Renntech Stage 4 Dyno
07-16-2006, 11:23 AM
#26
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Vadim,
Why is the bypass valve opening? Would this be happening on all the cars or just on a car that had the recall done (load limit activation)?
I still think there is a way to control that bypass valve electronically. The pinouts are the same as the TB.
If the valve is a normally closed unit, could we not just short out the 2 input
pins to the output pins so that the ECU sees the same values it sends in?
The way the valve works is: the ECU tells the valve to open a certain amount (Pins 2 & 3). The valve then sends back on Pin 5 & 6 the actual amount it moved.
If we short out the 2 inputs (2 & 3) to the outputs (5 & 6) would the ECU not think it was moving and not create any problems?
If this is possible, we could create a toggle switch in the car which when activated shorts out the pins and keeps the valve closed.
Why is the bypass valve opening? Would this be happening on all the cars or just on a car that had the recall done (load limit activation)?
I still think there is a way to control that bypass valve electronically. The pinouts are the same as the TB.
If the valve is a normally closed unit, could we not just short out the 2 input
pins to the output pins so that the ECU sees the same values it sends in?
The way the valve works is: the ECU tells the valve to open a certain amount (Pins 2 & 3). The valve then sends back on Pin 5 & 6 the actual amount it moved.
If we short out the 2 inputs (2 & 3) to the outputs (5 & 6) would the ECU not think it was moving and not create any problems?
If this is possible, we could create a toggle switch in the car which when activated shorts out the pins and keeps the valve closed.
Originally Posted by Vadim @ MBLN
It is bypass valve opening and closing.
It is not belt slippage, I actually verified this using shaft-speed strobe reader.
It is not belt slippage, I actually verified this using shaft-speed strobe reader.
07-16-2006, 01:11 PM
#28
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vrus
Why is the bypass valve opening? Would this be happening on all the cars or just on a car that had the recall done (load limit activation)?
Originally Posted by vrus
I still think there is a way to control that bypass valve electronically. The pinouts are the same as the TB.
If the valve is a normally closed unit, could we not just short out the 2 input
pins to the output pins so that the ECU sees the same values it sends in
If the valve is a normally closed unit, could we not just short out the 2 input
pins to the output pins so that the ECU sees the same values it sends in
07-17-2006, 01:50 AM
#29
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
S600TT, R350
Let me see what if I can make sense of this.
3.2L V6 Kompressor engine was developed by AMG first. Kompressor size is around 1.7L and running 14.5 psi making 350HP did not require bypass valve. C/SLK32 developed good TQ/HP with decent fuel economy.
5.5L V8 was next, with kompressor at around 2.3L at 11.6 psi it was making 500HP, but the fuel economy was bad. My old source in Germany was saying that at autobahn speeds they were seeing as low as 5-6 MPG.
There was a redesign that added a bypass valve. This will explain why some older drawing do not show a bypass valve. The idea behind bypass valve is to reduce mechanical losses (which increase fuel consumption) due to high load part throttle operation at moderate to high speeds (100 - 140 mph).
It is quiet possible that part of redesign reduced TB size from 80 mm to 74 mm (C32 uses 74 mm TB). I will need to verify this by going thru MB parts catalog. The reason may have to do with limiting potential engine power by choking it down (not unlike NASCAR restrictor plate) in addition to reducing fuel consumption.
In addition bypass valve can be used to control maximum boost. From the pinout it appears that is a stepper motor. I still need to verify this. A simple way to see what kind of impact it has would be to block one side of the bypass, thus making it irreralavant and than see what happens on the dyno and data stream.
Ideally, if we can find load maps that are used to control the valve and then set them higher, that would be an optimum solution. Powerchip has been looking at the maps, but so far without success. My available time is very limited nowadays, so frankly I do not see this happening in the near future.
There is always hope that other tuners have figured it out, but so far, with exception of Wetterhaur, no one even mentions the bypass valve.
Vrus, I know your car is back together and the last thing you want to do is to take the blower apart again. When you do get to it, see if your tech can somehow block the bypass valve, without locking the blade. This would give us an idea on what is going on.
I might have one of our original test E55s back in the shop, and I will try to do the same.
Just to give a little teaser on possibilities, a Ford GT, with similar size engine (5.4L) - although better heads, with the similar kompressor (2.3L Lysholm) at 15.5 psi was putting down 670 RWHP on my friend's Dynojet.
We are just knocking at 500RWHP with similar boost, so IMHO 550-600 RWHP should be very possible.
3.2L V6 Kompressor engine was developed by AMG first. Kompressor size is around 1.7L and running 14.5 psi making 350HP did not require bypass valve. C/SLK32 developed good TQ/HP with decent fuel economy.
5.5L V8 was next, with kompressor at around 2.3L at 11.6 psi it was making 500HP, but the fuel economy was bad. My old source in Germany was saying that at autobahn speeds they were seeing as low as 5-6 MPG.
There was a redesign that added a bypass valve. This will explain why some older drawing do not show a bypass valve. The idea behind bypass valve is to reduce mechanical losses (which increase fuel consumption) due to high load part throttle operation at moderate to high speeds (100 - 140 mph).
It is quiet possible that part of redesign reduced TB size from 80 mm to 74 mm (C32 uses 74 mm TB). I will need to verify this by going thru MB parts catalog. The reason may have to do with limiting potential engine power by choking it down (not unlike NASCAR restrictor plate) in addition to reducing fuel consumption.
In addition bypass valve can be used to control maximum boost. From the pinout it appears that is a stepper motor. I still need to verify this. A simple way to see what kind of impact it has would be to block one side of the bypass, thus making it irreralavant and than see what happens on the dyno and data stream.
Ideally, if we can find load maps that are used to control the valve and then set them higher, that would be an optimum solution. Powerchip has been looking at the maps, but so far without success. My available time is very limited nowadays, so frankly I do not see this happening in the near future.
There is always hope that other tuners have figured it out, but so far, with exception of Wetterhaur, no one even mentions the bypass valve.
Vrus, I know your car is back together and the last thing you want to do is to take the blower apart again. When you do get to it, see if your tech can somehow block the bypass valve, without locking the blade. This would give us an idea on what is going on.
I might have one of our original test E55s back in the shop, and I will try to do the same.
Just to give a little teaser on possibilities, a Ford GT, with similar size engine (5.4L) - although better heads, with the similar kompressor (2.3L Lysholm) at 15.5 psi was putting down 670 RWHP on my friend's Dynojet.
We are just knocking at 500RWHP with similar boost, so IMHO 550-600 RWHP should be very possible.
07-17-2006, 02:00 PM
#30
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Thanks Vadim!
I am still searching for an answer to this and so far no one has been able to locate the maps for the bypass valve just like you said..
I know someone who has a car in Europe that doesnt have the bypass valve on it.. If I could get someone to dump his ECU code we could compare it to a standard ECU map with the bypass valve and see where the "extra" code is in the ECU.
Does anyone have a contact in London area that can dump ECU ??
I am still searching for an answer to this and so far no one has been able to locate the maps for the bypass valve just like you said..
I know someone who has a car in Europe that doesnt have the bypass valve on it.. If I could get someone to dump his ECU code we could compare it to a standard ECU map with the bypass valve and see where the "extra" code is in the ECU.
Does anyone have a contact in London area that can dump ECU ??
Originally Posted by Vadim @ MBLN
Let me see what if I can make sense of this.
3.2L V6 Kompressor engine was developed by AMG first. Kompressor size is around 1.7L and running 14.5 psi making 350HP did not require bypass valve. C/SLK32 developed good TQ/HP with decent fuel economy.
5.5L V8 was next, with kompressor at around 2.3L at 11.6 psi it was making 500HP, but the fuel economy was bad. My old source in Germany was saying that at autobahn speeds they were seeing as low as 5-6 MPG.
There was a redesign that added a bypass valve. This will explain why some older drawing do not show a bypass valve. The idea behind bypass valve is to reduce mechanical losses (which increase fuel consumption) due to high load part throttle operation at moderate to high speeds (100 - 140 mph).
It is quiet possible that part of redesign reduced TB size from 80 mm to 74 mm (C32 uses 74 mm TB). I will need to verify this by going thru MB parts catalog. The reason may have to do with limiting potential engine power by choking it down (not unlike NASCAR restrictor plate) in addition to reducing fuel consumption.
In addition bypass valve can be used to control maximum boost. From the pinout it appears that is a stepper motor. I still need to verify this. A simple way to see what kind of impact it has would be to block one side of the bypass, thus making it irreralavant and than see what happens on the dyno and data stream.
Ideally, if we can find load maps that are used to control the valve and then set them higher, that would be an optimum solution. Powerchip has been looking at the maps, but so far without success. My available time is very limited nowadays, so frankly I do not see this happening in the near future.
There is always hope that other tuners have figured it out, but so far, with exception of Wetterhaur, no one even mentions the bypass valve.
Vrus, I know your car is back together and the last thing you want to do is to take the blower apart again. When you do get to it, see if your tech can somehow block the bypass valve, without locking the blade. This would give us an idea on what is going on.
I might have one of our original test E55s back in the shop, and I will try to do the same.
Just to give a little teaser on possibilities, a Ford GT, with similar size engine (5.4L) - although better heads, with the similar kompressor (2.3L Lysholm) at 15.5 psi was putting down 670 RWHP on my friend's Dynojet.
We are just knocking at 500RWHP with similar boost, so IMHO 550-600 RWHP should be very possible.
3.2L V6 Kompressor engine was developed by AMG first. Kompressor size is around 1.7L and running 14.5 psi making 350HP did not require bypass valve. C/SLK32 developed good TQ/HP with decent fuel economy.
5.5L V8 was next, with kompressor at around 2.3L at 11.6 psi it was making 500HP, but the fuel economy was bad. My old source in Germany was saying that at autobahn speeds they were seeing as low as 5-6 MPG.
There was a redesign that added a bypass valve. This will explain why some older drawing do not show a bypass valve. The idea behind bypass valve is to reduce mechanical losses (which increase fuel consumption) due to high load part throttle operation at moderate to high speeds (100 - 140 mph).
It is quiet possible that part of redesign reduced TB size from 80 mm to 74 mm (C32 uses 74 mm TB). I will need to verify this by going thru MB parts catalog. The reason may have to do with limiting potential engine power by choking it down (not unlike NASCAR restrictor plate) in addition to reducing fuel consumption.
In addition bypass valve can be used to control maximum boost. From the pinout it appears that is a stepper motor. I still need to verify this. A simple way to see what kind of impact it has would be to block one side of the bypass, thus making it irreralavant and than see what happens on the dyno and data stream.
Ideally, if we can find load maps that are used to control the valve and then set them higher, that would be an optimum solution. Powerchip has been looking at the maps, but so far without success. My available time is very limited nowadays, so frankly I do not see this happening in the near future.
There is always hope that other tuners have figured it out, but so far, with exception of Wetterhaur, no one even mentions the bypass valve.
Vrus, I know your car is back together and the last thing you want to do is to take the blower apart again. When you do get to it, see if your tech can somehow block the bypass valve, without locking the blade. This would give us an idea on what is going on.
I might have one of our original test E55s back in the shop, and I will try to do the same.
Just to give a little teaser on possibilities, a Ford GT, with similar size engine (5.4L) - although better heads, with the similar kompressor (2.3L Lysholm) at 15.5 psi was putting down 670 RWHP on my friend's Dynojet.
We are just knocking at 500RWHP with similar boost, so IMHO 550-600 RWHP should be very possible.
07-17-2006, 02:11 PM
#31
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vrus
I know someone who has a car in Europe that doesnt have the bypass valve on it.. If I could get someone to dump his ECU code we could compare it to a standard ECU map with the bypass valve and see where the "extra" code is in the ECU.
07-17-2006, 02:17 PM
#32
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Sending him an email right now.. Will see what I can do.
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
Does this person's car have the S/C clutch? Vadim stated that the bypass valve was added to reduce mechanical losses. Mechanical losses would imply driving the S/C when not in boost conditions. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense. Could you please verify? If this is true, it would imply another difference in the ECU code.
07-17-2006, 03:05 PM
#33
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
S600TT, R350
Does this person's car have the S/C clutch? Vadim stated that the bypass valve was added to reduce mechanical losses. Mechanical losses would imply driving the S/C when not in boost conditions. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense. Could you please verify? If this is true, it would imply another difference in the ECU code.
If the code w/o bypass valve can be loaded into cars that have bypass valve, that might be another solution.
07-17-2006, 03:11 PM
#34
Banned
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 Vadim @ MBLN
According to the drawings, cars without bypass valve still had kompressor clutch. C32s are the same way.
If the code w/o bypass valve can be loaded into cars that have bypass valve, that might be another solution.
If the code w/o bypass valve can be loaded into cars that have bypass valve, that might be another solution.
If the code was missing altogether, there would have to be some way of electrically closing the valve..
I think finding the location of the code and modifying it would be the best of both worlds.. you would still have the fuel economy benefits, but you could remove all of the boost bleed functionality.
07-17-2006, 06:36 PM
#36
Senior Member
Is there a specific signal that commands the bypass valve closed?? If there is, and we can immulate it (i.e. if it's a simple 12v signal to a certain pin) then wouldn't it be possible to use a WOT switch, similar to the ones offered my Nitrous Express and others, to send a signal at anything over 90% throttle that commands the bypass valve closed? Just a wild thought I had while sitting in traffic. 
It'd be completely stand-alone and only effective at WOT.
It'd be completely stand-alone and only effective at WOT.
07-17-2006, 07:06 PM
#37
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, stepper motors require a series of precise pulses to operate. To send the motor to a specific position (say closed), you have to know where it currently is and send both pieces of information to the stepper motor controller. The controller will then determine the pulse sequence required to command the motor to the correct position. Send too many pulses and you run the risk of damaging the motor if it can't move.
07-17-2006, 07:13 PM
#38
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Yup! You are 100% correct.
You send in the following signals:
Input, Potentiometer -
Input, Potentiometer +
The stepper motor replies with:
Output, Potentiometer 2 Actual
Output, Potentiometer 1 Actual
It works exactly the same as the TB with the same pinouts as the TB.
You send in the following signals:
Input, Potentiometer -
Input, Potentiometer +
The stepper motor replies with:
Output, Potentiometer 2 Actual
Output, Potentiometer 1 Actual
It works exactly the same as the TB with the same pinouts as the TB.
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
No, stepper motors require a series of precise pulses to operate. To send the motor to a specific position (say closed), you have to know where it currently is and send both pieces of information to the stepper motor controller. The controller will then determine the pulse sequence required to command the motor to the correct position. Send too many pulses and you run the risk of damaging the motor if it can't move.
07-17-2006, 07:29 PM
#40
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Did you really think MB would make something EASY for us to mess with?? The littlest things on this car are so complicated.. I feel like I conquered Rome or something when I got the TB to work... If I told that story to someone on the Corvette or Mustang board they would laugh me off the boards...
Originally Posted by GTA23109a
Ahh, ok . . . well that figures. Should have known nothing that simple would work. 
07-18-2006, 03:19 AM
#41
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead of messing with the bypass valve, consider this: Insert a slide valve or knife gate valve between the TB and BV. Trigger it closed with a signal from the S/C clutch engaging. The BV functions as normal, the ECU won't know it's there, and it can't be seen - the best of all worlds. The only question is fitment. Is there room? Food for thought.
07-18-2006, 12:13 PM
#42
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2003 E55 AMG
Grumpy,
Great idea in concept, but, I am not sure if there is enough room in there to do it. I am hesitant to pull everything off again so I'll take some time to review this again once I pull the blower to do the head work..
Great idea in concept, but, I am not sure if there is enough room in there to do it. I am hesitant to pull everything off again so I'll take some time to review this again once I pull the blower to do the head work..
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
Instead of messing with the bypass valve, consider this: Insert a slide valve or knife gate valve between the TB and BV. Trigger it closed with a signal from the S/C clutch engaging. The BV functions as normal, the ECU won't know it's there, and it can't be seen - the best of all worlds. The only question is fitment. Is there room? Food for thought.
