stevebez

Mbe 030 have different stock mapping to give the great first dyno ??

Rgds Steve.

JamE55

Would you happen to have Chris' dyno sheet on this? Pls post dyno.

thanks

Tony007

I don't know for sure but I would tend to agree based on the considerable torque output to the wheels.

Take a peek at SPEEDTHRILLS dyno numbers on the CLS55 forum. His stock HP is right in line with mine but his stock rwtq is alot lower. Nevertheless, excellent numbers.

https://mbworld.org/forums/c219/121256-before-after-k1-mod-dynos.html

Tony007

Here's the dyno sheets.

Feel free to make comments and suggestions. Thanks..

Tony007

It appears that there may be some relief in site.

Kleemann has another program file ready to go that will pull a bunch of fuel out of that rich pig.

Kleemann also speculates that the check engine code(s) might be the rear cat sensors being "out of range" due to the very rich running program they sent. I should know something tomorrow.

Rock

Tony, congrats on the K2, I am sure you will love it. One question. You took your car to the track and trapped at 111mph and are making 440rwhp? What were the track conditions?

Tony007

The track in Bithlow was horrible as always, nicknamed spinworld rather than speedworld. Best time I could manage on my 04' Z06 when stock was 12.8X @ 116.X Best time with the Procharger on the Z06 was 11.8X @ 126.8

That night I was only able to make two passes & the car couldn't get a decent lanch either. I don't think they even prepped the track. The 60ft time was 2.03. Car felt slow up top as well and didn't seem like it wanted to make power. I recall the air temp was 69 degrees and the air was pretty thick, especially when looking at the outdoor lights you could see a nice moisture & thickness to the air.

I've heard that Gainesville has a much better track and I'm planning on getting up there as soon as possible to try out this K2.

Tony007

Here is today's dyno graph.

I'm running on the revised Kleemann program file on these latest pulls. They removed some fuel and added some timing. Looking at the graphs it looks as though they need to pull a bunch more fuel and add more timing up top. Overall the curve is shaping up. Peak power is being made at 5200 rpm instead of over 6k.

Best Results: 480.3 rwhp 563.5 rwtq

We managed to do 2 back to back pulls and they were basically right ontop of each other. The Power has definitely improved but there is still room for quite a bit more. I'm hoping to crack the 500rwhp mark when it's said and done.

This afternoon I yanked out the computer again and sent it off for another revision. Hope to have it back this Sat. and get some more pulls in the first part of the week.

Tony007

Got the 3'rd computer revision back in and installed this morning.

Been too busy out romping on the car all day to post. The car is definitely alot stronger now. The car is so much more responsive to throttle input and feels like it is walking on edge. With the help of the dyno's, Cory and his crazy crew are getting this car dialed in bigtime.

The car is pulling so hard now, I'm loving this. Best part of all is I can't keep out of the darn thing, this power is so damn addictive. I found myself going for blasts all day and night long. Each time coming back with a ear to ear grin and the deepest respect for my boys at Kleemann.

I'm heading back to the dyno on Tuesday and will post the graphs on this latest computer file.

JamE55

Pics pls!

Tony007

Here is the latest Dyno curve taken two days ago. This comparison is between the latest Kleemann program revision to the very last one which is listed above & is overlayed with the current one.

Current numbers are up to 497.4rwhp & 576.5rwtq!!!

As you can see they removed some more fuel evenly across the rpm range but we are still VERY top end pig rich.. Also there is flat spot that crept in between 3100 rpm & 3500rpm which may need a touch more timing to help even it out.

What this tells us that there is ALOT more power to still be made in this motor. I have a sneaky suspicion that when we are all done tweeking the air/fuel & timing in the program this CLS55 030 w/K2 should see a dyno in the range of 525-540 rwhp and 575-580rwtq!!!

Now how do these numbers relate to flywheel numbers using the popular 19% loss? How about 648-667 hp & 710-716 ft/lb tq all for some simple bolt ons... these 5.5 Kompressor engines rock!!!!!!!

Kleemann's target is to get the air/fuel ratio between 12:1 and 11.8:1 from 3500 rpm's through 6500 and slightly tapering down to 11.6:1 from 6500 to 6800 rpms to keep any knock retard from creaping in.

Ok, here is where I need all your help. As you can see, the fuel/air graph cuts off at 10:1 so we can't see how low it is really going. What do you think it is actually bottoming out at????????? I want to try and get the majority of this brought up to correct level this next time around.

I'll be getting some more computer adjustments Friday and then it's back on the dyno. I'll be sure to post the results of the next revision.

Til then

Grumpy666

Perhaps the dyno guys could print out another copy with an extended fuel ratio scale?

AKxSpyO

Your break-in method seems to have paid off!

Tony007

Thanks Grumpy, I just called the dyno shop and 10:1 is the lowest scale their fuel/air reading will display. At least it was worth a shot. That would have been pretty cool if they could read lower than 10:1..

Tony007

While the rear wheel HP is right in line with the highest dynos I've seen on the 55K engines the rear wheel torque is where I'm a bit amazed.. I've never heard of a stock 5.5K engine dynoing anywhere near 510 rwtq.

Speed Thrills

My pre-mod Dyno numbers were almost identical as was my "break-in" process. I was hard on the car from day 1. I only have the K1 mod but the results were amazing. The torque unleashed is unbelievable. You can see my pre-mod dyno charts here:
https://mbworld.org/forums/c219/119935-pre-mod-dyno-results.html

Grumpy666

Yeah, I pretty much expected that since most wideband O2 sensors range from 10:1 to 18 :1. But, like you said, it was worth a shot.

On a different note, it seems a little strange that Kleemann's standard K2 programming would be that far off for your car. It might be an indication that something else is wrong (fuel pressure, etc). It might be prudent to have some diagnostics run on your car. If there is another problem, and it self-corrects, you could go from from your current pre-Kleemann-tweak pig-rich condition to the worst possible scenario - super lean. You may want to pulse Cory and see how far off his adjustments are from other K2 cars and see if he's concerned. Just a thought.

Tony007

Earlier this afternoon I forwarded Cory all the graphs including stock.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that there is an abundance of fuel being thrown in these cars bone stock in an effort to keep it safe but to really keep the power down (read de-tuned).

My experiences show that Kleemann's programmer throws alot more "fuel to the fire" so to speak when they should be removing fuel from the stock program with these K2 mods. At least that is how it's working with this car..

This car would have made way more power than it did in the first dyno graph if Kleemann never touched the stock MB program and we just bolted on the K2 mods.

Going back to the stock programming, in fact it's easy to see how much power MB is choking from these stock engines. Take a look at my stock dyno air/fuel curve. The stock computer program runs the fuel/air right down to pig rich condition as early as 5000 rpms. Now look up at the HP curve. That is exactly where the HP is leveled off and starts dropping down. If you kept the fuel/air at 11.4:1 the HP would continue to climb. And we don't even know what they are doing with the timing above 5200rpm..

To me it's crystal clear, MB is choking the hell out of these engines to keep the power down, period!!!!!!!

Anyone agree or disagree?

vrus

Tony,

You definitely have yourself one heck of a fast car on your hands.. Congrats on one heck of a beast!! It is making some really good power for the level of mods.

But, understand one thing.. MB makes the top end rich for 2 reasons. 1 reason is to keep the car in a safety zone so there is less chance of knock/detonation. #2 reason is to help cool the car down at the higher RPM. If you lean out the fuel you will make more power but you will increase the heat in the motor at the top end. This will also give more possibility of IAT creep and possibility of supercharger shutdown by ECU.

Sometimes, leaning things out can be counter-productive. Do 3 back-to-back pulls on the dyno and take the average of the power. If you can do 3 pulls with any ECU tune and be in the same range then you have a good setup. Doing just 1 pull is not a good idea of how the car will perform on the street.

No point in having a 500rwhp car in pull #1 and a 460rwhp car in pull #2.

Just my $0.02...

Tony007

Hi Vic,

Thanks, you make some valid points.

I agree having consistency is a very important thing, hence the upgraded Kleemann I/C pump.

This last time on the dyno we did 3 pulls. There was about 5 minutes between the first & second pull and then another 5 minutes for the 3'rd pull. The first pull yielded us 487 rwhp. The second pull got us the 497.4. The third pull looked similiar but this time you could see a nice suckout between 5000-5800rpm. Looked to me like some timing was being pulled on that 3'rd run due to heat. Third pull yielded us 485rwhp. Heat might be the culprit.

For these 3 runs the hood was open but there was just a tiny little fan about 12" tall blowing at the front of the car, allowing very little airflow over the motor.


To help get to the bottom of all this lets pose some questions.


What air/fuel ratio constitutes being TOO RICH at 6000rpm in a stock 5.5K engine at wide open throttle?

What air/fuel ratio is considered lean & potentially dangerous for a stock 5.5K engine at 6000rpm at wide open throttle?

Is there unlocked power available up top on a stock 5.5K engine that could be still regarded as "safe"?

If the factory is SO concerned about cooling why do we have to jump through hoops scratching our heads trying to figure out ways to cool the engine from excessive heat build-up and high IAT?

Why does MB give us these tiny little exhaust manifolds when they cause so much heat (possibly including component failure) to build up inside the motor under boost?

Does adding excessive fuel cool via the computer program cool excessive heat buildup in the engine?

Don't these engines get so hot due to poor I/C pump quality they cause the supercharger to not engage at times?

Is the stock intercooler system considered inadequate to properly and efficiently cool a stock 5.5K engine?

Does the factory really appear to be concerned about heat?

Does the factory de-tune the stock 5.5K engine?

If so, how do they accomplish this?

Lets all have some fun with this..

stevebez

My 2c

- the headers are a joke ... engine is severely choked.

- Higher combustion temps are good for power (the higher the diff between chamber temps and IAT's the more air expands and therefore more power.) but bad for reliability / detonation, so its a balancing act right ?

- bottom line if you increase breathing efficiency power goes up - sometimes this is at the cost of thermal efficiency as chamber temps are lower ... think thats why some guys LOST power when they added headers without remapping.

- Intercooler design is for touring not for track thats for sure. Compare E55 to Bugatti Veyron (ok i know its unfair) but the Veyron has 10 radiators... but then it has 1000hp.

- motor is definitely detuned - a simple remap gets you 22-24 hp on 98 RON fuel.

Rgds Steve.

Tony007

Ok, now were starting to get somewhere. Made 2 more dyno pulls today. Here's the graph along with the previous best.

Today's numbers 511.7 rwhp & 592.6 rwtq !!!!!!!!!!!!!

All this power from a K2 car

It's putting down about the same power as the V12 65 biturbo cars.

Best part is there is still more power to be made in this engine. I'll be trying out another program this Wed and then it's back to the dyno Thurs..

Akara1

Awesome numbers. Im thinking of doing the K2 setup on my E55. Anybody know what octane fuel is required? Any reliability issues?

Tony007

I run 93 octane. That's what I would suggest running in these cars. The more aggressive the fuel/air & timing the more critical the fuel octane requirement.

There are no reliability issues whatsoever. But it's a sure bet your tires will be begging for mercy.

Get that K2 now, you will absolutely love it!!

rflow306

Tony007 I have been doing a lot of data logging lately and can tell you that when Iat's are under 140 timing is around 17.5 degrees. As the iat's increase timing decreases as low as 10 degrees. This starts to happen at 160 to 180 iat's. My data logger does not display knock sensor retard which I believe can only be viewed with star-diag. Call it a hunch but I think the retard is built into the map as an extra safety precaution.

My next step is to separate the IC fluid from the radiator. I will try to use the biggest reservoir room permits to accommodate some ice for track runs.