View Poll Results: WEISTEC 2.3L vs 2.9L
2.3L
4
26.67%
2.9L
10
66.67%
Nitrous
1
6.67%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll
C63 Weistec 2.3L 630whp VID
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
C63 Weistec 2.3L 630whp VID
I would love to open up a debate about the 2.3L being just as effective with the correct setup as the 2.9L. If you watch my video you will see what I mean. The owner has upped the boost since this video and who knows maybe 800? But this is easily the fastest C63 in SoCal
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 391
Likes: 233
C63
I'm doing a 2.9l on my car right now. But I disagree bigger displacement in a blower will always be better and not comparable. Not saying you can't make 2.3l make some power but there would be no need for 2.9l or 3.4l blowers if size didn't really matter.
Also i don't think people publicize their numbers on the 2.9 that often. Ill bet a standard 2.9 on 93 tune with no meth or nitrous puts down 650-680whp. That being said that what the bigger size gets you. Plus you'll also cut down on heat as you're not pushing the supercharger as hard to make the same or more power.
With a tvs I would say you are correct as I dont think you would need the displacement as a twin screw does to make power. Head to head a 2.9 will win vs a 2.3. Anc at how much extra supporting mods are you doing to tame the 2.3 heat etc.
Also i don't think people publicize their numbers on the 2.9 that often. Ill bet a standard 2.9 on 93 tune with no meth or nitrous puts down 650-680whp. That being said that what the bigger size gets you. Plus you'll also cut down on heat as you're not pushing the supercharger as hard to make the same or more power.
With a tvs I would say you are correct as I dont think you would need the displacement as a twin screw does to make power. Head to head a 2.9 will win vs a 2.3. Anc at how much extra supporting mods are you doing to tame the 2.3 heat etc.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 380
From: Texas
10 C six trizzle
The ess kit is better than the weistec by design, but it'll work just fine. and bigger is better. Do you want to push something beyond it's efficiency? that's why all the 205 C63 guys blow up their turbos. Tuners pushing them way too hard. Stock turbos fall on their face around 5,000rpm. I also wouldn't believe a dyno with an ET from actually getting some real world data.
Member
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 99
Likes: 13
C63 amg coupe
I would love to open up a debate about the 2.3L being just as effective with the correct setup as the 2.9L. If you watch my video you will see what I mean. The owner has upped the boost since this video and who knows maybe 800? But this is easily the fastest C63 in SoCal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcATdpPEw5c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcATdpPEw5c
Member
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 242
Likes: 48
From: West by god Virginia
'08 C300 4Matic Sport / '11 C63
So far looks like it's about as likely to find one as it is fairy dust.
EDIT: Confirmed, no reason to ever think of Magnuson Hammer anymore.
Thank you for contacting Magnuson Products.
Unfortunately, the Mercedes supercharger system has been discontinued quite some time ago and is not slated for return.
It is suggested to check eBay, message forums and other resources from time to time for an available kit.
Kind regards,
Kevin Woodruff
Field Sales Manager
Magnuson Products LLC.
1990 Knoll Drive, Building A
Ventura, CA 93003
Office - 1.805.642.8833 x 458
Direct - 1.805.918.5977
Cell - 1.848.240.4052
Last edited by catmandoob; Aug 7, 2020 at 11:05 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 38
From: Seattle
2008 Mercedes Benz E63
My E63 with the stage 2 pulley and 2.3 with MBH long tubes made 530 whp (Dyno Dynamics but corrected to read closer to Dunojet numbers) It ran 11.25 @ 126 mph.
The power was surprisingly low but I was happy with the trap speed. Before the supercharger, the car only made 430 wheel with the headers, row boxes, MBH headers and EC tune. A bone stock one made 405.
The power was surprisingly low but I was happy with the trap speed. Before the supercharger, the car only made 430 wheel with the headers, row boxes, MBH headers and EC tune. A bone stock one made 405.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
My E63 with the stage 2 pulley and 2.3 with MBH long tubes made 530 whp (Dyno Dynamics but corrected to read closer to Dunojet numbers) It ran 11.25 @ 126 mph.
The power was surprisingly low but I was happy with the trap speed. Before the supercharger, the car only made 430 wheel with the headers, row boxes, MBH headers and EC tune. A bone stock one made 405.
The power was surprisingly low but I was happy with the trap speed. Before the supercharger, the car only made 430 wheel with the headers, row boxes, MBH headers and EC tune. A bone stock one made 405.
the process doesn't change from one platform to another, a 2.3 with a proper cooling/fueling/pulley setup will make way more then 530whp-- its all about the setup--- there is nothing stopping this c63 in this video from making close to 750whp-800whp besides tranny and engine which the owner has taken care of that problem, its all about the setup...
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
The ZR1 which probably all motor will make just as much as a c63 being that they are both 6.2's just with a lower compression uses the 2.3L but a roots style where as the wiestec I believe still uses the twin screw style as seen on the 2.9L. It gets interesting because through manual im seeing 800whp +with stacked pullies on these ZR1's. So idk how the 2.3 is not sufficient enough to cause just as big of storm as the 2.9L. Its just a example how how a 2.3L can be extremely effective. Can it be that pete is the only one to exploit the 2.3L to this level? I would have loved to get alex from Gintani here to discuss his claimed 800hp c63 he put together using a Maggie 2.3L, he could give us info on iat's and numbers.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 391
Likes: 233
C63
the process doesn't change from one platform to another, a 2.3 with a proper cooling/fueling/pulley setup will make way more then 530whp-- its all about the setup--- there is nothing stopping this c63 in this video from making close to 750whp-800whp besides tranny and engine which the owner has taken care of that problem, its all about the setup...
Also, the roots style is so efficient that thats why you see zr1 running 1100whp with a 2650r and only about 8-900whp with the whipple. And im Pretty sure its a 2.9 whipple.
To be honest, I toyed with the idea of retro fitting a 2650r or a whipple 3.4l on my car once I'm bored with the weistec setup. I'd bet there's another 100hp to be picked up easily.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 380
From: Texas
10 C six trizzle
Lower compression makes a huge difference on the amount of boost you can run and how it can be used especially on pump fuel (real pump gas not e85). You are also comparing an engine with direct injection as well. Although it's a dinosaur pushrod motor with only 16 valves, DI i a game changer, also optimized camshafts for a supercharger vs optimized cams for n/a on the M156. You can inject fuel after the intake valve is closed and during the combustion process. Not really comparable. Let me also mentioned they flex fuel capability and maps in the ecu unlike ME9.7.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 45
Likes: 27
From: AU
2010 c63
That is a lot of power, more than my stage 3 makes on 98. Is there any 1/4 mile info, be interesting to see ET and MPH in particular.
Altogether that thing is a menace. Might have just become a satin black convert.
Altogether that thing is a menace. Might have just become a satin black convert.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
Lower compression makes a huge difference on the amount of boost you can run and how it can be used especially on pump fuel (real pump gas not e85). You are also comparing an engine with direct injection as well. Although it's a dinosaur pushrod motor with only 16 valves, DI i a game changer, also optimized camshafts for a supercharger vs optimized cams for n/a on the M156. You can inject fuel after the intake valve is closed and during the combustion process. Not really comparable. Let me also mentioned they flex fuel capability and maps in the ecu unlike ME9.7.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
he is making way more now then in that video I will have a update video soon, he runs it only in the 1/2 mile and hasn't ran it yet with the new setup-- he kept heat soaking at those events but he has solved the problem now
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
Lower compression makes a huge difference on the amount of boost you can run and how it can be used especially on pump fuel (real pump gas not e85). You are also comparing an engine with direct injection as well. Although it's a dinosaur pushrod motor with only 16 valves, DI i a game changer, also optimized camshafts for a supercharger vs optimized cams for n/a on the M156. You can inject fuel after the intake valve is closed and during the combustion process. Not really comparable. Let me also mentioned they flex fuel capability and maps in the ecu unlike ME9.7.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
Look at your heavy hitters now with 2.9 blowers. Theyre making 7-800whp on e85. The 2.9 is running out of steam fir them, so idk how you think you do that kind of power with a 2.3. I just don't see it.
Also, the roots style is so efficient that thats why you see zr1 running 1100whp with a 2650r and only about 8-900whp with the whipple. And im Pretty sure its a 2.9 whipple.
To be honest, I toyed with the idea of retro fitting a 2650r or a whipple 3.4l on my car once I'm bored with the weistec setup. I'd bet there's another 100hp to be picked up easily.
Also, the roots style is so efficient that thats why you see zr1 running 1100whp with a 2650r and only about 8-900whp with the whipple. And im Pretty sure its a 2.9 whipple.
To be honest, I toyed with the idea of retro fitting a 2650r or a whipple 3.4l on my car once I'm bored with the weistec setup. I'd bet there's another 100hp to be picked up easily.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 412
2010 C63 AMG
the twin screw is more efficient in almost every way over a roots... shorter air travel path, quicker boost production, cooler charge temperature and less parasitic drive cost. They look similar but they do operate differently
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 391
Likes: 233
C63
I agree with the displacement being drastic, but not the fact twin screw is more efficient anymore. The new tvs 2650R is a hell of a design and makes more power with less heat than its whipple 2.9 counter part. Its one of the reasons alot of gm guys go with it over whipple or others. It can literally make 1100whp over whipples 8-900 whp.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 412
2010 C63 AMG
I agree with the displacement being drastic, but not the fact twin screw is more efficient anymore. The new tvs 2650R is a hell of a design and makes more power with less heat than its whipple 2.9 counter part. Its one of the reasons alot of gm guys go with it over whipple or others. It can literally make 1100whp over whipples 8-900 whp.
edit didn’t realize the whipple are twin screw as well the TVS is a multi screw is it not?
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 391
Likes: 233
C63
I’m confused... you say you don’t think the twin screw is more efficient anymore (which is just a design trait the it will inevitably be more efficient than a roots type blower). But than for evidence show that a smaller screw blower Tvs is better than the larger and less efficient roots type whipple?
Here's a link comparing blowers for i think an lt4 zl1 and he literally says the whipple even though bigger makes a little less power. 950-1k fir the whipple and 1100-1400 for the 2650 variants.
Before the new designs of roots implemented in 07 ish i would agree on the twin screw. But not anymore. Honestly I'd like to see how a 2650r or a 3.4 whipple would fair on our cars. My weistec stage 3 is not finished yet, hopefully soon if I get some free time. But in the future I plan to mock a 2650 or 3.4 to my car and maybe do some test.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 412
2010 C63 AMG
Answer my own question just read up on the 2650 and yeah that’s crazy I had just assumed it was a twin screw. It is as you specified a roots. Amazing because I’ve seen them put on to replace larger twin screws and pick up a bit of power. Learned something new for the day 👍
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 380
From: Texas
10 C six trizzle
I have no idea how 2015 mustangs do with stock cams. I don't care about mustangs, so i have no comment there lol. I'm not dismissing the fact that n/a cams cannot be used. btw my car has a supercharger on stock cams. Im stating that cam profile is going to be much different on a factory boosted vehicle vs one that wasn't intended to be boosted. You will never see 800whp on a c63 with a 2.3L blower without nitrous.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 387
Likes: 18
From: New York
2005 CL55 (sold) C63 Coupe 2012 p31(sold) Audi 330awhp E55 511WHP(sold)Z06C6 550whp C63 LTH
Ive been on the claim of the twin screw being better .He may be referring to iats which can be a good debate but in terms of overall power I do believe the twin screw will put down more power with the same displacement as the roots
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 391
Likes: 233
C63
I wouldve agreed until the redesign of the new 4 rotor eaton tvs roots blower. Im pretty sure the 2650r blower will outperform the whipple/twin screw 2.9l blower in almost all instances.
The new 4 rotor roots is so efficient. They even give rough hp estimates on the 4 blowers in the video and the twin screw is the lowest rated.
I would love to see R&D of a 2650r on an m156 to see how it compares to the whipple 2.9l. I'd bet we be impressed if not happy to see gains.
