Someone I know just bought a 1999 SLK 230 Kompressor.

I was wondering what the performance statistics are for the car.

HP, Tourque, Weight, 0 to 60 mph, etc.

He is quite an aggressive driver. He modified the chip in his chevy pick up truck to press it to the limit of it's performance .

Will someone like that be happy witht the SLK 230 Kompressor? I hope so. It is his first convertable.

He did buy it primarily for his wife to drive.

 

Chris, certainly a MB roadster will be a better drive than a pickup truck.

 

I believe they did 0-60 in 6.7 seconds, not to bad for a 4 banger. You can drop that significantly with a pulley kit.

 

6.7s is for the V6 and 7.2s is for the stock 4 banger.

 

THANK you!!! No offense Chris.

Here's a link for 1999 SLK230 specs.

http://research.cars.com/go/crp/rese...=&aff=national

 

Here's some data that isn't as conservative as Mercedes puts in their sales brochures, and a little closer to what happens in real life:
http://www.fantasycars.com/derek/cars/slk.html

As I said on another board 6.6 seconds 0 to 60........

 

Hi!!!!

i upgraded the ECU.....and now i have 223HP....with 320NM (225 lb-ft).
But you can upgrade the kompressor pulley! :-)

 

Mike,

Where are your dyno sheets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

As soon as i can i'll put them here!

But i can assure you....that it CAN FEEL the difference!!!!!

The less-factors: MORE HIGH TEMPERATURES and USE ALWAYS GAS ABOVE 95.... i use 98 or 100......

 

One more thing..... a very GOOD result is the ROMULUS exhaust .....for the SLK.
I put it months BEFORE the ECU upgrade and notice a very "clean" DIFERENCE on performance!!!!!!!!

 

Mike,

I am stuck with 91 octane in California. If you are indeed running 98 or 100 octane petro you indeed will see a much higher gain than us here in the states. I really want to see the dyno sheets. Master Linh (CLK/SLK) tried them 3 times and did not get any gains whatsoever. Since you are not stuck in the states and have access to much higher octane gas you have a chance with the right mods to really open it up and get that hidden Hp that our cars have. How are the emmission laws where you live. Does your car have a cat?? Keep us informed of your progress!

 

http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicl...o09019701.html



http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicl.../solo9737.html




http://www.automallusa.net/1998/merc...s/reviews.html

 

I heard that UPSOLUTE do 91 or less mod chips also......

emissions are OK and the car PASSES on the ANUALLY PERIODIC TESTS we have here in Portugal...

All i done was replacing exhaust with a ROMULUS SLK SPECIFIC.... and a UPGRADE to the ECU!

All CATs REMAINED!!! and it has th stock EXHAUST MANIFOLD!

ah yes...i tested a LITTLE times using 95.. and i NOTICE A BIT from the 98...

 

did not mesured the 0-60mile.....but it KICKS!!!!!

the top speed i had on the METER....was 245km/h (i think 149mph).....
but it can do more....

 

From what I've seen from Upsolute on the M111 motor on the dyno, 3-4 HP is about all it gives. They have a 29 HP spike that's just dyno noise. The true gain on that car is from a pulley kit bringing boost from 6 psi to about 10 psi. This kit includes relocating the MAF, cooler plugs and a higher pressure FPR. Kits on the other SLK forums run about $900.

 

hmmmm interesting!!! put the links here if you can...

All i can tell is what i have and tested!!!!
i even DID NOT KNEW UPSOLUTE until i search on foruns and internet... eheheh

But if you think....SLK is a "TURBINATED" car..... and ALL turbinated cars like TDI's have gains of +20..+30..+40HP!

what i think...I THINK...they do (upon other things) is a BETTER ON-OFF of the Kompressor VALVE!... and maybe an INGITION-TIMING upgrading LESS CONSERVATIVE!!!! (that's why they tell to use a MORE OCTANE GAS!)...

 

I agree that many turbo cars with electronic wastegates can be controlled via a chip. Supercharged cars can only be controlled by spinning them faster so you need to either have a smaller s/c pulley or a larger crank pulley. Most have a larger crank pulley. Here's my dyno, before and after on my C230 with the same M111 engine. I've done tons of dynos, tried just about everything and I know what works and what doesn't. For example, no gains for any IC and generally losses. Chips are a bust. Quality filters are good for 3-4HP, dynoed ITG and K&N, both good, ITG slightly better.

 

hmmmmm interesting!
Yes..i know that SC are pulley-dependent.... BUT the control of the BYPASS- VALVE that closes to make the boost.....or open to release it.....is the secret!

I don't know...(just to ask UPSOLUTE)....but as far i feel and notice (and friends notice).....acceleration is BETTER!....and ALL is better!!!!!!

i know that pulley upgrade ADDS +30HP..... BUT and the A/F ratio???????
must have ECU remaped!!! ALSO!!!!! to mantain 14.7:1....

 

everyone on here is saying the 1999 slk should do 0-60 in 7,2 sec. i road tested mine today and it was 12- 13 seconds could anyone give me some advise what could be wrong it sounds like it runs good but i think it should run faster

 

remember European octane != American octane

European octane ~= American octane +5

so 93 octane which most of us use would be fine....



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

"Portugal: 95 RON "Euro" is sold in every station and 98 RON "Super" being offered in almost every station."

"United States: in the US octane rating is displayed in AKI."

 

WELL I,V HAD MY SLK230 CHIPPED TO 250BHP, AND I HAVE REDUCED THE REAR TYRE SIZE FROM 245X45X17 TO 240X40X17 AND MY CAR HANDLES BETTER.
DOES ANYONE KNOW WHERE THE OBD1 PLUG SITS ON THESE CARS THKS.

 

hi mate replace your air filter with an kand n filter and fit two pronged plugs it should go better. from deonp1

 

Just a quick question of one of you gurus: Is the compressor in the 230 the same, or same basic type as the one in my 32 AMG? Sorry, I just can't find the answer on any MB sites. Thanks

 

just my understanding... but the 14.7 to 1 AF is the ideal optimum for emmissions purposes its not the optimum for power... more like 12.8 or 13 to 1 AF ??

 

Sorry to be so obtuse, but I don't understand how your response relates to me question. (I'm more than willing to assume its because you Brits are just smarter than we are)