C63/C63S AMG
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Burger Motorsports 2018 C63 Dyno Testing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 04-05-2019, 10:08 PM
  #376  
Junior Member
 
scrufy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 52
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
2019 C63 s
Originally Posted by crazy1eye
From what I’ve read & what I’ve managed with my C63S that has drop in low profile air filters & secondary cat delete, you can check my posts in the 1/4 mile thread, there’s definitely a gain in the 1/2 mile of at least 5 mph compared to my 144-145 mph runs.
Good to see improvements crazy, but I'd really like to see some dyno numbers.
Terry:
I have a '19 C63S and am only in Pasadena so very close if you want to try some (very) safe pulls.
Old 04-06-2019, 05:45 AM
  #377  
Senior Member
 
crazy1eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal Quebec
Posts: 396
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
2016 C63S, 2012 ML350
Originally Posted by scrufy
Good to see improvements crazy, but I'd really like to see some dyno numbers.
Terry:
I have a '19 C63S and am only in Pasadena so very close if you want to try some (very) safe pulls.
Sorry, as I added above, I do not have a jb4 yet, I know people are wanting to see dyno numbers & I was just adding my 2 cents regarding track numbers.
Old 04-06-2019, 07:04 PM
  #378  
Junior Member
 
mbfan219's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 55
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
W205 C63s
Just finished installing the JB4 in my C63s. Ran it on map 2 for an hour or so with no issues. Definite improvement! Will try to get a dyno in the next few weeks. Had a small issue with forgetting to reconnect a wire that was removed for slack during installation but all fixed and Jon at Burger Motorsports was a huge help. I'm very pleased.
Old 04-06-2019, 11:25 PM
  #379  
Junior Member
 
scrufy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 52
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
2019 C63 s
On the mobile app.. Why not just make it car play and android auto compatible.
That way there wouldn't be any need for that funky suction magnet mount.
i know probably way too many hoops to jump through with Apple and Google but it would be nice.
Old 04-07-2019, 06:59 AM
  #380  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Originally Posted by mbfan219
Just finished installing the JB4 in my C63s. Ran it on map 2 for an hour or so with no issues. Definite improvement! Will try to get a dyno in the next few weeks. Had a small issue with forgetting to reconnect a wire that was removed for slack during installation but all fixed and Jon at Burger Motorsports was a huge help. I'm very pleased.
Is your car stock? Seems like map 2 was being mentioned as best used with other mods and also requires messing with plug gaps.

Hoping for an update from BMS soon with stock S figures, map recommendation on 93, and install video.

One other thing that I don’t get is why the boost reduction by gear is called some whacky parameter name...would really simplify and clarify if it were renamed “boost reduction” and had an input for each gear, and also the values should be entered as negative...confusing that they are positive when they have the opposite effect. Also, would be nice to come pre-set to the ideal boost reduction settings for a stock vehicle. Worst case, make it like “Map 1 BR”, “Map 2 BR” etc. One less thing to have to mess with.
Old 04-07-2019, 07:32 AM
  #381  
Junior Member
 
mbfan219's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 55
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
W205 C63s
Stock C63s. 93 octane fuel. Didn’t mess with any settings (boost reduction by gear etc, or plug gaps).

Install wasn’t too difficult - definitely doable if you follow the instructions by any home mechanic. I used the guide on their website which worked great. Getting the map 1 and map 3 sensor connectors off was a pain since Mercedes buried them in the front under a plastic guard that you have to loosen a lot of stuff to get to it. Took me about 5 hours all in because this was the first time I had removed the air boxes, etc, so it took a little while to be familiar with everything. If I did the install again I could do it in about three hours.

Last edited by mbfan219; 04-07-2019 at 07:40 AM.
Old 04-08-2019, 01:45 PM
  #382  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
raudiace4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: IL
Posts: 1,498
Received 581 Likes on 334 Posts
19 E63s, 23 M3 compX, B9 SQ5
+1 in for Intake release date.
Old 04-10-2019, 03:39 PM
  #383  
Junior Member
 
DonC63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
C63
You guys all Suck
I just ordered me a JB4
Old 04-10-2019, 05:00 PM
  #384  
Member
 
Vader-C63sE1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 97
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
2017 C63s Edition 1 JB4
Originally Posted by raudiace4
+1 in for Intake release date.
+1 here too for Intake
Old 04-17-2019, 02:20 PM
  #385  
Member
 
Vader-C63sE1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 97
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
2017 C63s Edition 1 JB4
Just ordered the JB4 and the BT Wireless Connector, should be fun!
Old 05-16-2019, 02:10 PM
  #386  
Junior Member
 
V8rumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
C63
Any updates on the intakes?
Old 05-16-2019, 03:54 PM
  #387  
BMS
Former Vendor of MBWorld
 
BMS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Simi Valley, California
Posts: 827
Received 152 Likes on 109 Posts
2018 C63 Sedan
Originally Posted by V8rumble
Any updates on the intakes?
They're at powder coating right now. Maybe another week or two at most!

Old 05-16-2019, 04:53 PM
  #388  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Trying to piece this together since there is no C63S dyno available... If the non-S car made 465 whp stock (rated at 469 crank), and then made 537 whp with the JB4, we see a 72 hp gain. The S is rated at 503 crank, and following similar logic, it should be about 500 whp stock. I believe we have been told that the peak power will be the same on JB4 between S and Non S cars, so it would end up with the same 537 whp. So, really all we are going to gain is ~37 whp on an S model?

Would be nice to have a stock S dyno as a baseline, then add just your JB4 on pump gas (not mixing in any E85 that 99% of us won't ever mess with) and then a third with JB4 on pump gas plus your intake.
Old 05-16-2019, 07:06 PM
  #389  
Newbie
 
Gbango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
16' C63s
No idea on actual numbers for my S, but it definitely felt to be somewhere in between 540-580whp. Ended up trading in the car, so I have my 1 month old JB4 with Bluetooth for sale.
Old 05-18-2019, 03:43 PM
  #390  
Junior Member
 
scrufy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 52
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
2019 C63 s
Originally Posted by ezatnova
Trying to piece this together since there is no C63S dyno available... If the non-S car made 465 whp stock (rated at 469 crank), and then made 537 whp with the JB4, we see a 72 hp gain. The S is rated at 503 crank, and following similar logic, it should be about 500 whp stock. I believe we have been told that the peak power will be the same on JB4 between S and Non S cars, so it would end up with the same 537 whp. So, really all we are going to gain is ~37 whp on an S model?

Would be nice to have a stock S dyno as a baseline, then add just your JB4 on pump gas (not mixing in any E85 that 99% of us won't ever mess with) and then a third with JB4 on pump gas plus your intake.
Your math doesn't add up there. If a non S made 469 crank then there is no way it's making 465 whp. There is roughly 10-15 percent loss in the drivetrain.
I think the HP numbers from Merc would be usable - say 12% for an avg whp but the problem is I've read a few Dyno numbers that suggest AMG under rated the m177 by quite a bit so unless we use a before and after on the same Dyno and same day there really is no data. Just random shot in the dark. I think BMS posted one early on but this thread has evolved so much I don't think any of that info is valid anymore.
Might be time to get some updated numbers?
I probably won't be getting one for my S just because there are some differences between S and non S and the tuner has never even tested in house on an S.
Don't get me wrong, I used the JB3 then JB4 on my 335i for years back around 2009 to 2014 then a JB4 on my M3 . I just think there isn't enough going into my current car for a complete understanding.
The following users liked this post:
AMGMessiah (05-23-2019)
Old 05-18-2019, 05:33 PM
  #391  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Originally Posted by scrufy
Your math doesn't add up there. If a non S made 469 crank then there is no way it's making 465 whp. There is roughly 10-15 percent loss in the drivetrain.
I think the HP numbers from Merc would be usable - say 12% for an avg whp but the problem is I've read a few Dyno numbers that suggest AMG under rated the m177 by quite a bit so unless we use a before and after on the same Dyno and same day there really is no data. Just random shot in the dark. I think BMS posted one early on but this thread has evolved so much I don't think any of that info is valid anymore.
Might be time to get some updated numbers?
I probably won't be getting one for my S just because there are some differences between S and non S and the tuner has never even tested in house on an S.
Don't get me wrong, I used the JB3 then JB4 on my 335i for years back around 2009 to 2014 then a JB4 on my M3 . I just think there isn't enough going into my current car for a complete understanding.
All I’m doing is using BMS’s own graphs. It shows whp is 5 shy of claimed crank. All I did was use the same logic for the S.

That aside, I agree, somewhat disappointing that there isn’t testing being published with an S at this stage of the game.

I too used the JB3 on my 2007 335i and was very happy with it.

Last edited by ezatnova; 05-18-2019 at 05:36 PM.
Old 05-18-2019, 08:32 PM
  #392  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
RDOCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,216
Received 112 Likes on 97 Posts
2016 C63S Sedan
Originally Posted by ezatnova
All I’m doing is using BMS’s own graphs. It shows whp is 5 shy of claimed crank. All I did was use the same logic for the S.

That aside, I agree, somewhat disappointing that there isn’t testing being published with an S at this stage of the game.

I too used the JB3 on my 2007 335i and was very happy with it.
A stock C63S will have approx 470 WHP and and it is under rated by about 30 HP per Dinan. They say 533 HP stock and that would look correct using 470 WHP and a drive line loss of 12 % would give 534 HP.
Most stage 1 tunes will give some where around 70 HP increase. After watching these threads over the last 4 years I think this is quite close.

Last edited by RDOCA; 05-20-2019 at 06:35 PM.
Old 05-19-2019, 05:46 PM
  #393  
Junior Member
 
scrufy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 52
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
2019 C63 s
Originally Posted by RDOCA
A stock C63S will have approx 470 WHP and and it is under rated by about 30 HP per Dinan. They say 533 HP stock and that would look correct using 470 HP at the crank and a drive line loss of 12 % would give 534 HP.
Most stage 1 tunes will give some where around 70 HP increase. After watching these threads over the last 4 years I think this is quite close.
Yeah I think he missed the point I was making. AMG under rated the HP so BMS stock pull whp just shows that.
Old 06-12-2019, 07:56 AM
  #394  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Originally Posted by BMS
They're at powder coating right now. Maybe another week or two at most!
Any new issues or updates? Been a long week!
Old 06-12-2019, 01:09 PM
  #395  
BMS
Former Vendor of MBWorld
 
BMS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Simi Valley, California
Posts: 827
Received 152 Likes on 109 Posts
2018 C63 Sedan
Originally Posted by ezatnova
Any new issues or updates? Been a long week!
Everything has been delayed longer than expected as always

Once I get a firm answer, I'll update again.

-Payam
Old 06-12-2019, 01:36 PM
  #396  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Originally Posted by BMS
Everything has been delayed longer than expected as always

Once I get a firm answer, I'll update again.

-Payam
Sounds good. Looking forward to it!

Any action as far as an install video being wrapped up for the JB4? I believe there was talk about this a few months back?
Old 08-07-2019, 07:10 AM
  #397  
Super Member
 
ezatnova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Received 70 Likes on 55 Posts
2016 C63S
Installed my JB4 last weekend. As others have said, it’s not super easy the first time, but also not terrible. Sensor 1 and 3 took a while and four hands is definitely a help. Took about 3 hours. I also took extra time to RTV around the existing gasket of the JB4 enclosure, as well as in the wire sections entering the top and bottom of the enclosure to help ensure it is water tight.

Anyway, initial impression is overall positive. Personally I notice more of an improvement from stock to map 1 than map 1 to map 2, which makes sense given the delta is ~+3 psi on map 1 and ~+4 on map 2.

Have sent some logs to BMS and Terry seems fine with both maps’ results. I am otherwise stock, on 93 octane.

I need to explore boost by gear. But haven’t had time yet.

Also particularly on map 2, I’ve noticed some part throttle (20-50%) non-linear rpm increase (i.e. surge/lag). I need to explore more and compare back to back with map 1 and map 0.

In the meantime, can anyone give me a general sense of healthy results for some of the parameters in the logs? i.e. AFR, Trim, IGN, load, etc. I’m just not sure what to really watch for in the logs.

Map 2 log below:

Last edited by ezatnova; 08-07-2019 at 07:26 AM.
Old 08-07-2019, 08:47 AM
  #398  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
raudiace4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: IL
Posts: 1,498
Received 581 Likes on 334 Posts
19 E63s, 23 M3 compX, B9 SQ5
Perhaps some of you JB4 guys can get some 1/4 track times to compare vs the ECU tune people. Stock vs JB4 vs Ecu Tune would be nice to see for people on the fence about their options.
Old 08-07-2019, 09:22 AM
  #399  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
AlexZTuned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,537
Received 368 Likes on 262 Posts
2017 Porsche 911 C4
Originally Posted by raudiace4
Perhaps some of you JB4 guys can get some 1/4 track times to compare vs the ECU tune people. Stock vs JB4 vs Ecu Tune would be nice to see for people on the fence about their options.
That’s what I’d like to see as well.

I ran 11.5 @ 127 mph in Texas heat with just a Dinan piggyback and 305 PS4S’s in the rear. Tank of straight
93 octane with no booster/ethanol. I haven’t seen JB4 best that time or mph even with their full intake and E30 blend.

I wish more people were active so we could get more JB4 results...
Old 08-07-2019, 11:28 AM
  #400  
Member
 
GuardianVA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: the Right coast
Posts: 212
Received 64 Likes on 46 Posts
'19 C43
Originally Posted by ezatnova
Installed my JB4 last weekend. As others have said, it’s not super easy the first time, but also not terrible. Sensor 1 and 3 took a while and four hands is definitely a help. Took about 3 hours. I also took extra time to RTV around the existing gasket of the JB4 enclosure, as well as in the wire sections entering the top and bottom of the enclosure to help ensure it is water tight.

Anyway, initial impression is overall positive. Personally I notice more of an improvement from stock to map 1 than map 1 to map 2, which makes sense given the delta is ~+3 psi on map 1 and ~+4 on map 2.

Have sent some logs to BMS and Terry seems fine with both maps’ results. I am otherwise stock, on 93 octane.

I need to explore boost by gear. But haven’t had time yet.

Also particularly on map 2, I’ve noticed some part throttle (20-50%) non-linear rpm increase (i.e. surge/lag). I need to explore more and compare back to back with map 1 and map 0.

In the meantime, can anyone give me a general sense of healthy results for some of the parameters in the logs? i.e. AFR, Trim, IGN, load, etc. I’m just not sure what to really watch for in the logs.

Map 2 log below:
AFR looks a little rich (upper 10s low 11s) getting toward redline, but hard to know exactly what the numbers are just looking at the graph. Can you post the .csv file? Otherwise, looks fine. Even if it is running rich, it won't hurt performance appreciably, but is kinda wasting fuel.


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Burger Motorsports 2018 C63 Dyno Testing



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:02 PM.