power. Both V2 of the tranny and both have 08/09 cars.

Looking forward to pushing each other into the 9s.

Merc63

What did he change on these headers? Is the collector different? Primaries are still 2"..?

I hope that tranny makes that much of a difference, mine is at Weistec now for v2 upgrade.

Must be something in the air down under, you guys are all running very strong there.

Charlie, are you going to throw the smaller pulley on with the stock engine?

charliekay

Mate no idea what is different, my guy suggested new headers, I trust him, so we did it.

Looking forward to seeing your results with V2 tranny.

At the moment I am hesitant to run a smaller pulley, I am trying to find the right wheel setup to help with the 60ft first. If I get closer to 9s with a better wheel setup then I might try it, but I do not think the smaller pulley will shave off enough time alone to get me to the 9s.

Your thoughts?

kimeran

Wax my sack! That is an insane time!

What power are you making currently?

Will we be seeing a C63 Stage 3 with stock internals in the 9s? I hope so!

blackbenzz

Has there been any stock internal 63's in the 9's yet? I went 10.0 in my 55 before it let go and I decided to build it.

Merc63

That smaller pulley is supposed to pump out another 4-5lbs of boost I think. That should get you into the 9s.

Do you have the ice tank?

Also if you trailer the car there that would knock another .1 off for sure.

charliekay

Currently it is make 634hp atw. The aim was never 9s, didn't think it was possible, but I think it is now, so that is the new aim.

As far as I know there is only 2 63s in the 9's, none with stock internals. 1 is jrcarts CLK63BS and the other is PP Performance C63 in Dubai.

I have the ice tank, but surprisingly the 10.22 run was done when we ran out of ice.

4-5lbs might just make enough difference to get a 9.

Might be worth talking to Weistec to see if they think the stock engine will hold up.

layzie12g

Have any of your fast guys had issues with your cam adjusters? My car has always been down on power and I can not figure out why. I'm going to pull the valve covers this weekend.

charliekay

No issues from me. Have you done any 1/4 mile passes? Got any time slips? They will help with your true power, plus your times will help diagnose any issues.

layzie12g

Yes. It trapped 113 mph with full bolt-ons before the supercharger. I picked up 100 whp and I believe it was 85 ft lbs after the supercharger. This is a healthy carbon free engine. Oil changes every 10k if not sooner. Inside the engine looks new. I know some of you are going to read this and think I'm beating a dead horse, but I know for a fact someone out there will eventually have some technical insight regarding the cam adjusters on this engine.

I know someone of you guys have a ***** fit when a dyno number is mentioned, but a BONE STOCK CLS made 25 less whp then my car. Exact same dyno, same correction, same temperature, and the pulls were 12 hours apart. I had all the bolt-ons besides the supercharger. That is ridiculously low gains over a stock vehicle, unless mine has a major underlying issue.

I'm a tech for living and worked at a shop with a Dyno Dynamics. The numbers are a very equal comparison and "accurate" representation of actual power. My trap speed is proof. Stock E55s at my local track are trapping 117. I still need to get this car on a scale to compare the weight of it to a C. It is going to be one of the heavier Es due to the Panoramic roof.

12.17 @113
1.90 60 ft

This was with absolutely no wheel spin. The car is on drag radials and was like a Honda before the supercharger. It was a dog before 5k. All the local tracks are closed so I will have to wait till next year to get a pass in.

I bring up the cam issue because I have worked on two 63s in the last four months that have needed cams/lifters, and a couple that have needed adjusters. There is another thread started discussing these issues, and one person had the cam wear with no valve train noise. The two I have seen have had very obvious audible valve train issues.

charliekay

Do you know what DA at the track was? 113mph for a FBO C63 is low, you should be at least 118mph, and should be mid-high 11s.

What track you running at?

Merc63

Isn't there a test on the xentry for the adjusters?

Have you checked your compression? Mine is 185psi at 2750ft.

Fuel? Tried a different source.

Merc63

Charlie, your car should be putting down more power than that to run that mph. You're about 750hp crank.

Did you say u did a run at 139mph?

layzie12g

I have an E63, and compression is good. That Xentry test of the adjusters is kind of a joke. One of the cars I had to do adjusters on passed the test, but I was able to turn the engine by hand and got 25+ degrees of crank movement without the intake cams turning at all. I'll have to look up the DA. It was at Pacific Raceways in Seattle.

Your car is absolutely hauling ***. That must be a fun ride.

roadtalontsi

I have a question for some of you stage 3 guys, how many of you have the torque converter upgrade and the ported cylinder heads? It's interesting that my stage 2 is trapping in the 126-128mph zone and ya'lls stage 3's are only a few mph quicker considering an almost 100whp advantage. I dont have either of those upgrades, and no trunk ice box. MY current setup is stage 2 blower, row, tcu upgrade, mbh headers, high flow cats, akro catback, kw's, full weight minus spare tire, threw on an extra oem trans cooler.

The non built motor part isnt shocking. Plenty of stock 2jz motors to hit 900-1000whp. It's all in the tuning to get them there, but no matter how conservative the tune they dont stay together like that for long and neither will a m156 It's alot cheaper to put upgraded pistons and rods in before you put custom windows in the side of the block. New short blocks aren't cheap.

layzie12g

Are you on the east coast by any chance?

How has the TCU upgrade been working out? I've been thinking I should do it try to get the most life out of the clutches.

My comment regarding MBH was directly from the tuner. This was not my opinion, just what he said. It seemed to be his reason for not having any interest in looking further in to my car.

charliekay

The car went 139mph for a 10.263 run, the other 2 runs were 10.228 @ 137.09mph and 10.244 @ 136.95mph.

I think the numbers are close enough to right. 635hp atw, would be about 770-780hp crank, which is what Weistec say the Stage 3 system puts out.

780hp should get you close to 139mph for a 3900lbs car, unless my numbers are off?

I have the torque converter but not the ported heads. My Stage 2 ran 130-132mph, so going from 132 to 139 is a good improvement. You're mods are almost the same as mine, with the exception of the KWs, I have H&R springs, and no trans cooler, though I do have the ice tank.

And that is why I do not want to put the smaller pulley on, getting a 9 is fun, but will the engine go boom before or after I hit the 9. That is the risk of running 14psi on a stock engine

Merc63 has been running a Stage 3 on a stock engine for a while, with no issues, so hopefully mine stays like that.

Merc63

I don't have the TC or the heads, engine is completely stock. My friend with just headers and tune is only trapping 115mph. Our track is pretty slow compared to others.


There is a track 11-12hrs away, a few buddies with blowers went and were doing .25 quicker. Catch is they are real tight with the rules and I would need a cage to run.

PetroC63

I wouldn't throw more boost at it just yet. I would work on the 60' first. There is definitely room for improvement. 139 is good enough for 9's.

How are you launching the car? Off idle? What rpm?

By the way, awesome time and mph.

charliekay

My thoughts exactly.

Have tried launching a couple of different ways, best times have been coming off idle and onto the accelerator on green, also tried stalling up to 2200rpm and flooring it on green. They both netted similar 60fts but the ET was better coming off idle.