Injectors, Tune, and Intake Dyno
Thread Starter
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 717
Likes: 1
From: Dunellen, NJ
Chrysler Crossfire
Injectors, Tune, and Intake Dyno
We just finished up a dyno of two cars today.
Car 1: 01 C320, Mods: Shorty headers, UD Pulleys, C32 Exhaust, Injectors, Intake, Tune, Magnecor wires. 189 RWHP, 199 RWTQ
Car 2: 00 CLK320, Mods: Injectors, Intake, Tune. 177 RWHP, 190 RWTQ
As a disclaimer these numbers are only relevant to be compared to each other. Nearly every dyno is going to give different results as another.
Car 1: 01 C320, Mods: Shorty headers, UD Pulleys, C32 Exhaust, Injectors, Intake, Tune, Magnecor wires. 189 RWHP, 199 RWTQ
Car 2: 00 CLK320, Mods: Injectors, Intake, Tune. 177 RWHP, 190 RWTQ
As a disclaimer these numbers are only relevant to be compared to each other. Nearly every dyno is going to give different results as another.
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
From: PK, NY
2kCLK320
I figured lack of base line numbers would toss up a few 
The dyno was a dynopack 2000, this type of dyno attaches strait to the hubs. As it was explained to me since there is no inertia for the wheel or roller as in a mustang or dynojet the numbers should be about 9% lower then the other more common dynos. I have no idea what a stock 320 motor should be putting out and I realize a random baseline wont directly compare but if anyone has stock dyno numbers they want to share...
The dyno was a dynopack 2000, this type of dyno attaches strait to the hubs. As it was explained to me since there is no inertia for the wheel or roller as in a mustang or dynojet the numbers should be about 9% lower then the other more common dynos. I have no idea what a stock 320 motor should be putting out and I realize a random baseline wont directly compare but if anyone has stock dyno numbers they want to share...
Thread Starter
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 717
Likes: 1
From: Dunellen, NJ
Chrysler Crossfire
Yea sorry, no baseline numbers that's why I wasn't claiming any gains just kind of throwing it out there.
As a comparison: (taken from our C320 thread)
Anyway, Results are: 189 RWHP, 199 RWTQ. Shop owner said this dyno is about 9% lower then a Dynojet (originally used). So corrected numbers are: 207 RWHP, 219 RWTQ. This is 8 RWHP less then our Crossfire which is a manual.
The biggest difference is the area under the curve. We saw a massive (for a 3.2L) amount of TQ from the 3400-5000 mark.
Stock(SI tune, UD Pulleys, Exhaust): 163 HP/ 169 TQ
Modded: 207 HP/ 219 TQ
Gain: 44 HP, 50 TQ
As a comparison: (taken from our C320 thread)
Anyway, Results are: 189 RWHP, 199 RWTQ. Shop owner said this dyno is about 9% lower then a Dynojet (originally used). So corrected numbers are: 207 RWHP, 219 RWTQ. This is 8 RWHP less then our Crossfire which is a manual.
The biggest difference is the area under the curve. We saw a massive (for a 3.2L) amount of TQ from the 3400-5000 mark.
Stock(SI tune, UD Pulleys, Exhaust): 163 HP/ 169 TQ
Modded: 207 HP/ 219 TQ
Gain: 44 HP, 50 TQ
