Help to improve 60mph-120mph
09-07-2017, 06:33 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Help to improve 60mph-120mph
Any suggestions ?
Last time I managed 8.14 vbox
This was in sport plus, sport traction and from a race start off
Tyres are 3 bar and almost new ps4s 275/35/19s
Best 0-60 ive managed is 3.91 same set up will try again when the weather is better but any suggestions how to improve would be much appreciated as trying to get 7:35 or better
Last time I managed 8.14 vbox
This was in sport plus, sport traction and from a race start off
Tyres are 3 bar and almost new ps4s 275/35/19s
Best 0-60 ive managed is 3.91 same set up will try again when the weather is better but any suggestions how to improve would be much appreciated as trying to get 7:35 or better
09-07-2017, 06:34 PM
#2
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
Supercharger 
09-07-2017, 06:36 PM
#4
Member
Thread Starter
09-07-2017, 06:38 PM
#5
Senior Member
Weight reduction , lighter wheels , Meth? , bottle in a bag ????
09-07-2017, 06:39 PM
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Tire pressure isn't going to affect anything from 60-120...
Unless you are hitting the limiter, neither are the two shifts you should be making in that range.
Dropping almost a full second on the time means you need a good bit more power. Start with a 75 shot and see if that's enough.
Unless you are hitting the limiter, neither are the two shifts you should be making in that range.
Dropping almost a full second on the time means you need a good bit more power. Start with a 75 shot and see if that's enough.
09-07-2017, 06:42 PM
#7
Member
Thread Starter
Wheels could do but not a priority
I don't want to remove parts I like the car as is full weight interior etc
And it's a full weight car runnng the 7.35 I need to beat
I'm looking at de catting and valves boxes
And new tune
Might try with my track wheels and tyres and see if that helps
Just wondered offer than nailing it in sport plus with sport traction of there was a way to get the time down ?
I don't want to remove parts I like the car as is full weight interior etc
And it's a full weight car runnng the 7.35 I need to beat
I'm looking at de catting and valves boxes
And new tune
Might try with my track wheels and tyres and see if that helps
Just wondered offer than nailing it in sport plus with sport traction of there was a way to get the time down ?
Trending Topics
09-07-2017, 06:47 PM
#8
Super Member
Almost 0.8 of a second? Horsepower or gravity are your only options. Seriously. And I'm sure there are calculators online that will tell you how much more hp you need, but the above post of 100hp wouldn't be crazy, IMO.
09-07-2017, 06:50 PM
#9
Senior Member
Wheels could do but not a priority
I don't want to remove parts I like the car as is full weight interior etc
And it's a full weight car runnng the 7.35 I need to beat
I'm looking at de catting and valves boxes
And new tune
Might try with my track wheels and tyres and see if that helps
Just wondered offer than nailing it in sport plus with sport traction of there was a way to get the time down ?
I don't want to remove parts I like the car as is full weight interior etc
And it's a full weight car runnng the 7.35 I need to beat
I'm looking at de catting and valves boxes
And new tune
Might try with my track wheels and tyres and see if that helps
Just wondered offer than nailing it in sport plus with sport traction of there was a way to get the time down ?
Well the difference in the mode you are in is downshift response time , being in the correct gear will be quicker then actually waiting for the transmission to downshift . So try it in Manual mode.
09-07-2017, 06:52 PM
#10
Member
Thread Starter
And gravity defeats the point of a fair test
Height difference of 1.64ft is pretty good for comparison
Next question is 8.14 a good time for 60-120?
09-07-2017, 08:47 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 463
Received 119 Likes
on
80 Posts
2014 C63 Coupe
09-07-2017, 10:16 PM
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
Given your constraints, you wont reach your goals. Sorry, something has to change. And not in a small way
The following users liked this post:
BLKROKT (09-08-2017)
09-07-2017, 10:48 PM
#14
I read this some time ago on a Hellcat forum and dug it up again. Credit to poster "Driver72." You may find it of interest.
This post will highlight the differences and advantages of cooler weather/superior weather = lower DA and what it does for performance on a car.
So a couple of months ago I went out onto my deserted testing road to do some rolling times.
I did 60-120 mph tests starting in 3rd gear.
60-120 highlights the acceleration at WOT.
When I did the initial testing a couple months ago the weather was:
85 degrees
45% humidity
29.92 inches pressure
elevation of road is 10 feet above sea level
Wind was calm
This gave a DA of 1,910 feet above sea level
60-120 mph ranged from 6.7 to 6.9 seconds with an average of 6.825 seconds.
Tonight I went out again.
Tonights conditions were as follows
45 degrees
65% humidity
30.18 inches pressure
Wind was calm
This gave a DA of of -1138 feet (negative 1138 feet) below sea level
So essentially like being 3048 feet lower in elevation.
60-120 mph runs at this below sea level DA was DRAMATICALLY better.
I did 8 runs this time and got 3 at 6.0 seconds and 5 at 6.1 seconds for an average of 6.063 seconds.
An average improvement of .7625 seconds (and up to .9 seconds improvement). That's an 11.2% improvement average.
That just goes to show you that when guys at tracks like ATCO and similar tracks that often have below sea level DA's (even in summer) their 1/4 mile times and traps are so much better than those at tracks with a bit of elevation or who don't get sea level DA's. That's why you absolutely CAN NOT compare one track to another or one car to another car on different tracks. And why it's silly for anybody to claim "world's fastest" on a stock car, or a lightly modified car (i.e.: DR's, driveshaft, lightweight wheels, race gas) when they have access to a "fast" track that's below sea level and other people do not. Those (truly) stock cars that did the 1/4 in 11.2 seconds at sea level or below may actually be no better or maybe even slower than someone who got a 11.6 at a track that doesn't have below sea level DA's
The car felt like an even stronger beast tonight with that oxygen filled cool below sea level DA, almost like having an extra 20-30 hp. It was nice.
This post will highlight the differences and advantages of cooler weather/superior weather = lower DA and what it does for performance on a car.
So a couple of months ago I went out onto my deserted testing road to do some rolling times.
I did 60-120 mph tests starting in 3rd gear.
60-120 highlights the acceleration at WOT.
When I did the initial testing a couple months ago the weather was:
85 degrees
45% humidity
29.92 inches pressure
elevation of road is 10 feet above sea level
Wind was calm
This gave a DA of 1,910 feet above sea level
60-120 mph ranged from 6.7 to 6.9 seconds with an average of 6.825 seconds.
Tonight I went out again.
Tonights conditions were as follows
45 degrees
65% humidity
30.18 inches pressure
Wind was calm
This gave a DA of of -1138 feet (negative 1138 feet) below sea level
So essentially like being 3048 feet lower in elevation.
60-120 mph runs at this below sea level DA was DRAMATICALLY better.
I did 8 runs this time and got 3 at 6.0 seconds and 5 at 6.1 seconds for an average of 6.063 seconds.
An average improvement of .7625 seconds (and up to .9 seconds improvement). That's an 11.2% improvement average.
That just goes to show you that when guys at tracks like ATCO and similar tracks that often have below sea level DA's (even in summer) their 1/4 mile times and traps are so much better than those at tracks with a bit of elevation or who don't get sea level DA's. That's why you absolutely CAN NOT compare one track to another or one car to another car on different tracks. And why it's silly for anybody to claim "world's fastest" on a stock car, or a lightly modified car (i.e.: DR's, driveshaft, lightweight wheels, race gas) when they have access to a "fast" track that's below sea level and other people do not. Those (truly) stock cars that did the 1/4 in 11.2 seconds at sea level or below may actually be no better or maybe even slower than someone who got a 11.6 at a track that doesn't have below sea level DA's
The car felt like an even stronger beast tonight with that oxygen filled cool below sea level DA, almost like having an extra 20-30 hp. It was nice.
09-07-2017, 11:21 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 463
Received 119 Likes
on
80 Posts
2014 C63 Coupe
Lol yeah. Last time I took my car to the drag strip a few weeks ago, the DA was +4759 feet. The track is at 2100 feet to begin with so it's always crappy. Definitely wreaks havoc on times as a good launch and 60 ft time can still translate to a lousy top end and et.
09-08-2017, 03:19 AM
#16
Member
Thread Starter
09-08-2017, 07:32 AM
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
What's the deal with your car? is it stock?
Which stock is it, base or P30/31/507?
Where are you, US or EU?
Here's my take:
Without calling out speed numbers, which remain forever available for others to search, I will say that engines of high displacement are usually perceived as making easy progress in accelerating at high speed.
When I went to get a feel for what my car does, I was underwhelmed.
But then I researched and saw that the throttle was not going to open up more than 60% stock. So no wonder it makes strained progress at that speed.
For US cars, that was not even a concern for Mercedes, who can legally and repeatedly do this anyway..
Now the influence of the charcoal filters is under my opinion not clearly understood either.
I don't think they're filters, because the documentation and construction does not provide for their replacement.
I think they're acoustic dampers, like what other car communities call snorkels.
In other cars they are not in the form of filters, but in the form of winding intake piping.
Anyway, these filters while not showing a HP difference on a dyno, they will make a difference in driving at a higher speed on the road. In US? not a concern for MB.
Which stock is it, base or P30/31/507?
Where are you, US or EU?
Here's my take:
Without calling out speed numbers, which remain forever available for others to search, I will say that engines of high displacement are usually perceived as making easy progress in accelerating at high speed.
When I went to get a feel for what my car does, I was underwhelmed.
But then I researched and saw that the throttle was not going to open up more than 60% stock. So no wonder it makes strained progress at that speed.
For US cars, that was not even a concern for Mercedes, who can legally and repeatedly do this anyway..
Now the influence of the charcoal filters is under my opinion not clearly understood either.
I don't think they're filters, because the documentation and construction does not provide for their replacement.
I think they're acoustic dampers, like what other car communities call snorkels.
In other cars they are not in the form of filters, but in the form of winding intake piping.
Anyway, these filters while not showing a HP difference on a dyno, they will make a difference in driving at a higher speed on the road. In US? not a concern for MB.
09-08-2017, 08:27 AM
#18
Member
Thread Starter
What's the deal with your car? is it stock?
Which stock is it, base or P30/31/507?
Where are you, US or EU?
Here's my take:
Without calling out speed numbers, which remain forever available for others to search, I will say that engines of high displacement are usually perceived as making easy progress in accelerating at high speed.
When I went to get a feel for what my car does, I was underwhelmed.
But then I researched and saw that the throttle was not going to open up more than 60% stock. So no wonder it makes strained progress at that speed.
For US cars, that was not even a concern for Mercedes, who can legally and repeatedly do this anyway..
Now the influence of the charcoal filters is under my opinion not clearly understood either.
I don't think they're filters, because the documentation and construction does not provide for their replacement.
I think they're acoustic dampers, like what other car communities call snorkels.
In other cars they are not in the form of filters, but in the form of winding intake piping.
Anyway, these filters while not showing a HP difference on a dyno, they will make a difference in driving at a higher speed on the road. In US? not a concern for MB.
Which stock is it, base or P30/31/507?
Where are you, US or EU?
Here's my take:
Without calling out speed numbers, which remain forever available for others to search, I will say that engines of high displacement are usually perceived as making easy progress in accelerating at high speed.
When I went to get a feel for what my car does, I was underwhelmed.
But then I researched and saw that the throttle was not going to open up more than 60% stock. So no wonder it makes strained progress at that speed.
For US cars, that was not even a concern for Mercedes, who can legally and repeatedly do this anyway..
Now the influence of the charcoal filters is under my opinion not clearly understood either.
I don't think they're filters, because the documentation and construction does not provide for their replacement.
I think they're acoustic dampers, like what other car communities call snorkels.
In other cars they are not in the form of filters, but in the form of winding intake piping.
Anyway, these filters while not showing a HP difference on a dyno, they will make a difference in driving at a higher speed on the road. In US? not a concern for MB.
Ec v5 tune ran on shell v power uk 98ron
Don't have the weather details from the day so can't comment on them
I'll try a few dirrent runs in various forms and see what I can do I doubt I'll get to the wanted time but an improvement is an improvement
