Burger Motorsports 2018 C63 Dyno Testing
Member
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 165
Likes: 15
From: Temecula, CA
Current: 2017 C63S Prior: 2016 CLA45, 2015 Evo X Final Edition
Glad to see I'm not the only one hassling BMS about this intake
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
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.
Attaching The .CSV here.
Thanks
Last edited by ezatnova; Aug 8, 2019 at 12:42 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 288
Likes: 15
C63 W205 17' + W205 C250@brabus + NSX 95'
I am glad that it worked for you. I am using map1 for few thousands km, my car is DD. Had problems with smoothnes while in comfort, map1/2 4th gear and full throttle, changed spark plugs and gets smoother, but sometimes there is slight hesitation in rpms. here is log of my map2 and also video of acceleration.
and old video with hesitation
and old video with hesitation
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 827
Likes: 152
From: Simi Valley, California
2018 C63 Sedan
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 827
Likes: 152
From: Simi Valley, California
2018 C63 Sedan
I am glad that it worked for you. I am using map1 for few thousands km, my car is DD. Had problems with smoothnes while in comfort, map1/2 4th gear and full throttle, changed spark plugs and gets smoother, but sometimes there is slight hesitation in rpms. here is log of my map2 and also video of acceleration.
https://vimeo.com/348879382
and old video with hesitation
https://vimeo.com/347098631
https://vimeo.com/348879382
and old video with hesitation
https://vimeo.com/347098631
Member
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 212
Likes: 64
From: the Right coast
'19 C43
Yea, it's a bit too rich, dipping into the uppers 10s AFR toward redline. The other numbers look good. Running that rich might be costing you some power and is wasting fuel unnecessarily, but it isn't anything to worry about. If you want to squeeze a little more power out of it, then you can try getting with BMS and see about settings to get those AFR into the 12s or high 11s toward redline.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
Yea, it's a bit too rich, dipping into the uppers 10s AFR toward redline. The other numbers look good. Running that rich might be costing you some power and is wasting fuel unnecessarily, but it isn't anything to worry about. If you want to squeeze a little more power out of it, then you can try getting with BMS and see about settings to get those AFR into the 12s or high 11s toward redline.
Thanks. Yeah I think my next steps are going to be trying to get some part throttle logs and see if we can dig into why things don't run as smooth as stock (and ensure that things are equally as smooth as stock on map 0, which they certainly should be since my understanding is that map 0 is a bypass). It's nothing violent by any means, but symptoms range from a random little hiccup at idle to a bit of hesitation/buck at lighter throttle in 1st, to revs hesitating somewhat and just not being smooth-as-stock in 3rd and 4th gear mid-throttle levels. Not sure if stuff like that is just the nature of the piggyback beast, or if it's something they need to study and improve as it moves out of beta status. What I have not noticed is any of that hesitation happening at WOT, like in notabenex's video.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 288
Likes: 15
C63 W205 17' + W205 C250@brabus + NSX 95'
Thanks. Yeah I think my next steps are going to be trying to get some part throttle logs and see if we can dig into why things don't run as smooth as stock (and ensure that things are equally as smooth as stock on map 0, which they certainly should be since my understanding is that map 0 is a bypass). It's nothing violent by any means, but symptoms range from a random little hiccup at idle to a bit of hesitation/buck at lighter throttle in 1st, to revs hesitating somewhat and just not being smooth-as-stock in 3rd and 4th gear mid-throttle levels. Not sure if stuff like that is just the nature of the piggyback beast, or if it's something they need to study and improve as it moves out of beta status. What I have not noticed is any of that hesitation happening at WOT, like in notabenex's video.
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
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 453
Likes: 91
From: DFW, Texas
2017 AMG C63
Have my JB4 in the garage waiting for me to get time to install. The suspense is killing me! lol
How many people are sending their logs to BMS for fine tuning vs. just running the maps 'off the shelf'?
How many people are sending their logs to BMS for fine tuning vs. just running the maps 'off the shelf'?
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
You’ll want to run map 1 and send some good logs on their thread on the BMS forum (I assume you know the one. If not, PM me...not sure of MBWorld’s rules on linking to other forums). The program is still in beta so they should check how it’s running on your car. Also, as far as I’m concerned, they need to see more data to iron out some smoothness and fine tuning, so the more data they get the better the collective pool becomes.
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 869
Likes: 35
From: Pacific NW
AMG GT-R
I'm interested in running the JB4 with a flash tuned ecu just for the boost by gear alone. Traction off the line is my biggest concern and I doubt the added boost in 1-2 gears is going to make the car quicker from a standing start. I'm just throwing out arbitrary numbers here, but let's say a stock car is making 10psi max boost in all gears, and a tune increases that to 12psi in all gears, will I be able to use the JB4 to dial back the boost to 10psi in gears 1 and 2?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that you can't drop the boost below what is set in the ecu? So if this is the case, maybe having a custom tune with gears 1 and 2 set at a lower boost level, for example 6psi, and then using the JB4 to control it from there would be optimal for fine tuning the boost for the best hookup?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that you can't drop the boost below what is set in the ecu? So if this is the case, maybe having a custom tune with gears 1 and 2 set at a lower boost level, for example 6psi, and then using the JB4 to control it from there would be optimal for fine tuning the boost for the best hookup?
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 827
Likes: 152
From: Simi Valley, California
2018 C63 Sedan
I'm interested in running the JB4 with a flash tuned ecu just for the boost by gear alone. Traction off the line is my biggest concern and I doubt the added boost in 1-2 gears is going to make the car quicker from a standing start. I'm just throwing out arbitrary numbers here, but let's say a stock car is making 10psi max boost in all gears, and a tune increases that to 12psi in all gears, will I be able to use the JB4 to dial back the boost to 10psi in gears 1 and 2?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that you can't drop the boost below what is set in the ecu? So if this is the case, maybe having a custom tune with gears 1 and 2 set at a lower boost level, for example 6psi, and then using the JB4 to control it from there would be optimal for fine tuning the boost for the best hookup?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that you can't drop the boost below what is set in the ecu? So if this is the case, maybe having a custom tune with gears 1 and 2 set at a lower boost level, for example 6psi, and then using the JB4 to control it from there would be optimal for fine tuning the boost for the best hookup?
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 869
Likes: 35
From: Pacific NW
AMG GT-R
Oh great, so just to clarify, I would be fine to go with an off the shelf tune from say Renntech that for example increases boost to 16psi, and if I wanted to set the boost to 8psi in first gear I would just enter 8psi in JB4 to reduce it by that amount?
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 453
Likes: 91
From: DFW, Texas
2017 AMG C63
Installed my JB4 tonight and went for a spin - wow!
Initial quick review:
Map 1 - not bad but looking for more ...
Map 2 - found it!
- Map 0 felt like stock of course.
- Map 1 was noticeably faster, more power, tires spin more easily and throttle is responsive. But I definitely did not buy this thing for map one.
- Map 2 was the same but even more power. Feels close to my old 548whp N54 535i, but power delivery is more midrange which is nice.
I plan to try out map 3 this weekend! - after I swing by an E85 station, probably do a 20% mix to start and see how it logs. Expecting good results
I didn't notice any hesitation or odd behavior at idle, part throttle, or full throttle on any map. It did do a very slight stumble when I switched from map 0 to map 1 on JB4 app with engine running the first time but was not concerning. I switched maps after that with engine idling and did not notice it again.
Over all I'm very pleased so far! More to come ...
Initial quick review:
Map 1 - not bad but looking for more ...
Map 2 - found it!
- Map 0 felt like stock of course.
- Map 1 was noticeably faster, more power, tires spin more easily and throttle is responsive. But I definitely did not buy this thing for map one.
- Map 2 was the same but even more power. Feels close to my old 548whp N54 535i, but power delivery is more midrange which is nice.
I plan to try out map 3 this weekend! - after I swing by an E85 station, probably do a 20% mix to start and see how it logs. Expecting good results
I didn't notice any hesitation or odd behavior at idle, part throttle, or full throttle on any map. It did do a very slight stumble when I switched from map 0 to map 1 on JB4 app with engine running the first time but was not concerning. I switched maps after that with engine idling and did not notice it again.
Over all I'm very pleased so far! More to come ...
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 453
Likes: 91
From: DFW, Texas
2017 AMG C63
Update to last post:
After running well on map 2 for a few days, I started exploring higher maps with an ethanol mix of E25.
Map 3 and 4 had no problems, and power was noticeably increased over map 2.
Running E25 and map 5 now, logs look good just had to raise FOL a bit more to 55.
Tracton at 50 mph WOT hit is a challenge!
Log attached for anyone interested.
After running well on map 2 for a few days, I started exploring higher maps with an ethanol mix of E25.
Map 3 and 4 had no problems, and power was noticeably increased over map 2.
Running E25 and map 5 now, logs look good just had to raise FOL a bit more to 55.
Tracton at 50 mph WOT hit is a challenge!
Log attached for anyone interested.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
Update to last post:
After running well on map 2 for a few days, I started exploring higher maps with an ethanol mix of E25.
Map 3 and 4 had no problems, and power was noticeably increased over map 2.
Running E25 and map 5 now, logs look good just had to raise FOL a bit more to 55.
Tracton at 50 mph WOT hit is a challenge!
Log attached for anyone interested.
After running well on map 2 for a few days, I started exploring higher maps with an ethanol mix of E25.
Map 3 and 4 had no problems, and power was noticeably increased over map 2.
Running E25 and map 5 now, logs look good just had to raise FOL a bit more to 55.
Tracton at 50 mph WOT hit is a challenge!
Log attached for anyone interested.
- looks like you short shifted (manual mode maybe)? Car seemed to shift up at only 5800 rpm
- seems like really not more boost than I logged on Map 2. Aside from your quick spike in the 18’s, which I believe was a shift-spike, it was basically making mid 16’s, which is the same as I got on Map 2. (My graph is in post 397). Perhaps it’s the taper that’s different, and not peak?
- your AFR was more lean (and arguably “proper”) than mine was. Yours being in the 12-14 range while mine was in the 10-11 range. Perhaps this is where Maps over 2 make more power? Not by boost but by leaning out? Or is there even more to it behind the scenes?
- general question for BMS...since the logs show that the gear can’t be read (always shows gear: 0), I assume you’re sure that boost-by-gear reduction actually works?
Last edited by ezatnova; Aug 28, 2019 at 04:44 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 453
Likes: 91
From: DFW, Texas
2017 AMG C63
- seems like really not more boost than I logged on Map 2. Aside from your quick spike in the 18’s, which I believe was a shift-spike, it was basically making mid 16’s, which is the same as I got on Map 2. (My graph is in post 397). Perhaps it’s the taper that’s different, and not peak?
OK looked at it: peak boost is similar but the way BMS maps on the JB4 work is that they add X PSI to to the ECUs requested boost. So you need to compare the delta between ECU PSI and boost. Yours is right around 5 which is correct for map 2 per BMS info. Whereas my boost is consistently 7PSI or so higher than requested ECU boost, which is correct per BMS info for map 5. So I think the tunes are operating correctly in both our cases. Question is really, why was your car requesting more boost… not sure where you live, but it has been a 100 plus degrees here lately so guessing that is driving down how much boost my ECU thinks it needs.
- your AFR was more lean (and arguably “proper”) than mine was. Yours being in the 12-14 range while mine was in the 10-11 range. Perhaps this is where Maps over 2 make more power? Not by boost but by leaning out? Or is there even more to it behind the scenes?
In your case you do probably have a little power left on the table with AFRs a little rich, but very much doubt that BMS designed their maps that way.
Hopefully Terry/BMS can chime in on why AFR is rich on your logs. Definitely more to it behind the scenes.
- general question for BMS...since the logs show that the gear can’t be read (always shows gear: 0), I assume you’re sure that boost-by-gear reduction actually works?
Last edited by LessIsMore; Aug 28, 2019 at 10:56 PM.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
yes, ned to take another log. my main goal on these runs was to ensure trims were not maxxing out and AFR was healthy. And these were enough for that.
Map 3-5 peak should be progressively higher than Map 2, but also hold boost progressively more in high rpm as well. My logs of map 2 - 5 do show this progression clearly... Will check out your log...
OK looked at it: peak boost is similar but the way BMS maps on the JB4 work is that they add X PSI to to the ECUs requested boost. So you need to compare the delta between ECU PSI and boost. Yours is right around 5 which is correct for map 2 per BMS info. Whereas my boost is consistently 7PSI or so higher than requested ECU boost, which is correct per BMS info for map 5. So I think the tunes are operating correctly in both our cases. Question is really, why was your car requesting more boost… not sure where you live, but it has been a 100 plus degrees here lately so guessing that is driving down how much boost my ECU thinks it needs.
I dont know how BMS designd the maps, but IMO all maps should be tuned to keep the AFRs in the same "safe" range. Too rich isnt good either.
In your case you do probably have a little power left on the table with AFRs a little rich, but very much doubt that BMS designed their maps that way.
Hopefully Terry/BMS can chime in on why AFR is rich on your logs. Definitely more to it behind the scenes.
Wondered the same thing when i started reading the C63 logs. Also would be really good to have cylinders 2 - 8 timing logged as welll.
Map 3-5 peak should be progressively higher than Map 2, but also hold boost progressively more in high rpm as well. My logs of map 2 - 5 do show this progression clearly... Will check out your log...
OK looked at it: peak boost is similar but the way BMS maps on the JB4 work is that they add X PSI to to the ECUs requested boost. So you need to compare the delta between ECU PSI and boost. Yours is right around 5 which is correct for map 2 per BMS info. Whereas my boost is consistently 7PSI or so higher than requested ECU boost, which is correct per BMS info for map 5. So I think the tunes are operating correctly in both our cases. Question is really, why was your car requesting more boost… not sure where you live, but it has been a 100 plus degrees here lately so guessing that is driving down how much boost my ECU thinks it needs.
I dont know how BMS designd the maps, but IMO all maps should be tuned to keep the AFRs in the same "safe" range. Too rich isnt good either.
In your case you do probably have a little power left on the table with AFRs a little rich, but very much doubt that BMS designed their maps that way.
Hopefully Terry/BMS can chime in on why AFR is rich on your logs. Definitely more to it behind the scenes.
Wondered the same thing when i started reading the C63 logs. Also would be really good to have cylinders 2 - 8 timing logged as welll.
Makes sense about JB4 adding X boost on top of the stock ECU request. And that is interesting how your car was calling for ~2 psi less than mine, making the tunes’ boost about equal between your map 5 and my map 2 (although more taper on my map 2, I think). My temps here around Philly were hot too. Was probably 85 or so then. Check out my IAT’s...even a bit warmer than yours.
If you don’t mind, maybe once you are back on pump gas, get a good map 2 run and we can compare that to my file. I run 93 octane FWIW.
Last edited by ezatnova; Aug 28, 2019 at 11:38 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 453
Likes: 91
From: DFW, Texas
2017 AMG C63
Do you have an intake?
If you don’t mind, maybe once you are back on pump gas, get a good map 2 run and we can compare that to my file. I run 93 octane FWIW.
Last edited by LessIsMore; Aug 29, 2019 at 12:18 AM.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 71
2016 C63S
Thanks. No intake...patiently waiting to finally see BMS's and will consider that.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 17
Likes: 1
From: Roanoke, VA
2015 C63S
Haven't seen an update in a month. Did we ever get any dyno's or 1/4 mile times for a C63S with this on? I'm still looking at purchasing one but was really looking to have some valid date to refer to before I dropped my $$.
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 827
Likes: 152
From: Simi Valley, California
2018 C63 Sedan
-Payam
