Well I finally got a chance to dyno the stock 06 S65 we bought about 2 weeks ago and I must say it did not disappoint. 568.69 RWHP and 624.62 RWTQ. This is all through a set of K&N filters which only added 4 RWHP and about 11 RWTQ to the final numbers. There were a few people in the shop that seemed impressed. But the car feels strong and rides smooth..... let the modding begin!

 

568rwhp stock?? wow...that dyno's accurate...right??

 

What type of dyno?

Tom

 

TMC 5 going on how to work it out the last time we spoke on the subject,
560 rwhp seems a little high, don't you think.
I believe my 63 would have been 430-460 to get 525bhp!

 

This is an S65 with 604 BHP and 738 ftlbs of torque. Based on his dyno numbers he has a 6% loss on BHP and 15% loss of torque to the rear wheels. The 6% loss of BHP is little low, I would have expected near 15% loss.

 

This is either
A. not stock(ecu tune)
B. not accurate dyno

Seems like a tuned # IMHO

 

Why? Because of small loss on BHP to the wheels?

 

Well the car is completely stock except for the K&N Filters. The engine covers where off and we had fans to keep all the components cold. We have multiple videos of all the pulls we did. I would imagine an ECM mod would give you more HP/TQ. On the street the car seems a bit tame to me (ie feels real smooth during hard acceleration). I would guess the car would run harder on the street with an ECM mod. Below is the Dyno sheet. Does this seem normal?

 

As for the accuracy of the Dyno, I have no idea. I do know that my buddy who was dynoing his car the same day did 519FWHP and he was expecting to do over 600FWHP (he did 520 FWHP at a different shop before doing tons of upgrades) and this was after tuning it all day. He started off at around 420 FWHP.

Other cars that we have dynoed (its my buddy's shop) is my 87 Buick GN. The car dynoed at 409 RWHP and 419 RWTQ. The car runs 7.39 in the 1/8 @ 93 MPH and weighs a ton!

The Dyno for the S65 was done with K&N filters, minus the little tube that bends down from the air filter housing to the front grill, pump 91 octane fuel, cooled down engine (below 80* C when we made the pass) fans on the engine and in front of the engine (duh) and stock everything else (wheels, tires, ECM, etc, etc). A pass made right after that (with the engine still hot) made 20RWHP less and 16 RWTQ less. This is in 81* F temp.

 

Somethings up, your AFR is VERY lean?? If I'm reading this correctly? 14.0 AFR?? You either have a very leaned out screwed up aftermarket ECU tune made for 100-110 octane fuel or/and ??? Had a few bags of Ice resting over each Intercooler during runs, but even w/Ice your Air Fuel Ratio shouldn't be anywhere near 14.0 in stock or modded form, Stock AFR should be 12.0-12.5 MAX, TUNED 11.5-12.0 OR if Tuned for & using high Octane 110 Race fuel AFR's can run 13.-14.0



In stock form on DynoJet any 65 AMG will range from 490-530 rwhp TOPS, though your rwtq reading is close to stock IE 630-650 rwtq on ANY DynoJet... Dyno's don't tell the whole tale, I'd be very concerned about that AFR though def knocking/detonation lean range (UNLESS it was as I previously stated Hi-Oct tune set for & running about 110 oct)

 

I'm going with an inaccurate dyno...

There is no way in hell you're only losing 6% on HP and 15% on torque...? Powertrain loss is powertrain loss. It's usually calculated as a single percentage for both HP and TQ. The more accepted values are 18% for MB's. Then again, that's for 5 speed tranny's...

And why is your power dipping so hard at 3200 RPM? Were you shifting? Looks like the car fell on it's face there.
That torque curve looks pathetic. And I don't say that to sound like a jerk. It's not very flat and it seems to come on pretty late. See attached picture of a nice "flat" power curve.


Find out what dyno make you were on. Manufacturers vary in their numbers. Some, are generous, some are less so when it comes to the numbers they show.

Dynos are pretty much useless, if you want to really know the power you're making, run in the 1/4 mile.



Edit: And I agre with Sean, 14:1 AFR is a little on the high side...

 

Yeah bro, something is wrong here. You are claiming numbers close to sl65 black series.

Here is a cool dyno chart to check out. Notice the air fuels too. She does run a tick lean to start but then hangs a roughly 12.5 for the rest of the run.

 

Agree, the dip in curve look's like operator let the car downshift to 3rd, NOT the correct 1:1 gear on 5 speed trans it's 4th gear, this can ALSO skew HP/TQ #s Higher

 

Well the car was run in 3rd gear the entire time. If I got on it too fast (ie below 3500 rpm's) it would downshift so I had to lean in on it and not floor it till about 4000rpm's. As for the 1/4 mile track showing "real" numbers, I doubt that too. I been racing/tuning from both 1/4 mile and dyno for about 8 years now (not on this car though) and each one has their pro's and con's. A bad track can give you ****ty numbers and a dyno can do the same.

As for the inner-coolers, yeah we had ice on them on a few pulls but didnt see much of a difference, maybe 10-18 more HP. But even with the inner-coolers iced, the car would still compensate. The charge air sensors would read the inlet air temp and adjust the fuel ratio in open loop. The reason you are seeing the 14.7:1 (stoch) is because the cats were really hot and working as advertised. You cant get an accurate A/F ration running through cats as the cats will clean up the HC's and Co's making the car look lean. Something running this lean under boost would make the car knock and misfire and it would show on the Dyno.

But if you think these numbers are "inflated" feel free to take a drive to SD and throw your car on the Dyno to see what it makes. If the Dyno is off, your car should make similar numbers. If the Dyno is not, then lets see what really happens. And this car IS going to the track so hold on to your panties people!

 

It is true that using an exhaust sniffer will read a little lean after the cats....but not THAT lean. I dynoed my CL65 using exhaust sniffers on two different Dynojets (over a dozen times collectively) and the cats were always really hot. However, none of the runs ever were close to being as lean as your AFRs. I would seriously think about getting an accurate AFR reading ASAP. I would care less about the rwhp/rwtq #'s and care more about making sure that the car isn't running too lean.....especially on that cr@p CA 91 octane. The stakes are just too high $ wise to shrug it off as being "just really hot cats doing their job".

Tom

 

My old CL65 put out 580 rwhp with cat delete and rear trunk reservoir, ran 11.5 @ 120-121 all day. I could see where if your car being stock and not having cat delete or rear reservoir would be a bit on the high side.

The V12's are known for underrated HP who knows, maybe yours is one of nature. Best bet is to take it to the track. Slap on some drag radials and that will be your story teller.

 

I knew this thread would blow up right after it was posted with 586 RWHP stock.
ahah

 

I find it amusing that you're getting defensive about some dyno you don't even know the make of. If you've been running on dynos for the past 8 years, you should know by now what dyno you ran on.

But, if you really want to keep your head in the ground about the numbers you're getting, then... more power to you. People have been telling you that those numbers are on the high side for a reason. So of them have been playing on dynos with their TT V12's a little longer than you. What do they know...

 

But if the DYNO was inflated, then his Torque numbers would be inflated as well right?

If that's the case then I'd say it has an ECU tune..

 

So your cars been re mapped, what does it matter
You have all the fun, without a pain in the wallet.

Enjoy!

 

If his car has been tuned, it would help to know who tuned it. Not all tuners are the same. And if it is tuned, judging from those AFR's, I wouldn't want that tune.

 

Funny how the OP leaves out the icing Intercoolers down (worth up to 30 rwhp, I've seen & done it) & now you post dyno was run in 3rd gear! Def adds rwhp/rwtq since it's NOT true 1:1 gear it's 4th gear...

Furthermore the cats being hot is your reasoning for wacky LEAN AFR's you're out their buddy...I've had my SL smoking hot off frwy 2 1/2 drive to Dyno then ran repeatedly every 15 min for 4-5 hours, Cat's were RED hot AFR's never ran above 12.0

Lastly when adding Ice to cool the IC's it tricks the ECU into thinking the IAT's are much cooler than ambient temps & compensates by LEANING out your fuel, when I did the same Ice trick for extra HP we saw the AFR's go to 12.8-12.9 on race fuel too

What are inner-coolers lolol So in reality take away gains from Icing Intercoolers 25-30 rwhp & another 10-15 rwp for running in WRONG gear = 568 rwhp reading really is about 523-533 rwhp REAL WORLD...


School session... Notice this RENNtech ECU/TCU S65 set/TUNED for 110 Octane Pay CLOSE attention to AFR'S Even this S65 AFR isn't 14.0 it's 13.6-13.8 MAX @ Redline that's where AFR's matter the most, & yours are @ 14.+ during REDLINE very bad.


Lastly TRUE AFR reading will be right behind the cats, NOT from tailpipes...

 

Coming off hostile etc for your 1st few newb posts will get you no where FAST...

Since you're a proclaimed (8) year 1/4 mile track expert you'd know full well, that the TRAP mph speed would be SOLID proof of the cars TRUE power NOT ET's from poorly prepped track's etc.. But you already knew ALL that right?

 

The TRAP speed is not the "SOLID" proof of how much "TRUE" power the car is making. Things like vehicle weight, driver weight, elevation, track temp, ect, etc all come into play there "expert". And just because I have 1-5 posts does not make me an expert nor a novice. I've been working on Mercedes vehicles for a while as a Master Tech (both ASE and Mercedes) I wouldnt consider myself novice. Also, no where in my post do you see me call myself an "expert" in anything. So I would appreciate you stop putting words in my mouth and reading only what I posted.

As for the Wide Band O2 Sensor, I again am no expert in it, but I know how they work and I also know that we have Dynoed other vehicles (Mustangs, Corvettes, etc) and on SOME of them with stock CATS the A/F reads 14.7:1. The so Wide Band is useless for tuning in that case.

Also I said I made 568 RWHP not 586 (huge difference) and if I knew this post was going to be corrected grammatically I would have double checked my spelling for all you "professors" out there looking to criticize everything.

SO really, whats with all the "disbelief" and hostility? I dynoed my car, posted a graph, told you it was stock (as far as I know) and everyone starts attacking the results. Like Im lying or something. I told you how it was done and didnt lie about anything. And instead of getting something like "Man, those are some good numbers but a little high for stock. You might wanna keep an eye on those A/F ratio numbers cause they are kinda high" I get "I say the Dyno is off" or "that has to be a modded ECM". I bought the car used and all I did was put pump gas and dyno it. Replace the stock filters, cool the engine and ice the I/C's. Here is my results.

Also, I never said I didnt know what type of dyno we where using. I figured that the Dyno sheet would have been enough to show it was a DYNOJET but I see someone is struggling in the reading compression part. Its okay, thats what we are here for.

Actually let me re-phrase that since I re-read EVERYONES posts. Only a couple of you are being "negative". The rest of you I appreciate your replies and advice! Thanks guys! For those negative ones, if this is going to turn into a pisses contest Im not going to go there. But for the others suggesting what may have been done to the car already thanks in advance!

I see a few of you are concerned about the A/F ratio being high. Thanks and next time I will try to get a better/accurate reading of the A/F. If its still high then I will stay off the gas until I get the ECM re-tuned. Once we buy some tires and wheels I will make a few passes at the track and see what it does.

Corsa9000, Tom, V12GodSpeed, sound 8, JackPro1 and the few other positive people, thank you for your posts. You are true gentlemen. As for the rest, I do not want to judge anyone right off the bat. I may have read things out of context so I would rather not judge and observe for now. But please dont think I dont take advice or criticism well. Thanks again for your time!

 

I have owned 4 Tuned 65's and that 65 is NOT TUNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TRUST ME...when Vic gets it tuned he will post new numbers...that car is not tuned...I drove it for a couple of weeks...NO tune on that car...

The previous owner before Vic. was a 57 year old Surgeon and had 9 cars...SO no way he did a single thing to that car....... and he actually traded the car in for a ZR1...

Victor is a great guy....and was working around these cars when they were new...he like most of us couldnt afford a $200k car...now he owns one...as we do as well and appreciate them as PLATINUM...

SINCE THERE WILL BE NO MORE 65'S after this year..2011...Very sad news but also this will bring our cars out of the stupid pricing level and should bring the value up a bit.....I guarantee it....

ALSO Some 65's run better then others...I had my last stock S65 ran 122 the 1/4 @11.5....STOCK peeps...STOCK................


Maybe all my cars I sell are just damn impressive?

The CL65 I am selling now with 80k miles..car is solid as a rock....drives like a freaking 10k car...gotta love Mercedes...it also.burns through 60 mph on dry pavement with brand new F1's....it is also STOCK....
not bad FOR A CAR COSTING $38K---lets see any other car do that with a/c seats and looks to match

That Flint grey sure was...A BARGAIN .......

THOSE WHO DRIVE 65'S are the elite auto enthusiasts...the smart car guys ...I call them....simply for knowing they posses a car with more power then any production car in the world.....also very few yuppies know about them......and if they did...no 65 would be for sale.......Let those yuppies keep drivng their C63's and E55's and M45's AND M5's and SRT8's...when they could of had a REAL man's car for the same loot....I actually think the ones who go out and buy a C63 or G37 for $50k or a E63 are suckers....

see I can say that here...I will get my *** handed to me on the other side.....but it is TRUE what I say....

My best times are when I hang out with friends with my 65 and some yuppie dude says hey I just bought a M3...a great car ...I paid $55k...I got a deal....I say really? You could of bought a CL65...they say what is that? I say that car u see right there...oh a Mercedes? Yes sir....the most powerful car ever built....NO WAY!! They will say...I said yeah google it and then ask yourself why you dropped $55k on a car that competes with a G37s........when u could of had a $200k supercar for less then what you just paid......priceless....

65'S are the baddest cars on the planet....PERIOD....

You will get tired of a GTR ...I own one...You will get tired of a Porsche
you will get tired of driving a LAMBO or FERRARI...BMW's are for EX-Infinit owners....

You will never get tired of owning a 600HP Mercedes....I know..I own 3 right now....and just sold my GTR to my brother....