otoupalik,
I've follow this long and interesting discussion because I looking for buy the MKB Exhaust kit (headers, down pipes, 4 cats).
Well, I have my C32 with some mod, and I do want to install headers as well as that I do know that the V6 from Evosport are coming.
String to the point,
1.- if you have the MKB Exhaust kit how much?, if so, is this kit street legal (I do hope so, for the 4 cats but I would like to confirm) and how long takes to install headers (labor)?
2.- when and in which price range the Evo's headers will be?

Thanks

 

Brad, when will they be out for sale/price.

 

C32 headers are currently in development. I will have some pixs within 7-10 days. We are able to make an equal length, about 10-11'', headers with collectors. Install looks to be fairly starightforward. They will be EPA/CARB certified. Pricing info will follow shortly.

Also a prototype of our new intake manifold with Hi-FLow airboxes is also nearly complete.

 

So?? What's the latest on these? Any word on pricing? Availablility? Dyno #s??

 

We're currently finishing testing, and setting up pricing. As soon as I have info, MBWorld users will be the first to know!

Pierre,

MKB (as well as the majority of Germany) is on holiday. As soon as they return, I will have pricing for you. Our ODPS and IC resevoir upgrade are available now. Gains from the kit are 25hp at the wheels, and longer-sustainable power. Email me if you would like any more info on the kit.

Our C32 prototype headers and intake-header were completed today. I will post information on them shortly.

Thanks,
Ben

 

Thanks Ben! I am really interested in these parts. The ODPS magnetize me but I'm not sure weather or not this kit may work with my current set up, H&S chip and BMC filters.
Waiting for Evo’s information... bye

 

The filters probably won't effect the kit in either direction. The only way to tell how it will work with the ecu would be to install it, and then monitor it on the dyno. Our headers should be available around the middle of Feb for the car.

 

Have you guys finished the headers yet?!? I'm curious for pricing and performance gains.

 

Yeah when will you have these done? And what about the Air Intake. Ive been holding back on mods for things like these, and now its been quite a few months now.

-Vik

 

Are you thinking about making them for the 2.8L as well as the 3.2L V6's.

NP

 

I am not new to tuning but I am new to MB tuning. Working on my girlfriends high mile 92 300 2.5 turbodiesel really impressed me by MB engineering. As you can see in my sig I have a nearly stock Japanese car and mods for that is where my focus currently is. However, with the release of the supercharged AMG cars my curiousity has been kindled and I have been enjoying reading through the performance threads here.

Now, anyone can post anything they want but for the record I have no allegiances for any shop or tuner, MB or otherwise... I will just comment using my own observation and 30 years of experience with extracting power from IC engines.

The Evosport manifolds are claimed to out flow the stock manifolds. If true this should yield power. As far as flow testing exhaust manifolds... I see minimal value in such data as the true environment is one of extreme pressures, velocities, temperatures and accoustics. Dyno testing is obviously better but the tune is also critical. If someone has control over the fuel and timing curves... dyno testing can actually be misleading. I could baseline a stock car, swap stock painted manifolds in place, lean the fuel and advance the timing and "show" gains and "sell" paint. I am certainly NOT suggesting this is what is happening here... just showing there can be MUCH more to the story. Also, a part can add performance WITHOUT adding peak power (and vice versa) Power under the curve is more important than peak only numbers. As claimed these Evo manifolds should be relatively easy to get CARB certified. If an MB owner feels the price justifies the power... it is good to have this option.

As stated I am not an MB tuner but experience tells me that power gains on a late model OBDII microprocessor controlled engine is a tricky thing. Simply bolting on a higher flowing part often requires that the ECU relearn before the full gains are found. Sometimes external tuning is need to realize the modifications potential. One pitfal example would be a part that creates a resonance that the knock sensors judge to be detonation... resulting in less power!

So, without observing actual testing I hesitate to say anything. Evosport appears to have earned a good reputation so I lean towards trusting that they will be honest about their products performance. Being that their part is purposely designed as a compromise for fit and legality, it will not be the BEST part from a power perspective. I would be VERY surprised if it came close to the MKB's power gains. I would not be surprised if it shows gains. This again is PURE educated speculation, take from it what you wish. For anyone wishing to learn about header design, function and theory... a great site is www.burnsstainless.com

FWIW, I soon expect to review a board members E55 for custom header design. Ideas are one thing, execution is another. Who knows, maybe there will be yet another option in the not so distant future...

 

Well said!

You shoudl check out the burns site too! Cool info!

You shoudl see the custom merge collectors they just did for us for our BMW race system.

We can also build an all out power header for MB, but our research showed that more people want legality!

Our exhaust engineer is simply a genius! No ifs, ands or buts. He is that good. He consults with Burns and other leaders in the industry and is extremely highly regarded in the industry and in the SoCal tuner crowd for the last 15 years.

His ***** works - period!

Thanks

Brad

 

I wan't them, still waiting on price and release date.

 

Yes!

 

Brad man, when these coming out and price? Also the air intake. Im holding back on a K&N air filter for this air intake, and i need more HP. Cmon man, dont make me buy the air filter, all we want are prices and atleast a date. Thanks...

-Vik

 

JBrady: You are correct. Real life dyno data is very important. To most of us this is what we are looking for. HP and TQ.

As you have read from previous posts, we are limited to keeping the header sizing within stock exhaust manifold's dimensions. On a CLK it is all that can be done. SO the only options was to increase piping and keep it free flowing. Trying to use header length for tuning simply was not possible.

On C32 however, we were able to add length and add some TQ. Check out the C32 headers thread on AMG C32 forum.

 

Yes we do!

 

Tuned length headers have their highest returns with NA engines- they need all the pumping/scavenging help they need.

Mass flow is where its at for forced induction engines- although a "log" type manifold is the worst solution possible- space dictates these solutions. I would expect the V8 CLK manifold to have its best returns when used with a SC system.

Very elegant looking pieces!

 

I like the thick, precisely machined flanges. These pictures do beg a question. Is the ID of the flange = to the OD of the feed tube... or... does the feed tube taper to fit? If the first is true it is an optical illusion that the feed tube OD is substantially larger than the flange ID. Or, do you use very thick walled material that is machined to fit?

 

The picture is actually R&D prototype. Production flange, which we actually designed, will have a taper inside. It will help smooth out exhaust gas flow into catalytic converter.

 

Well... yes and no.

While it is obviously harder to generate sizable gains in the NA state... I would say that a compromised part (ie: the stock exhaust manifold) would be less of a restriction to potential power on a NA engine than a FI engine. This agrees with your last sentence. BTW, I am extremely impressed with all the Kleeman engineering and workmanship so I do not mean to suggest anything negative here.

An interesting example of FI response to system efficiency can be found in the Oldsmobile Aerotech project in which Fueling Engineering and Batten Engineering both built turbocharged 2.0 liter engines, one for each of the 2 cars used. Other than bore spacing and extenal dimensions, both engines were "clean sheet" pieces. Both generated 1000hp. The Batten engine used 40psi of boost. The Fueling engine used 24psi As impressive as the Batten engine was, 1000hp from 2 liters... the Fueling engine accomplised the same task with over a FULL atmosphere LESS boost! Another interesting fact was the Fueling engine intake valves were only slightly larger than the stock 150hp Olds Quad 4 had and the exhaust valves were actually SMALLER! BTW, this engine was later used at Bonneville and running 40psi produced 1600hp!!! Did it used tuned length headers and merge collectors?... you betcha.

BTW, Jim Fueling sucumbed to pancreatic cancer this past December. Some here may of heard of him... he was suing MB over their use of 3 valve cylinder heads of which he held several patents. Like him or hate him he was a great engineering mind.

 

its amazing how i can never get anyone to answer a simple question, boggles my mind, guess ill have to buy a K&N then.

 

Cuz I don't have an answer! We are in testing. We will be in testing till things make power! I know it is tough to wait.

If you want filters, I can get you the BMC's immediately. Best filters out there as of now for MB IMHO.

Thanks

Brad

 

JBrady: What you are reffering to is airflow. Fueling heads flowed significantly more air than Batten. More importantly they had higher velocity, which comes from better design. At this point boost is measure of airflow restriction into combustion chamber.

It is sad that Jim passed away. Several years ago, at SEMA, I spent two hours dicsussing 3-valve heads' benefits with him. He is the reason MB is going back to 4-valve in the next generation, They did not want to keep paying him (now his estate) for the patent.

 

Vadim, yes, MASS airflow is the key. Boost, as you suggest, is mearly a measure of the resistance the engine system has in its manifold as a result of moving air mass. Complete system efficiency from the atmospheric pressure available to the air filter inlet to the atmospheric pressure presented to the exhaust tips and EVERYTHING in between all contribute. Everthing includes all pressure drops and pumping losses, compressor efficiency, ducting, port configuration and dynamics, valve efficiency, burn efficiency, exhaust efficiency, etc, etc.

When I point out the 16psi difference in the 2 engine examples given it was to point out the amazing difference between both highly developed designs. If not for the Fueling engine... the Batten would look awesome. Relativity.

I am jealous you were able to spend 2 hours talking to Jim. I spoke with him by phone for apx 30 minutes and found myself smiling the entire conversation.