When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
well i can't complain too much when i cruise normal it's around 8.5-9l per 100km which is close to your mpg results but with 5/50 and ALT LIN i can go a bit lower in terms of consumption (apart of the other benefits you mentioned already) then idk what else to say the thank you, you always have it you know )
Your 9L/100km translates into 26mpg mpg scales
> Apples to oranges :
We can't really compare different engines on different roads with different drivers...
reaching high number with these hot-rods is a miracle on flat roads (not downhill cheat!).
The day you go from 9L/100k to 7 you're going to be amazed with better throttle.
For me this shows ECU is really self-tuning combustion timing - - - I like the part about less heat.
It's beginning to make sense: we know more gas cools engine more than lean mixtures. Mind you my 70kMi Lambda did not fall asleep, perhaps self-cleaned from ingesting less vaporized oil!
The new "normal" setup goes towards reliable performance: two thumbs up. I can hardly imagine this combination with TT boost!! Entering boost with a neutral non-lean map has to be a mind-blowing reward.
Last edited by CaliBenzDriver; Jan 21, 2025 at 06:26 PM.
> Apples to oranges :
We can't really compare different engines on different roads with different drivers...
reaching high number with these hot-rods is a miracle on flat roads (not downhill cheat!).
The day you go from 9L/100k to 7 you're going to be amazed with better throttle.
For me this shows ECU is really self-tuning combustion timing - - - I like the part about less heat.
It's beginning to make sense: we know more gas cools engine more than lean mixtures. Mind you my 70kMi Lambda did not fall asleep, perhaps self-cleaned from ingesting less vaporized oil!
The new "normal" setup goes towards reliable performance: two thumbs up. I can hardly imagine this combination with TT boost!!
woww.. even lower than i expected, congrats, the lowest which i was able to reach was 7.8l/100km normal driving with some kickdowns here and there when i drive from Bulgaria to Turkey and back (400km ish one way), but since then im not able to see this anymore and i blame the latest MB updates on ecu and tcu they did on my car about some combustions without my permission as isn't in warranty anymore but anyway this is another topic
Cali suggest me to change some stuff on my engine and when i went to friend of mine i explain him that i get tired of replacing this check valve all the time and he told me you don't have to just go and buy simple check valve for 2$ from any garage shop and install it and this is what i did, the car now feels better and not sure but when i brake hard i can feel some vibrations in the brake pedal and after i install this check valve i did not feel this (not sure if the check valve was the reason tbh but kind of make sense idk..)
it seems i miss the topic again that @CaliBenzDriver suggest this mod... but i suggest you to do it as well
in the other hand Cali you mentioned to be installed T and to have 2 check valves or i misunderstood it, the way from the pic i did it do you think is fine?
@W205C43PFL happy you finally manage to do it, congrats and enjoy it : )))))
Thank you, hopefully you get yours done too soon, back still hurting so another "day off" for me and can't drive it today as well.
woww.. even lower than i expected, congrats, the lowest which i was able to reach was 7.8l/100km normal driving with some kickdowns here and there when i drive from Bulgaria to Turkey and back (400km ish one way), but since then im not able to see this anymore and i blame the latest MB updates on ecu and tcu they did on my car about some combustions without my permission as isn't in warranty anymore but anyway this is another topic
The oil pump solenoid mod actually decreased fuel economy so was switching from 0W-40 to 5W-40 although I wasn't surprised, both of which was meant to increase fuel economy and meet federal regulations at the expense of wearing out the engine more so I am more than glad to have those both gone.
When I drive conservatively on mobil 1 0W-40, I got 6.8L/100KM once but that was the best I did. That said, I think I was driving the vehicle wrong, because C 43 isn't meant to be about fuel economy. I am happy with the smiles per miles instead : ) Fuel economy wasn't ever C 43's focus even back in W202 C 43 with the 4.3L V8.
woww.. even lower than i expected, congrats, the lowest which i was able to reach was 7.8l/100km normal driving with some kickdowns here and there when i drive from Bulgaria to Turkey and back (400km ish one way), but since then im not able to see this anymore and i blame the latest MB updates on ecu and tcu they did on my car about some combustions without my permission as isn't in warranty anymore but anyway this is another topic
I honestly think the newer updates are meant to increase fuel economy, for example, the cold start despite warm update was meant to heat up the cats for emission purposes.
Just enjoy the vehicle, given you are tuned as well, enjoy the smiles, don't think about fuel economy.
I honestly think the newer updates are meant to increase fuel economy, for example, the cold start despite warm update was meant to heat up the cats for emission purposes.
Just enjoy the vehicle, given you are tuned as well, enjoy the smiles, don't think about fuel economy.
i don't look consumption, im always in the amg screen gauge but i did notice on longer distances when im not alone i drive around the speed limits chilling and compared with latest updates my consumption increased which shouldn't but anyway
i just get unplug hope this is the correct one @CaliBenzDriver ? i took photos as well for other members with m276TT and did a video of warm start
i don't look consumption, im always in the amg screen gauge but i did notice on longer distances when im not alone i drive around the speed limits chilling and compared with latest updates my consumption increased which shouldn't but anyway
i just get unplug hope this is the correct one @CaliBenzDriver ? i took photos as well for other members with m276TT and did a video of warm start
Yup, identical to mine, looks like all W205 with the M276 has this style connector, again, not sure why MB changed it but hey, all good! Thanks for taking the pictures!
Ya, I knew it was different but all good : ) strange MB changed it though, that said in my case I just put a flat head like forum member Manny_c450 recommended and wiggled it out, took a minute or I think it was less than that.
Yup, identical to mine, looks like all W205 with the M276 has this style connector, again, not sure why MB changed it but hey, all good! Thanks for taking the pictures!
I want to specifically mention this because the M274 C 300 engine in the W205 (from the videos I gathered on youtube) shows the same connector as forum member CaliBenzDriver and JettaRed so I find it very strange and interesting MB did what they did on the W205 with the M276.
Oh well, I can't find the video anymore : ( but point is I wasn't able to find any W205 M276 (C 400, C 450, C 43) alternator replacement videos only the W205 C 300.
@CaliBenzDriver So I tried to find connectors so I can probably cap it, do you mind pointing us which one is the right one to help protect it from the elements for us W205 folks on both the live ECU harness side and the alternator side. Thank you : )
@CaliBenzDriver So I tried to find connectors so I can probably cap it, do you mind pointing us which one is the right one to help protect it from the elements for us W205 folks on both the live ECU harness side and the alternator side. Thank you : )
MS put some sort of magic tape on both the alternator side and connecter side. The alternator is pretty shielded from elements I think so may be okay to just leave as is.
MS put some sort of magic tape on both the alternator side and connecter side. The alternator is pretty shielded from elements I think so may be okay to just leave as is.
True true, I thought about the better safe than sorry idea but probably just leave it as is like you mentioned. I mean, look at forum members JettaRed's picture, super clean in that area.
This has been a very interesting thread, and I wanted to pursue it from the alternator inside, rather than from the alternator outside. Turns out there are alternator regulator devices such as NXP's AR6000LF that perform the traditional voltage regulation task to charge the battery, but also provide a LIN bus connection to the ECU. This regulator is capable of doing its battery charging task without interference from the ECU, but the ECU has the ability to alter the regulator's behavior (its "Load Response Control", or LRC) in a variety of (and likely nefarious) ways. Disconnecting the LIN puts the regulator into a default mode, which seems to be entirely OK (and according to the many posts above, improves performance). When under LIN control, the ECU can change the battery charging voltage as a function of alternator RPM (engine RPM) and electrical load demand on the battery, for whatever end purpose this might provide under the circumstances. For a real headache, technical specs can be reviewed at https://www.nxp.com/products/power-m...ith-lin:AR6000.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
)
