Notices
SL55 AMG, SL63 AMG, SL65 AMG (R230) Discuss the SL55, SL63 and SL65 AMG.

Video of V12 BiTurbo Dyno - 624 rwhp

 
Old 01-31-2010, 06:03 PM
  #1  
SGC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
SGC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2006 CL65
Video of V12 BiTurbo Dyno - 624 rwhp

SGC is offline  
Old 01-31-2010, 06:41 PM
  #2  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Thericker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Originally Posted by SGC View Post
Very impressive!
Thericker is offline  
Old 02-02-2010, 11:40 PM
  #3  
SGC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
SGC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2006 CL65
Originally Posted by Thericker View Post
Very impressive!
Thanks.
SGC is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 01:20 PM
  #4  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
Originally Posted by Thericker View Post
Very impressive!

I thought you can't get an accurate flywheel figure from a rolling road.
Pearls of wisdom my ***!
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 01:37 PM
  #5  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
TMC M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,895
Received 50 Likes on 43 Posts
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
Originally Posted by sound 8 View Post
I thought you can't get an accurate flywheel figure from a rolling road.
Pearls of wisdom my ***!
Those are rear wheel horsepower and torque figures!!

Tom
TMC M5 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 01:41 PM
  #6  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Carl Lassiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: L.A., CA
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
Originally Posted by TMC M5 View Post
Those are rear wheel horsepower and torque figures!!

Tom
Carl Lassiter is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 01:52 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
soulsearcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SL600 (1000 hp), Cayenne S, 996TT EVO GT750, F430 Spyder,A real Ford GT, 08 Gallardo Spyder
I think that's the car that did 185 in the mile. I know 4500+ pounds & .32cf needs at least 600 whp to crack 180 mph in the standing mile
soulsearcher is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 02:31 PM
  #8  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 171
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
05 E55, 07 SL65, 06 S4
Interesting dyno run, but probably not very representative of what your car really puts to the wheels - I didn't see a large blower - or make that 3 or 4 - because for these cars to get to the power they can produce you need to cool the charge air. Not going to happen in a shop, you need to provide upwards of a 70 MPH gust to the front mounted H/E.

Originally Posted by SGC View Post
CA_E55 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 02:58 PM
  #9  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
TMC M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,895
Received 50 Likes on 43 Posts
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
Originally Posted by CA_E55 View Post
Interesting dyno run, but probably not very representative of what your car really puts to the wheels - I didn't see a large blower - or make that 3 or 4 - because for these cars to get to the power they can produce you need to cool the charge air. Not going to happen in a shop, you need to provide upwards of a 70 MPH gust to the front mounted H/E.
No need for you to use the ...(although maybe you need a good yourself)... he was merely sharing a video of his dyno run. Yeah, in a perfect world their would be wind tunnel testing with $1M+ fans blowing air through a closed hood while the car is on the dyno. But such conditions don't exist for mere enthusiasts. But everything is relative. When these cars dyno completely stock, under the same inferior conditions, they usually run in the 490-530rwhp range on a Dynojet. So picking up 100+hp and 150lbs-ft of torque through ECU/TCU tuning, airboxes and I/C upgrade is pretty impressive given the relative increase over stock.

BTW, SGC is a hard core track fanatic (1/4 mile and 1 mile runs) so he will be testing the real world conditions in addition to the dyno.

Tom
TMC M5 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 05:54 PM
  #10  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Thericker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Word...

Originally Posted by Carl Lassiter View Post
Sound8 is the Mayor of Idiotville
Thericker is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 06:25 PM
  #11  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 171
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
05 E55, 07 SL65, 06 S4
Clueless....

.... in itself is not half as bad as being clueless and of the opinion to be an expert of a subject matter.....

Forced induction and the efficiency thereof has a huge impact on power output, hence the notion to use a dyno for before and after comparison without taking intercooler efficency into the equation is useless at best, totally misleading in all probability.
In more laymen terms for you to follow: Increasing boost increases charge air temperature, and not in a linear fashion. Pushing boost towards the limits of a compressor can raise charge air temperature to a level for which the engine controller will start pulling timing, dump fuel etc. possibly reduce boost; unlike the stock engine where intercooling is maybe of marginal benefit, for a modified engine without proper intercooling its not even possible to do a proper tune.
Its exactly this kind of ignorance that makes most tunes and tuners fail, look at a picture of an engine dyno and the gadzillion of temperature probes sticking on an engine making them look like a porcupine....

My argument is not against wheel-dyno's, just commenting on how clueless most of the people are that use them.



Originally Posted by TMC M5 View Post
No need for you to use the ...(although maybe you need a good yourself)... he was merely sharing a video of his dyno run. Yeah, in a perfect world their would be wind tunnel testing with $1M+ fans blowing air through a closed hood while the car is on the dyno. But such conditions don't exist for mere enthusiasts. But everything is relative. When these cars dyno completely stock, under the same inferior conditions, they usually run in the 490-530rwhp range on a Dynojet. So picking up 100+hp and 150lbs-ft of torque through ECU/TCU tuning, airboxes and I/C upgrade is pretty impressive given the relative increase over stock.

BTW, SGC is a hard core track fanatic (1/4 mile and 1 mile runs) so he will be testing the real world conditions in addition to the dyno.

Tom
Attached Thumbnails Video of V12 BiTurbo Dyno - 624 rwhp-amg1.jpg  
CA_E55 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 06:49 PM
  #12  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
MB_Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
Originally Posted by SGC View Post
RennTech Rules
MB_Forever is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 07:57 PM
  #13  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
The words rwhp means nothing to me, I naturally assumed that with such a high figure it could only be flywheel figure. So what would a ball park figure be for flywheel power. 750
I also agree with CA55, a turbo proffessor I knew a long time ago said testing turbo cars on a rolling road was a waste of time as you can never simulate the amount of air when driving, no matter how many fans you had.
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 08:05 PM
  #14  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
Obviously rwhp means rear wheel, who cares what wheels it comes from.
just put whp, that's what I am now familiar with.
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-03-2010, 09:49 PM
  #15  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
TMC M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,895
Received 50 Likes on 43 Posts
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
Originally Posted by CA_E55 View Post
Clueless....

.... in itself is not half as bad as being clueless and of the opinion to be an expert of a subject matter.....

Forced induction and the efficiency thereof has a huge impact on power output, hence the notion to use a dyno for before and after comparison without taking intercooler efficency into the equation is useless at best, totally misleading in all probability.
In more laymen terms for you to follow: Increasing boost increases charge air temperature, and not in a linear fashion. Pushing boost towards the limits of a compressor can raise charge air temperature to a level for which the engine controller will start pulling timing, dump fuel etc. possibly reduce boost; unlike the stock engine where intercooling is maybe of marginal benefit, for a modified engine without proper intercooling its not even possible to do a proper tune.
Its exactly this kind of ignorance that makes most tunes and tuners fail, look at a picture of an engine dyno and the gadzillion of temperature probes sticking on an engine making them look like a porcupine....

My argument is not against wheel-dyno's, just commenting on how clueless most of the people are that use them.
You are quite the book genius...

Okay..now here is a lesson in reality...a single dyno run even with puny fans hitting the front mounted heat exchanger will not heat the intercoolers significantly. I have touched my intercooler cores after a dyno run and they were cool to the touch. The 65s do not produce large amounts of boost for a prolonged periods of time. You can try this for yourself. Now in a different application with 30+lbs of boost...yeah you have a valid point. But your condescending tone and arrogance took you out of your depths... now run along...and play idiot savant somewhere else..

Tom

Tom
TMC M5 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 12:50 AM
  #16  
Member
 
BVLDARI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GL550
Originally Posted by Thericker View Post
Sound8 is the Mayor of Idiotville
BVLDARI is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 07:46 AM
  #17  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2014 SL550
This is a tough group. The guys at Renntech were telling me about this car. My guess is if he races it alot he will break stuff with that much power. Sounds like fun. I am sure a dyno is not real world but done right it is a relative comparison. Besides these are toys and we are playing.
carcommander is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 08:47 AM
  #18  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
Originally Posted by TMC M5 View Post
You are quite the book genius...

Okay..now here is a lesson in reality...a single dyno run even with puny fans hitting the front mounted heat exchanger will not heat the intercoolers significantly. I have touched my intercooler cores after a dyno run and they were cool to the touch. The 65s do not produce large amounts of boost for a prolonged periods of time. You can try this for yourself. Now in a different application with 30+lbs of boost...yeah you have a valid point. But your condescending tone and arrogance took you out of your depths... now run along...and play idiot savant somewhere else..

Tom

Tom
Over the years intercooling must have improved since my Professor friend said that rolling roads were no good for turbo cars. But I think you kinda
contradicted yourself. You said 65s do not produce large amounts of boost for prolonged periods of time, that's a bit vague I thought you once posted a figure for the 65 between 19-21 lbs of boost stock and it depends how long and how hard you drive to get a time period,, surely to get
624 rwhp the boost must be considerably higher maybe 30lbs in which case
you said he has a valid point.It would be better to fit a heat sensor to your intercoolers, rather relying on touch.
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 10:19 AM
  #19  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
TMC M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,895
Received 50 Likes on 43 Posts
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
Originally Posted by sound 8 View Post
Over the years intercooling must have improved since my Professor friend said that rolling roads were no good for turbo cars. But I think you kinda
contradicted yourself. You said 65s do not produce large amounts of boost for prolonged periods of time, that's a bit vague I thought you once posted a figure for the 65 between 19-21 lbs of boost stock and it depends how long and how hard you drive to get a time period,, surely to get
624 rwhp the boost must be considerably higher maybe 30lbs in which case
you said he has a valid point.It would be better to fit a heat sensor to your intercoolers, rather relying on touch.
No contradiction, he is making just under 1.5 BAR or 22psi.

https://mbworld.org/forums/3922090-post15.html

You try to simulate "rolling" conditions as best as you can on a dyno run. I usually run with 3 fans that can run up to about 45mph (10000 CFM each) pointed directly at the HE with the hood open. Take a look at the CL's hood when it is closed. It is not the most efficient design to flow lots of air volume. The open hood also allows better heat dissipation than with the hood down.

I usually run the dyno in 3rd gear which goes from about 50mph to about 118mph. The car is under boost for about 10 seconds in total. It is probably making maximum boost for about a second or two based on the data logging done out on the highway. It kind of spikes and then significantly tapers off. I can data log the IATs next time I am on the dyno and then compare that to doing the same run in 3rd gear out on the road.

Tom
TMC M5 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 11:58 AM
  #20  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Carl Lassiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: L.A., CA
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
Originally Posted by CA_E55 View Post
Clueless....

.... in itself is not half as bad as being clueless and of the opinion to be an expert of a subject matter.....

Forced induction and the efficiency thereof has a huge impact on power output, hence the notion to use a dyno for before and after comparison without taking intercooler efficency into the equation is useless at best, totally misleading in all probability.
In more laymen terms for you to follow: Increasing boost increases charge air temperature, and not in a linear fashion. Pushing boost towards the limits of a compressor can raise charge air temperature to a level for which the engine controller will start pulling timing, dump fuel etc. possibly reduce boost; unlike the stock engine where intercooling is maybe of marginal benefit, for a modified engine without proper intercooling its not even possible to do a proper tune.
Its exactly this kind of ignorance that makes most tunes and tuners fail, look at a picture of an engine dyno and the gadzillion of temperature probes sticking on an engine making them look like a porcupine....

My argument is not against wheel-dyno's, just commenting on how clueless most of the people are that use them.
What a waste of time that was. You, sir, are verbose.
Carl Lassiter is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 01:05 PM
  #21  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
Originally Posted by TMC M5 View Post
No contradiction, he is making just under 1.5 BAR or 22psi.

https://mbworld.org/forums/3922090-post15.html

You try to simulate "rolling" conditions as best as you can on a dyno run. I usually run with 3 fans that can run up to about 45mph (10000 CFM each) pointed directly at the HE with the hood open. Take a look at the CL's hood when it is closed. It is not the most efficient design to flow lots of air volume. The open hood also allows better heat dissipation than with the hood down.

I usually run the dyno in 3rd gear which goes from about 50mph to about 118mph. The car is under boost for about 10 seconds in total. It is probably making maximum boost for about a second or two based on the data logging done out on the highway. It kind of spikes and then significantly tapers off. I can data log the IATs next time I am on the dyno and then compare that to doing the same run in 3rd gear out on the road.

Tom
So do you mean that SGC engine is running 1.5 bar for 624 rwhp?
What is standard boost on a CL65?
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 01:28 PM
  #22  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
TMC M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,895
Received 50 Likes on 43 Posts
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
Originally Posted by sound 8 View Post
So do you mean that SGC engine is running 1.5 bar for 624 rwhp?
What is standard boost on a CL65?
That is what he said in the other thread.

I am not sure what data logging tool he is using. I think I got around 18psi stock...around 1.2+ bar using my friend Jay's data logger.

Tom
TMC M5 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 01:56 PM
  #23  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 171
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
05 E55, 07 SL65, 06 S4
You are right, I should have posted the below turbo map as an example, its easy to see for any gearhead that even a slight increase of e.g. 10% in boost is accompanied by an increase of as much as 20% in temperature etc - but its also easy to see that what really matters is airflow, not boost.... but now I start to rant again


Originally Posted by Carl Lassiter View Post
What a waste of time that was. You, sir, are verbose.
Attached Thumbnails Video of V12 BiTurbo Dyno - 624 rwhp-k24-70gga.jpg  
CA_E55 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 01:58 PM
  #24  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 2,838
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
SL 63 W/B AMG , S600,C220
Originally Posted by TMC M5 View Post
That is what he said in the other thread.

I am not sure what data logging tool he is using. I think I got around 18psi stock...around 1.2+ bar using my friend Jay's data logger.

Tom
Maybe I'm thick but, if a standard engine runs 18 psi for 600 bhp flywheel, then it seems an immense rise to 624 rwhp for only 4 psi more.
sound 8 is offline  
Old 02-04-2010, 02:22 PM
  #25  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Carl Lassiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: L.A., CA
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
Originally Posted by sound 8 View Post
Maybe I'm thick but, if a standard engine runs 18 psi for 600 bhp flywheel, then it seems an immense rise to 624 rwhp for only 4 psi more.
"Only" 4psi more? That's an increase of more than 20% over stock boost. You do the math.
Carl Lassiter is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:
You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Video of V12 BiTurbo Dyno - 624 rwhp


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: