I am experiencing the same result with k4 mod....car loose power after k2.Kleeman is looking into it so lets see what happens

 

I am there with you guys, my car dynoed at 600 crank hp at kleemann, but I only get 435 at the rwhp at home, something is up. At the track I have trapped a 121.5 and have done 11.94, with 1.91 60' so I see some power on the track, and that's with stock rims & tires with 14k, half a tank of gas, and my first time on the track? I am sending the ECU back to Cory with the dyno sheet, so they can investigate more.

Not a very happy customer right now, I have had trouble with the install from the get go. We will see were it will end. I am also thinking about take it all off and leave it stock.

MG

 

A trap speed of 121.5 mph is consistant with 600 crank HP for a 4300 pound mass. Can you post the dyno plot? If not, do you know if the 435 HP is a corrected value? If so, which standard? Were the environmental conditions similar for the track and dyno run?

 

Trapping 121.5 @ 11.94 w/ 1.91 60' on street tires 1st time at the track and you're unhappy... give me a break!!! you deserve a ***** for that comment

Keep in mind your car is heavier than our 211. Throw some drag radials on there and squeak out some 1.6,1.7 60's and you'll be running 11.5-11.6x. IMO a very respectable time for a CLS55

 

If you trapped a 121.5 in a CLS w/K4 that is actually VERY GOOD!!!
You have to remember that the CLS is a higher (worse) drag coefficient compared to the E55's.
To be exact approx .265 compared to .31...That alone (CLS) will eat up 40rwhp in 1/4mi run as well as 4 mph in trap speed compared to the E!
Hence your 11.94 & 121.5mph in CLS is equivalent to a 11.54 & 125+ in an E!
Though an approximation - That is EXCELLENT!!

Given the same HP and TQ--an E will walk away from a CLS due to aerodynamics...anybody else want to confirm this???

 

I bet you are sick. I have yet to modify mine; it's great stock w/ DRs.

 

I am not complaining about my track run, I am upset about the dyno numbers. Now I had my C6 Z06 dynoed and it did 445 @ rwhp which is in line with ZO6 which do 440 to 460 rwhp stock. So he dyno seems to work but not for my car.

MG

 

I'm not sure the aerodynamics make that big of a difference from 0-120MPH, it certainly does play a roll, just not sure how much .29 - .31 is at those speeds.... obviously the effect gets much greater the faster you go...

I have seen a Viper with a a GTSR wing on the back pick up 2MPH in trap speeds when removing the wing.... back to back runs, just without the wing.... it's a big wing, designed to produce significant down force though.....

 

If available, please post the dyno plot.

 

The C6 Z06 is putting down 445 rwhp stock? Wow. I want one.

BTW -- you couldn't have picked a better color for both of your cars. Silver CLS and Yellow Z06... gorgeous!!!!

 

I am experiencing the same thing....500rwhp,with 640rwtq...was happy to let every one know,now after dealer download the new soft ware,and Kleeman did their download,i am seeing 460rwhp,and 580rwtq ,a significant decrease on hp and tq.One thing i will say though is that the car is much more responsive than before.I am sending my ecu back to Kleemann,and i trust that they will get it right this time around.

 

Such big power loss after new ECU upload...I would cry

 

Well lets give Kleemann a chance......i am sure as a tuner they are not happy with the situation either.......making hp is how they makes their living,so i feel pretty strongly about them finding the fix relitavely soon,if not they will be out of business.
Kleemann is around mutch too long to let this happens.
Not too long ago everyone was cheering "go kleemann"now everyone is anti Kleemann.
Like i said,before long they will have a fix.
My only problem with Kleeman is keeping it consistence with the people who is having problem with their car.

 

Has any one with a K2-K4 E55 been to the track yet? Since the MB/K2 re-flash my car feels stronger than ever. Is it in my head? I tried to get to a track this weekend but no one had a test-n-tune.

 

I got the car January 20th 06. I have never received a recall notice about anything, so I assume that it has the new software in it right now. I'll be talking to Kleemann tomorrow to see what else they are going to do if anything. I have already hooked up a boost guage upon their request and I am making 1 bar of boost (14.7 pounds). I just want to get some decent numbers at the track. If the dyno says 450hp but I can pull 120+ trap, I would be very happy.

 

Stiff1 - how did you hookup your boost gauge? Which one did you go with?

 

This is almost EXACTLY what I was going to say. I've had belt slip issues as well and only discovered it when directly checking the boost.

If you do have belt slip issues, one possible solution is to use Trackbite. That works well, save for the fact that I believe you have to re-apply such often.

One solution we use on our blown CTS-Vs when we have beltslip (with the 2.6" pulley) is to go back to the 2.8" pulley and change out the harmonic balancer to a larger one (from 7.25" to 8'). That allows the pulley driving the supercharger to have more "room" on the belt, but also have a higher belt speed.

 

I did it the same way Vrus said to do it. I only hook it up when I'm on the dyno, then I just plug the hole. I don't have the guage set-up anywhere in the car. I don't know what brand it is, but it serves its purpose when I need it to.

 

I also have a "slow" K2 car. With DR, LSD, and 100 octane, my K2 E55T best et is 12.1 and best trap is 119mph. Cory tells me that my car should be pushing 120+mph and getting sub 12's easily.

I've since had the recall performed and done a "sneaky" ecu reset. The car feels a bit stronger but I've yet to take it back to the track or get it dynoed.

I've always been a big Kleemann supporter and I will remain loyal unless I find out that my car is still only as fast as some of the stock E55s out there.

There can't be that much of a discrepancy between a "slow" car and a "fast" car from the factory, can there?

 

I wouldn't exactly call 119 mph 'slow' for a K2 car. If that's an uncorrected value at sea level and optimum environmental conditions, that puts you around 560-570 crank HP, depending on your running weight. It will probably be higher if environmental corrections are needed. That seems about typical for an E55 K2.


No, not in my opinion. These are precisely-designed engines, with tightly-controlled tolerances. At the most, I would expect a 1-2% power difference from engine-to-engine (5-10 HP). That would depend primarily on ring seal and valve seating. Plus, the assembled engines are tested prior to installation. It's my impression that the QC is tightly controlled from the factory.

I think you'll find that the performance differences for stock cars in the real world are due to dyno calibration, environmental parameters, driver error, and the adaptive ECU (a car that is driven aggressively seems to perform better than a car that is driven like a girly-man). This assumes that the ECU programming from the factory is the same for each car.

Unfortunately, most conditions are not controllable, so it's hard to compare performance numbers in a meaningful manner. And not all posters report the conditions that produced their numbers, which also makes it hard to compare.

If I were king of the world, I would mandate that all dynos would report raw rwhp, with no fudge factors to normalize to an expected value (like Kleemann does), no fudge factors to predict frictional losses (like a Mustang dyno), and no predetermined corrections for an established standard. It would also include temperature, barometric pressure, and relative humidity, with the option to display corrected values/curves. But what do I know - I'm just an opinionated, semi-senile, old fart with too much time on my hands and not enough to do.

 

now we know how your screename was derived.

 

Add wind resistance, and you'd have a very large Gtech unit, or so their sales department would probably exclaim!

I agree, dynos figures should be standardized across the board. I'm getting really tired of net, rear wheel, crank, blah, blah, blah.

If you were king of the world, I would have been the jester that got beheaded...

Thankfully, though, I'm still alive & kicking...

 

Has anyone heard if Milton re-dynoed his CLS K4 with the ECU remap? I know in the other thread about this he was heading back to the dyno shop with his K4 car to see if he could improve his numbers as well. What gives??? I haven't seen or heard of but just a few K4 cars and I haven't seen one of them hit the Kleemann HP gains?

 

He did go back and redyno. His car only hit 435rwhp, but he took it to the track and ran 121+mph.

 

Now I must reply to this ongoing saga.

If I didnt care about you and your car, or much less my own company, I wouldnt have flown to Chicago to look at your car, bring my DAS machine and flash programmer, writen numerous ECU files, make special pulleys in Denmark, talk with your dealer etc etc. I have gone the distance for you and your car, and will continue to do so.

The reason I talk directly to your dealer is because I asked for that line of communication since they are the ones trying to facilitate getting to the bottom of any possible OE issues with your car. Why bog you down with MB details you may or may not understand (Example: DAS process, test proceedure, etc).

Lets set afew things straight here as well in fairness to all.

By the time your dealer or you called me about a pre-tune dyno the car was nearly completed, a little late to do a baseline test. What I said was that it shouldnt matter too much because these cars all typically test at or near identical numbers. Ideally one always does a baseline test, in this case it was too late and suggesting to take it all apart to do one seemed a little out of bounds.

As I have always told you and your father, the items we supply are very straight forward. Meaning headers are headers, yours are like countless others in the field, your original boost pulley from us is identical to 100's sold, the camshafts are identical spec, throttle body and even your ECU software is the same as other cars which ar making far more power. If the combination of these parts, which has made more power on other cars does not make the power on your car what is the conclusion you draw?

When you offered to send the car to Colorado what I said is at that time it did not make sense to do that as i was willing to travel to examine the car in the environment it is used in, rather than Colorado Springs. Its far faster for me to fly to Chicago than trucking your car, the hope at the time was that it was something obvious or known that was the issue and it could be fixed on site. That didnt pan out, hence the special pulley to determine what is going on with your CLS.

The other point I have tried to make through your dealer and from me directly is at what point is it my responsibility to diagnose and fix your car when every item on it that we have provided is as it should be and this exact combi of parts and software makes great power on other cars? I can understand you feel slighted or disapointed about the result.

In any case, back to the matter at hand.

I am, and always have been, willing to do as much as possible to make you a happy camper. I cannot go to Illinois for an undetermined amount of time in an attempt to exorcize your car. I am satisfied that the hardware and software we have supplied you is withpout defect as it performs on other vehicles. That said you are free to have the car trucked to Colorado at your expense and we will go through the entire car front to back and return a car that makes more power.