*** Supercharger Shut-off Survey ***
03-17-2006, 01:15 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had this happen to me also and i am stock. 4-5 wot blast and zap the car has less power than a c180. Now to me I have to ask the following questions.
1. If this car is run on the autobhan in germany what happens? The same thing? We all know the car is run at higher speeds for extended periods of time. So are euro E55s having the same problem? If not then why?
2. Is there enough air flow to the radiators to cool the coolant?
3. Would a bigger intercooler solve this?
4. What has MB done about it. Just about every car has this issue
To me its pretty simple. There just is not enough capacity or air flow or both. Or maybe the cooler need repositioning and duct work to the coolers. There just is not alot of room in our engine bay to add alot of stuff.
1. If this car is run on the autobhan in germany what happens? The same thing? We all know the car is run at higher speeds for extended periods of time. So are euro E55s having the same problem? If not then why?
2. Is there enough air flow to the radiators to cool the coolant?
3. Would a bigger intercooler solve this?
4. What has MB done about it. Just about every car has this issue
To me its pretty simple. There just is not enough capacity or air flow or both. Or maybe the cooler need repositioning and duct work to the coolers. There just is not alot of room in our engine bay to add alot of stuff.
03-17-2006, 02:20 PM
#27
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vrus
Do you think it is worthwhile to replace the engine's coolant with the Evans Race coolant? My engine temp never goes above 86C.. Even with the 4 or 5 WOT blasts on the highway, the highest temp was 86C.
Hidden benefits include toxicity (it's orders of magnitude less toxic than ethylene glycol) and cost (it won't degrade over time and need replacement). Even though initially it's more expensive, it can be cost effective in the long term.
03-17-2006, 02:35 PM
#28
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mad TKD
I have had this happen to me also and i am stock. 4-5 wot blast and zap the car has less power than a c180. Now to me I have to ask the following questions.
1. If this car is run on the autobhan in germany what happens? The same thing? We all know the car is run at higher speeds for extended periods of time. So are euro E55s having the same problem? If not then why?
2. Is there enough air flow to the radiators to cool the coolant?
3. Would a bigger intercooler solve this?
4. What has MB done about it. Just about every car has this issue
To me its pretty simple. There just is not enough capacity or air flow or both. Or maybe the cooler need repositioning and duct work to the coolers. There just is not alot of room in our engine bay to add alot of stuff.
1. If this car is run on the autobhan in germany what happens? The same thing? We all know the car is run at higher speeds for extended periods of time. So are euro E55s having the same problem? If not then why?
2. Is there enough air flow to the radiators to cool the coolant?
3. Would a bigger intercooler solve this?
4. What has MB done about it. Just about every car has this issue
To me its pretty simple. There just is not enough capacity or air flow or both. Or maybe the cooler need repositioning and duct work to the coolers. There just is not alot of room in our engine bay to add alot of stuff.
2. Probably.
3. Probably - moving it from between the SC and engine to an external location would be better.
4. This is a rhetorical question, right?
03-17-2006, 03:25 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by vrus
Grumpy666,
Thanks! I always appreciate and welcome your input.
The problem did start happening right after I replaced the failed Johnston pump and put the Evans coolant in.. Maybe that is the issue then.. I will drain the system since Spring is around the corner and replace with Water/Water Wetter..
Thanks for clearing up the overflow tank thought.. I was thinking that the overflow is used to store the coolant and if I put a bigger container in I would have more volume available for the system to use. I will scratch that thought off the list..
Do you think it is worthwhile to replace the engine's coolant with the Evans Race coolant? My engine temp never goes above 86C.. Even with the 4 or 5 WOT blasts on the highway, the highest temp was 86C.
Thanks! I always appreciate and welcome your input.
The problem did start happening right after I replaced the failed Johnston pump and put the Evans coolant in.. Maybe that is the issue then.. I will drain the system since Spring is around the corner and replace with Water/Water Wetter..
Thanks for clearing up the overflow tank thought.. I was thinking that the overflow is used to store the coolant and if I put a bigger container in I would have more volume available for the system to use. I will scratch that thought off the list..
Do you think it is worthwhile to replace the engine's coolant with the Evans Race coolant? My engine temp never goes above 86C.. Even with the 4 or 5 WOT blasts on the highway, the highest temp was 86C.
03-17-2006, 03:47 PM
#31
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by rflow306
Vic are you sure the kompressor is deactivating, does the boost drop on the data logger ?. The reason I ask is my IAT's will not go higher than 180 to 190 no matter how hard I romp on it. The one thing that does change is engine timing which is related to IAT's. Timing can go from 17 deg at full boost with low IAT's and down to 9 deg when the IAT's rise according to my data logger. That alone could kill 70 to 90 horsepower which is very noticeable. The key for my car has been keeping IAT's below 140 to achieve max power.
03-17-2006, 03:55 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,634
Received 182 Likes
on
131 Posts
Between the supercharger chirping, low rpm hesitation and now this I can see why MB is leaving the supercharged engines behind in favor of the new N/A one's.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, as I am very close to getting a new 06 E55 and the last thing I want is the supercharger turning off due to high temps especially since I live in super hot and humid sunny South Florida!
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, as I am very close to getting a new 06 E55 and the last thing I want is the supercharger turning off due to high temps especially since I live in super hot and humid sunny South Florida!
Last edited by RJC; 03-17-2006 at 06:28 PM.
03-17-2006, 04:27 PM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,634
Received 182 Likes
on
131 Posts
Originally Posted by Mad TKD
4. What has MB done about it. Just about every car has this issue
Last edited by RJC; 03-17-2006 at 06:29 PM.
03-17-2006, 05:19 PM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,634
Received 182 Likes
on
131 Posts
Originally Posted by Tony007
I have read many posts in the past on this topic but I'm sorry to report that with my K2 & I/C pump upgrade I've never experienced the infamous Kompressor shut down. I also have the -10 degree celsius option done at my dealer. Don't know if that has anything to do with it but it's working like a charm. Whether on the street or on the dyno, things have been consistant.
03-17-2006, 06:28 PM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 E55
Are you sure this is temperature related?
Couldn't this be a preprogrammed "safe" mode in the ECU? ie if WOT occurs for X duration in a given period = shutdown supercharger.
I seem to remember the BMW M5 has a preprogrammed safety mode that prevents multiple uses of the launch control within a specified period of time.
Why couldn't the E55 have a similar feature?
I have no idea how you could prove/disprove it, unless MBZ has some "small print" somewhere.
Couldn't this be a preprogrammed "safe" mode in the ECU? ie if WOT occurs for X duration in a given period = shutdown supercharger.
I seem to remember the BMW M5 has a preprogrammed safety mode that prevents multiple uses of the launch control within a specified period of time.
Why couldn't the E55 have a similar feature?
I have no idea how you could prove/disprove it, unless MBZ has some "small print" somewhere.
03-17-2006, 07:12 PM
#36
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bay Area SF
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350
hi guys, quick question does the C32 and E55 use the same Intercooler pump. and can I also use the johnson Pump and where can I get it?
03-17-2006, 08:43 PM
#37
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Real Cars
Victor,
My car has never had this happen... and I've done 60-VMAX runs a number of times back to back, and have been to the strip a couple of times as well. Car gets warm but I've never head the supercharger not engage.
A thought:
On my old Supra, it is common for guys to convert the cars from MAF based to MAP based when making big power (in fact, it's almost required). These E55s also run on a MAP based system, unlike the old W210s which ran on MAFs. This means dumping the MAF and adding a MAP sensor along with a proper IAT. The Japanese version of the Supra was MAP based from the factory. Initially people started to try a few places to mount the IAT sensor and things would run fine but after a while the idle would get ****ty and they'd have to pull timing due to high IATs. What was happening is that the sensor itself was being heatsoaked by being too close to the block, and was inflating IATs up to 25% over actual. Meaming, by heating up the part of the sensor exposed on the outside of the intake air system, it would cause the system to report back higher-than-actual temperatures of the air it was actually measuring.
It would not surprise me at all if the IAT location on these cars was less than ideal and required some shielding in order to prevent them from being heat soaked, lord knows those engine bays run so hot already.
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
It's not bad for the car to read higher-than-normal IATs, in fact it's a good thing cause the car is overcompensating and staying safe, but for us from a performance standpoint it could be a real killer on power.
Just my $.02
-m
My car has never had this happen... and I've done 60-VMAX runs a number of times back to back, and have been to the strip a couple of times as well. Car gets warm but I've never head the supercharger not engage.
A thought:
On my old Supra, it is common for guys to convert the cars from MAF based to MAP based when making big power (in fact, it's almost required). These E55s also run on a MAP based system, unlike the old W210s which ran on MAFs. This means dumping the MAF and adding a MAP sensor along with a proper IAT. The Japanese version of the Supra was MAP based from the factory. Initially people started to try a few places to mount the IAT sensor and things would run fine but after a while the idle would get ****ty and they'd have to pull timing due to high IATs. What was happening is that the sensor itself was being heatsoaked by being too close to the block, and was inflating IATs up to 25% over actual. Meaming, by heating up the part of the sensor exposed on the outside of the intake air system, it would cause the system to report back higher-than-actual temperatures of the air it was actually measuring.
It would not surprise me at all if the IAT location on these cars was less than ideal and required some shielding in order to prevent them from being heat soaked, lord knows those engine bays run so hot already.
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
It's not bad for the car to read higher-than-normal IATs, in fact it's a good thing cause the car is overcompensating and staying safe, but for us from a performance standpoint it could be a real killer on power.
Just my $.02
-m
03-17-2006, 08:53 PM
#38
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Marcus Frost
Victor,
My car has never had this happen... and I've done 60-VMAX runs a number of times back to back, and have been to the strip a couple of times as well. Car gets warm but I've never head the supercharger not engage.
A thought:
On my old Supra, it is common for guys to convert the cars from MAF based to MAP based when making big power (in fact, it's almost required). These E55s also run on a MAP based system, unlike the old W210s which ran on MAFs. This means dumping the MAF and adding a MAP sensor along with a proper IAT. The Japanese version of the Supra was MAP based from the factory. Initially people started to try a few places to mount the IAT sensor and things would run fine but after a while the idle would get ****ty and they'd have to pull timing due to high IATs. What was happening is that the sensor itself was being heatsoaked by being too close to the block, and was inflating IATs up to 25% over actual. Meaming, by heating up the part of the sensor exposed on the outside of the intake air system, it would cause the system to report back higher-than-actual temperatures of the air it was actually measuring.
It would not surprise me at all if the IAT location on these cars was less than ideal and required some shielding in order to prevent them from being heat soaked, lord knows those engine bays run so hot already.
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
It's not bad for the car to read higher-than-normal IATs, in fact it's a good thing cause the car is overcompensating and staying safe, but for us from a performance standpoint it could be a real killer on power.
Just my $.02
-m
My car has never had this happen... and I've done 60-VMAX runs a number of times back to back, and have been to the strip a couple of times as well. Car gets warm but I've never head the supercharger not engage.
A thought:
On my old Supra, it is common for guys to convert the cars from MAF based to MAP based when making big power (in fact, it's almost required). These E55s also run on a MAP based system, unlike the old W210s which ran on MAFs. This means dumping the MAF and adding a MAP sensor along with a proper IAT. The Japanese version of the Supra was MAP based from the factory. Initially people started to try a few places to mount the IAT sensor and things would run fine but after a while the idle would get ****ty and they'd have to pull timing due to high IATs. What was happening is that the sensor itself was being heatsoaked by being too close to the block, and was inflating IATs up to 25% over actual. Meaming, by heating up the part of the sensor exposed on the outside of the intake air system, it would cause the system to report back higher-than-actual temperatures of the air it was actually measuring.
It would not surprise me at all if the IAT location on these cars was less than ideal and required some shielding in order to prevent them from being heat soaked, lord knows those engine bays run so hot already.
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
It's not bad for the car to read higher-than-normal IATs, in fact it's a good thing cause the car is overcompensating and staying safe, but for us from a performance standpoint it could be a real killer on power.
Just my $.02
-m
Does any one know the current location of the sensor ?. Tried searching WIS could not find it.
03-17-2006, 09:13 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Berkeley, California
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 E55, Renntech Pulley, ECU
Is there a nice, turn-key bost-guage package available for our cars? I'd love to see what the supercharger is putting out and when.
Thanks,
Skeeter
Thanks,
Skeeter
03-18-2006, 01:58 AM
#40
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Marcus,
Thanks for the input. As usual you are thinking along the same lines as me. I've been looking at a solution to address the location of the IAT sensor because I need it relocated in order for my water/meth injection system to work optimally. I need it to read the IAT after I have cooled the air with water so I need to move the sensor further up the chain.
The IAT sensor is currently located at the backside of the engine on the supercharger's intercooler outlet. It is centered at that location just before the Y which lead to the individual intake plenums (Cast pieces with AMG script on them).
I will try a quick experiment and see if I can wrap the sensor area with heat reflectant material and do some more datalogs.
In the meantime I will most likely drain my intercooler circuit and replace the evans coolant with water & water wetter.
Thanks for the input. As usual you are thinking along the same lines as me. I've been looking at a solution to address the location of the IAT sensor because I need it relocated in order for my water/meth injection system to work optimally. I need it to read the IAT after I have cooled the air with water so I need to move the sensor further up the chain.
The IAT sensor is currently located at the backside of the engine on the supercharger's intercooler outlet. It is centered at that location just before the Y which lead to the individual intake plenums (Cast pieces with AMG script on them).
I will try a quick experiment and see if I can wrap the sensor area with heat reflectant material and do some more datalogs.
In the meantime I will most likely drain my intercooler circuit and replace the evans coolant with water & water wetter.
Originally Posted by Marcus Frost
It would not surprise me at all if the IAT location on these cars was less than ideal and required some shielding in order to prevent them from being heat soaked, lord knows those engine bays run so hot already.
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
-m
I think what you might want to try (although this may be somewhat difficult) is hooking up your own bung/IAT sensor setup in a good, shielded location and run it into the car to compare it's readings and the stock sensor's readings.
-m
03-18-2006, 09:41 AM
#41
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by DJe55
I have K1 with Evo Headers. I run my car pretty hard every time I drive it and this has never happened to me. If I'm at the track the car will lose a couple of tenths but the sc is still engaging. Good luck with the problem.
Derrick can attest that my car doesn't exhibit any problems, he was amazed at how cool it stays when hammering it.
I would run it at the strip 3-4 times, just hotlapping, and would not experience any heat related issues.My car is stock with about 8900 miles on it.
03-18-2006, 09:50 AM
#42
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2007 S65, 2005 Nissan Armada
I have not had this problem with my car either, bone stock 2005, I have been to the drag stip twice and hit the governor more times than I can remember. I haven't specifically tried to get it to shut off but I have run from 60-150 a number of times in succession.
03-18-2006, 12:40 PM
#43
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The general concensus with this i/c overheated pump seems to stem from a poor design by MB on the E55 and its sister cars sharing the same motors.
It seems as if every one has tried a fix for this problem.....but has not been successful in figuring out how to fix this problem.
Some companies offer,cooling packages,larger i/c pump,etc,while others recommends insulations or rewireing the i/c pump.
I think we need to address this to MB./AMG....cant say that they will or can do anything,but they have the money,time,resourses and maybe knowledge to fix this problem,and send out a recall bulletin or even fire the guy who came up with the idea of supercharging the car,but fail to let them know that the car would only be good for one pass,before loosing power.
This problem have everyone baffled,and thinking all kinds of off the wall stuff....one person suggest getting a larger over flow tank,others say use water wetter or different types of coolant.
What it boils down to is MB screwed up on this one,and they need to fix it.
I wonder why the replacement car for the E55 will not be SUPERCHARGED?
It seems as if every one has tried a fix for this problem.....but has not been successful in figuring out how to fix this problem.
Some companies offer,cooling packages,larger i/c pump,etc,while others recommends insulations or rewireing the i/c pump.
I think we need to address this to MB./AMG....cant say that they will or can do anything,but they have the money,time,resourses and maybe knowledge to fix this problem,and send out a recall bulletin or even fire the guy who came up with the idea of supercharging the car,but fail to let them know that the car would only be good for one pass,before loosing power.
This problem have everyone baffled,and thinking all kinds of off the wall stuff....one person suggest getting a larger over flow tank,others say use water wetter or different types of coolant.
What it boils down to is MB screwed up on this one,and they need to fix it.
I wonder why the replacement car for the E55 will not be SUPERCHARGED?
03-18-2006, 02:04 PM
#44
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,634
Received 182 Likes
on
131 Posts
Originally Posted by vrus
Marcus,
Thanks for the input. As usual you are thinking along the same lines as me. I've been looking at a solution to address the location of the IAT sensor because I need it relocated in order for my water/meth injection system to work optimally. I need it to read the IAT after I have cooled the air with water so I need to move the sensor further up the chain.
The IAT sensor is currently located at the backside of the engine on the supercharger's intercooler outlet. It is centered at that location just before the Y which lead to the individual intake plenums (Cast pieces with AMG script on them).
I was told my an MB shop foreman that the system must be bled of ALL air...MB dealers have a special process for this. The Foreman indicated that if there is even the slightest airbubble it would cause gaps in power.
I will try a quick experiment and see if I can wrap the sensor area with heat reflectant material and do some more datalogs.
In the meantime I will most likely drain my intercooler circuit and replace the evans coolant with water & water wetter.
Thanks for the input. As usual you are thinking along the same lines as me. I've been looking at a solution to address the location of the IAT sensor because I need it relocated in order for my water/meth injection system to work optimally. I need it to read the IAT after I have cooled the air with water so I need to move the sensor further up the chain.
The IAT sensor is currently located at the backside of the engine on the supercharger's intercooler outlet. It is centered at that location just before the Y which lead to the individual intake plenums (Cast pieces with AMG script on them).
I was told my an MB shop foreman that the system must be bled of ALL air...MB dealers have a special process for this. The Foreman indicated that if there is even the slightest airbubble it would cause gaps in power.
I will try a quick experiment and see if I can wrap the sensor area with heat reflectant material and do some more datalogs.
In the meantime I will most likely drain my intercooler circuit and replace the evans coolant with water & water wetter.
03-18-2006, 02:05 PM
#45
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,634
Received 182 Likes
on
131 Posts
Originally Posted by jamusa
The general concensus with this i/c overheated pump seems to stem from a poor design by MB on the E55 and its sister cars sharing the same motors.
It seems as if every one has tried a fix for this problem.....but has not been successful in figuring out how to fix this problem.
Some companies offer,cooling packages,larger i/c pump,etc,while others recommends insulations or rewireing the i/c pump.
I think we need to address this to MB./AMG....cant say that they will or can do anything,but they have the money,time,resourses and maybe knowledge to fix this problem,and send out a recall bulletin or even fire the guy who came up with the idea of supercharging the car,but fail to let them know that the car would only be good for one pass,before loosing power.
This problem have everyone baffled,and thinking all kinds of off the wall stuff....one person suggest getting a larger over flow tank,others say use water wetter or different types of coolant.
What it boils down to is MB screwed up on this one,and they need to fix it.
I wonder why the replacement car for the E55 will not be SUPERCHARGED?
It seems as if every one has tried a fix for this problem.....but has not been successful in figuring out how to fix this problem.
Some companies offer,cooling packages,larger i/c pump,etc,while others recommends insulations or rewireing the i/c pump.
I think we need to address this to MB./AMG....cant say that they will or can do anything,but they have the money,time,resourses and maybe knowledge to fix this problem,and send out a recall bulletin or even fire the guy who came up with the idea of supercharging the car,but fail to let them know that the car would only be good for one pass,before loosing power.
This problem have everyone baffled,and thinking all kinds of off the wall stuff....one person suggest getting a larger over flow tank,others say use water wetter or different types of coolant.
What it boils down to is MB screwed up on this one,and they need to fix it.
I wonder why the replacement car for the E55 will not be SUPERCHARGED?
Also it apprears the SL will still be a 55 for MY 2007.
03-18-2006, 04:05 PM
#48
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jamusa
I think we need to address this to MB./AMG....cant say that they will or can do anything,but they have the money,time,resourses and maybe knowledge to fix this problem,and send out a recall bulletin or even fire the guy who came up with the idea of supercharging the car,but fail to let them know that the car would only be good for one pass,before loosing power.
You are driving the car in a manner which was not intended. The system is functioning as designed to protect the engine. Go pound sand.
03-18-2006, 05:18 PM
#49
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2007 S65, 2005 Nissan Armada
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
Would you like a preview of their response?
You are driving the car in a manner which was not intended. The system is functioning as designed to protect the engine. Go pound sand.
You are driving the car in a manner which was not intended. The system is functioning as designed to protect the engine. Go pound sand.
03-18-2006, 05:24 PM
#50
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by RJC
The question is why are some cars having the issue and others not?
Good question. Is it mileage related? Does the pump and/or coolant get less efficient with age?
