04E55 AMG

Or have your ECU re-programmed so it will not trigger a check engine light when the above scenario happens, or just move it behind the secondary cats.

I had my check engine light appear after the removal of my cats 5 months ago. Instead of having the O2 sensors moved I had the ECU changed. Never have to worry about that again.

vrus

That's really the dilemna.. I want to get rid of the cats but I am not at a point where I want to reprogram the ECU yet.. Still doing testing on certain aspects of the car and want the stock programming intact for now...

I guess I'll have to remove the secondaries for now.

vrus

I've been working on something (planning and researching best way to do this) for a while.. The E55 sounds too tame and was hoping the headers would have woken up the sound but they didnt...

I'll give you a hint on what I am doing...

It involves a pair of these:



and a set of these:



oh, and one of these:



Can't wait to see what you came up with..

I'm building it to support 700hp+... 3" stainless. Will keep the rear section stock for now but everything forward will hopefully be all done.. otherwise I'll hack up the stock exhaust to do testing and then have the final constructed once all measurements are 100%.

blackbenzz

What happened with the dyno? Are you doing a cut out exhaust? The ones where you flip the switch and a valve opens and makes it a straight pipe (no mufflers)? This has been done before by someone on this forum.

vrus

Had 1 hr of dyno time booked last night at 5pm.. Called at 4pm to confirm and the girl tells me the guys are at the track testing... !@(#&^@(^# I was pissed!! No dyno...

Anyways, I gotta call them today and tear them a new one and see if I can get in later this afternoon.

Was thinking about cutouts but they are pointless for me now.. There would be 0% backpressure in the open position with what I plan on doing with the exhaust so it wouldnt work out...

vrus

Update... Hitting the dyno in 1hr...

Will post updates when I get home tonight along with some datalogs taken on the dyno.

This should give a good indication of IAT impact with the cooling system upgrade.

Hopefully there will be some good improvements at this stage of tune.

Stay tuned...

JamE55

Victor,

At this point i think i'm more excited than you to see what rwhp numbers you're going to be putting down! :v

vrus

Monolog:

Back from the dyno.. Let me say that I am going back again in a couple of days and doing the runs later in the evening.. It was too hot in the dyno room so I know my numbers suffered but I wanted to get a feel for the changes so I went ahead with the pulls anyway.. It was 37.5degress celcius (99.5F) when I did my pulls. I did a total of 5 pulls.. 4 of them in 4th gear. 1 in 3rd gear. The car was running over 100Celcuis for engine coolant temp. I know it has more in it with some cool air.

Results:

Best 4th gear pull (1st pull I did): 442rwhp @5400RPM 497rwtq @2700RPM

I didnt bother posting the 3rd gear pull since the ratio isnt correct.. I will just keep running in 4th gear until it hits fuel cut to see what it does. I will have to guestimate the peak power since I only get to 5,400RPM at fuel cut.

After the 1st pull, every pull after that netted 430 - 434rwhp.. Torque stayed exactly the same at 495 - 497. I was driving the car on the dyno for each pull so I was pretty consistent.

Also, no datalogs.. Damn autotap wouldnt work with the car in dyno mode.. it would record 3 or 4 seconds worth and then lose its connection with the car... cant figure that one out so no hard facts to give you.. I will have to datalog on the street and post some info.

My Comments:

Based on what I saw on the dyno I can say the following:

1) The cooling system upgrade works to keep the car consistent. After the first pull, once the car reached it's max operating temperature, the cooling system kept it consistently at 430rwhp for each successive pull.

2) I think that the consistency would have still been there if I had just the pump alone and not the heat exchanger.

3) I think that 90% of the power increase can be attributed to the headers. 10% because of the cooling system.. I believe that what Evosport is saying about the 30rwhp increase OVER STAGE 2 with the cooling system would be accurate. If you are pushing even more boost and different programming than stock, I think the full cooling upgrade with the heat exchanger is a MUST. I think on a stock car, you could probably get away with just the pump and see 85 - 90% of the gains. Basically, if you plan on modding your car and want more boost and more power, you should spend the money and get the full cooling upgrade. I think it will be a must to keep the car running properly.

4) Look at my new graph and compare it to the stock one.. Look at how nice the A/F is now.. pretty stable and consistent all the way to 5,500RPM.. The headers helped to lean it out on top big time and now I have a nice stable A/F curve.

5) I would speculate (which I dont do often) that if I return and do this again with some nice cool air, there is at least another 10rwhp, and 10rwtq. I was hoping to break 500rwtq but I came just shy of it... ah well.. I will further speculate that my car in its current form would have netted 455 - 460 rwhp if I could have pulled cleanly to 6,400RPM. The car feels insanely fast on the road at high RPM so I know the power doesnt drop off after 5,400RPM..

Notice how the torque curve has almost flattened itself out now.. its pretty constant from 2,400RPM - 4,500RPM and then only dropping 100ft lb to 5,500RPM. This is what I am hoping the meth/water injection will cure.. I am suspecting that I will get to KEEP that torque right to redline and possibly even raise it a bit higher.

I am going to do some exhaust mods and the oil catch can and the heat wrap of the plug wires and more heat wrap on the intake tube and do another pull...

Now for the dyno graph:

vrus

Oh yeah... Forgot a couple of things..

Keep in mind the following:

1) These were 2 different dynos so I can't be 100% sure the gains are accurate. The pulls should really have been done on the same dyno (which I will do once he finishes setting up shop in the new location).

2) The stock dyno was done with a minimum of 10deg F lower temperature so this new dyno pull would of been alot better with some cool air.

For reference:

Baseline: 411rwhp, 476rwtq
New: 442rwhp, 497rwtq

Gains: 31rwhp, 21rwtq

I'll post another set of #'s once the original dyno I used is setup again.

vraa

Whoa, that is one nice looking graph. Really high resolution too

Do you have any pictures? I love pictures!

vrus

Thanks! No pics unfortunately. But, there might be dyno video from now on..

medici78

What voltage does the stock O2 sensor need to see in order not to trigger a check engine light? Does anybody make an O2 sensor simulator that would work in our W211 E55 application.

vraa

I have this scary feeling that in the video, your car will go insane from all the power it's making and just rip apart the dyno.

Grumpy666

The normal operating range for an O2 sensor is 0.45 - 0.5 volts. Higher than 0.5v indicates a rich condition and lower thab 0.45v indicates a lean condition. Most OBD II cars use the same sensor. You can get simulators from several sources, such as the one below. Google for more.

http://www.o2sensorsimulator.com/

Or, if you're cheap like me (uhh, make that frugal), you can make your own with a simple voltage divider network. All it takes are two resistors - 24k ohm and 1k ohm. Hook them in series and connect the free end of the 24k ohm to the 12-volt wire in the O2 sensor connector, and the free end of the 1k ohm to the ground wire in the connector. Now connect the joined ends of the resistors to the signal wire in the connector. This will feed 0.48 volts to the computor in place of the second O2 sensor. DO NOT do this for the first sensor - you need this one for closed loop mode. Do this at your own risk.

vrus

See Grumpy's post.. He hit the nail on the head.

Your are too kind.. My car is still a little puppy.. It is hardly "grown" up YET. But, I do like the image that you have put forward in my head with your statement.. That is my new goal.. Forget wanting to hit 700hp with the 113 engine... I want to tear apart the dyno!!!!! I'll toast to you once I have my success.


You are a wise man.. I have yet to get anything by you. I welcome your posts and your input.

I will share whatever I find (good or bad) and hopefully we can all learn more about our cars.

Grumpy666

Thanks . . . I appreciate the kind words. I also like and agree with your systematic approach to improving your car's performance. Do the ECU last and don't do the pulley if you can live w/o it. Did you notice a small reduction in boost when you installed the headers?

Since you opened the door for input, I'd like to offer an opinion. You said:

As nice as this would be, I don't think it's gonna happen. Instead, I think what you'll see is a small torque increase across most of the RPM band. To me, the tapering torque curve looks more like a flow issue due to head port size and/or cam timing. I don't know if AMG modifies the heads to increase flow on these engines, but I doubt it. Typically, car makers are conservative with the port sizes to maintain flow velocity at lower RPMs. Especially on heavier cars. The cam duration probably starts to give up at about 5500 RPM. The S/C will push this to about 6000 RPM. Of course, this is just my opinion, and I could be wrong.

Actually, I'm kinda anxious to hear your results on the H2O injection. I've been considering this for my S/C truck for the past couple of years, but have yet to pull the trigger. There's just not a lot of good info avaiable to raise my comfort level. Thanks for sharing.

vrus

I have yet to get a clean datalog now since I did the install.. I am expecting there will be due to the lower restriction design and higher flow. I guessed at a 1lb boost drop.. Once I get a complete log done I'll know for sure.


I would normally agree with what you are saying and point the finger at flow restriction or cam design but in this case I don't. If you look at a Kleemann Stage 2 or Evosport Stage 2 power curve you'll see that the numbers are higher than mine at the point where the dropoff occurs.

The difference in the bigger pulley and rempped ECU graph is that the drop-off is steeper.

Take a look at Gid_E_Up's Stage 3 Kleemann graph: https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/94458-619-hp-e55-dyno-results.html

I know the car will "support" the horsepower because I've seen the graphs a few people have posted. This is what led me to conclude that the issue is heat related. If we can control the heat, we can unlock the trapped horsepower in the upper RPM range.

But, like everything I say, the only way to find out is to DO IT and put it on the rollers.

Grumpy666

Interesting thread - it didn't show up in any of my searches. But this is probably not a good example to make your point, since he used the Stage 3 package, which includes cams. Without knowing the valve timings of the cams, its hard to make a meaningful comparison of the upper RPM power taper.

In my opinion, Kleeman's dyno plots seem to be somewhat suspect. They appear to be configured to elicit the responses seen throughout the thread. Valid comparisons to other forum members' cars would be extremely difficult based on this data. I think I'll broach HP comparisons in a new thread.

This is where our thoughts on the upper RPM power taper diverge. Why do you think the heat is only an issue in the upper RPM range?

Accomplice8

I agree 100%. All tuners should put customers' cars on a dynojet and get real wheel hp figures. 'Crank dyno' figures just sound like a guesstimate.

vrus

True, the graph is Stage 3 which includes cams.. The reason I pointed it out is because they state that the cams are only good for another 15hp (I am not sure about this number, but I know it is a low increase).. Saying that, I would assume the cam doesnt account for the majority of the power that is being shown on the graph.

But, you are correct.. I cant be 100% because the cams are there. Unfortunately there isnt enough data in the form of dyno plots that I can use on from this board so that is all I have to go on.

I guess I'll have to just prove/disprove this theory myself with my own testing.

Don't misunderstand me.. I'm not saying there is only a heat issue in the upper RPM band, I am just saying that there is a SIGNIFICANTLY greater heat issue in the upper RPM band. The higher the RPM, the greater the heat issue. So, if I can relieve the supercharger of some of that heat it generates, I should get higher efficiency from it and therefore better power output.

Grumpy666

OK, this is where I need some help. Sorry, but that's just my **** nature. I don't understand the mechanism for the increase in heat as RPMs rise. With the Lysholm-style compressor, boost is constant across the RPM range, so the heat due to adiabatic inefficiency should be constant. Of course, if there's a significant flow restriction somewhere downstream of the S/C, the boost and heat will rise.

A WOT blast w/data logging would be a good thing to shed some light. Especially before the precats go bye-bye. Is that where you're going to put the race cats, or are you going with a downpipe with the race cats replacing the original main cats?


Absolutely. You would gain more power by doing this and bumping the timing a little than you would get by increasing the boost. Engine longevity would also be enhanced.

With your mods, you would probably be close to the drivetrain reliability point. Adding a pulley would likely cause you to become real friendly with a transmission specialist.
.

vraa

Are you sure about that? I thought the 65's and the 55's shared the same transmission?

Grumpy666

No Ricky, I'm not sure. But I asked about the E55 transmission in an earlier thread and was informed that they're good for 800 newton-meters, which is almost 600 lb-ft. Victor's a little under 600 lb-ft now (assuming 15% DT loss), so further mods will put him up there. Of course, if the 800 newton-meter number is bogus, then there might be a pulley in his future.

vraa

If they are the same..
I have a few SL65's running with the RENNtech ECU upgrade @ 840lb-ft torque just fine.

vrus

True.. Boost is not tied to RPM and is pretty much constant with positive displacement superchargers. Simple physics says that heat is a byproduct of power. As power increases so does heat. The adiabatic efficiency of a supercharger only tells you how much POWER the supercharger consumes to drive itself.

Power increases as RPMs climb and we make peak power somewhere around 6,200 - 6,400RPM. The heat that is generated at 3,000RPM is not the same as the heat generated at 6,000RPM.

Kenne Bell is a great resource on superchargers.. Here is a good read if you are interested: http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ge...efficiency.pdf

Agreed. Datalogs explain alot. I need to get some street time with my datalogger and do a couple of WOT runs and gather some hard data.

As for the race cats.. I will be experimenting with 2 different configurations. One configuration (the first one I will try) is to replace the main cats with the race cats and leave the secondaries alone and do some dyno pulls. I want to see how much HP is freed up by this simple swap.

Second test would be to:

- remove primary cats and replace with straight pipe.
- remove secondary cats and put race cats in their place.
- install O2 simulators

This should generate considerable power increases but I suspect that low-end torque will suffer somewhat.

Yup.. I keep this in the back of my mind. I dont know the real limit and hopefully I wont have to find out.