Originally Posted by jangy

I dunno about married with kids, but I gotta say I disagree with this thread being bad for VRP. Somebody will have to fix all of the blown TCU / ECUs that get sent to MHC. I've always loved to watch kharma bite the guy who just had to have everything, even if it meant selling out to a *****. In a way, I am glad jcart is on it because we will very soon find out how much meat is to MHC's yap. But, I can't help but to be dissapointed in it. You really want a Chrysler tuner to play with your Black Series, there are at least 10 just in the HB area. Why do you need to go to Ohio?

Originally Posted by jangy

I don't know about all that. I remember the CLK63 that was to be the first and dunno what happenned. All I do know is that I have seen the SC setup recently. The hardware is being fitted now and tune, etc will follow. Talk is cheap. What are you putting down now? Where is the 575 coming from?

Originally Posted by jangy

I don't know about all that. I remember the CLK63 that was to be the first and dunno what happenned. All I do know is that I have seen the SC setup recently. The hardware is being fitted now and tune, etc will follow. Talk is cheap. What are you putting down now? Where is the 575 coming from?

Originally Posted by MHP

I guess I've vastly understimated the size of our target demographic. Silly me for thinking any performance oriented MB owner would like to see control of their trans given back to them...
Good luck with the wiff sales.

If I'm a "know it not" you must be a know it all. Answer my questions and I'll answer yours. Start with how to spec a cam for a 4v, what's important, what's not, velocity v flow, etc. Then we'll talk.
What? You are so funny. OK, well you tell me my mother's real name, cause that is important, then we can talk. Like I said, you have no data to speak of, much less back up.

Then bust out the lube, I treat my customers like gold no question. I'm availabe 18hrs a day via cell--that helps when you have customers not just in the US but around the world.
Honestly if you have to pay for sex you need to hit the gym more often.
It is pretty clear how you treat your happy customers (both your brothers). I'm only worried about the ones that pay and never get a straight answer.

...and your experience with the C63 is...highlighted nicely by the 5th gear not being 1:1 as it is in the 7A comment below.
Look back at the post. Again, you jumped the gun. Obviously, you have played with the C63 which you just got. But how about that 65 that you claim to have worked on? Is it dyno'd in 5th for a 1:1 as well?

Let me apply your logic to the statement above again: Any moron can do (not really sure that's the right word) a supercharger. We'll it's true. Everyone knows that in a factory supercharged app adding a smaller pulley and tuning will always net huge power due to the inherent safety margins built into the vehicle at the factory and the ability of FI to make large power easily.
N/A is obviously going to be at a huge disadvantage to FI no argument there, however again I ask what kind of rwhp/rwtq are you making? I think we can get a H/C/I 6.2 with supporting bolt-ons to make the same kind of rwhp you do, just not the tq. I guess we'll find out soon enough...
You thinking is different than you posting it DONE. I don't care what you think, that is obviously mutual. The point is can you back up what you've already dished?


Only as an example.



That was clearly a bad attempt to spin, leave it at that.



Our TCU reflashing adds power due to the massive amount of additional tq management (aside from that in the ECU) found in the OEM TCU programming. It's sick how much they handicap these things.
DT loss is measured by coast down, we've found it to be right at 16-17% on my car at present. This may drop by a point or two with more miles (dyno'd at 600 miles). 5th gear is 1:1 in a 7A which my car (you know, the one in question) happens to have. Obviously it's 4th in most other vehicles.



Untested? LOL, how many vendors on here have purchased a pair of 6.2 heads just to destroy (one we literally cut in half and we worked different shapes/contours on the other)? Again, we've made 597rw with a 3.55" bore 4.165" stroke (stock dimension) Ford GT head 5.4L 4v naturally aspirated, 440rwhp from a 4.6/4v N/A, 350hp from 1.5L of 2v SOHC--that's (the 5.4) probably more than you're making with your twin screw 5.4. What makes you think that we'll do any worse with a 4" bore 6.2?

So, you are applying your ford experience and saying your first head for a motor you have never worked on will just magically work? Sure, I'll take 5.

I am officially done with you Jangy, at least until you learn how to quote in html because I'm sick of wasting my time.
ARE YOU ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN?

Have a nice day, and don't worry, I'll still sell you a TCU at only twice the normal cost.

Originally Posted by MHP

Watch the libelous comments.

Originally Posted by MHP

575rw will not be a problem from Jim's N/A 6.2.

Originally Posted by jangy

Originally Posted by jangy

You thinking is different than you posting it DONE.

Originally Posted by jrcart

Well, I'm making 511 at my last dyno run, on the way but not yet installed are the following part/products. A 6.4 pound CF drive shaft, new crank pulley, CF true Ram-Air hood and intake, heads, cams, valves and springs, a new updated ECU tune, the TCU tune. 575 is a VERY conservative number, might even see closer to 600 depending on heads.

I can dump money into this thing until I'm blue in the face just to **** guys like you off.

Originally Posted by jangy

Again, how? I love the all knowing blanket statements. Yes, Jim will spend his money with you. Not to worry.

Originally Posted by MHP

On a scale of 1-100 with regard to you owning me, you're at a negative 9999999999999999999999999999999999.

Not me owning you. You are doing it yourself. Thanks for keeping score, though.

I'd love to reply to the rest of the drivel you just posted but again am sick of fixing your quotations.

Have a nice day.

One thing, what the hell does this say?



I left my little orphan Annie decoder ring at home today...Sorry.

Originally Posted by MHP

Keep in mind that a stock 2000 Cobra R motor (using the same heads found on the Ford GT) makes about 360rw stock and 380rw after a tune. We've made 597rw with that same motor with tiny valves/seats.
If we can't make 575rw (at least) with our own H/C/I package I will kick myself off this site.

Originally Posted by jangy

Nah, doesn't **** me off, just curious. I just think there has been a bunch of talk about heads on here lately and nobody has bothered to notice that MB just doesn't leave much room to play with. I've never seen a 63 anywhere near 500rwhp so i was curious how you got it.

Originally Posted by jangy

Originally Posted by Jon2007E63P30

Jangy,
That is an arrogant statement as well (as those made by MHP). You assume that anyone who is anyone is on this forum.

I am interested and I have not yet been insulted.

If there are only 50 people in the world, then there is no way to support the development costs for ANYTHING on a 63.

Anyway, I do have to say that this thread is at least setting up MHP for stardom or the MB version of OZ.

Originally Posted by jangy

It means there is a huge difference between you THINKING you can do something and YOU having done it. Now you say you THINK you can do it, while your prior posts claim it has been done by you. Which was it?

Originally Posted by jangy

Nice, Jon explaining arrogance to me. You may hate to hear it, but it is true. The small market for such elaborate mods is very small and it is part of the challenge in developing new parts. I may be off on 50, but why not ask RennTech how many people get the TCU mod? The market is small. Tat is why tuners end up "stealing" information or just doing a partial R&D.

Originally Posted by Jon2007E63P30

Jangy,
That is an arrogant statement as well (as those made by MHP). You assume that anyone who is anyone is on this forum.

I am interested and I have not yet been insulted.

If there are only 50 people in the world, then there is no way to support the development costs for ANYTHING on a 63.

Anyway, I do have to say that this thread is at least setting up MHP for stardom or the MB version of OZ.

Originally Posted by MHP

Talk about a serious mistatement...How many 6.2 heads have you seen up close? Not that it would matter because you obviously don't know what you're looking at.
The reason you think MB doesn't leave much on the table is simply due to 1) ignorance 2) you having a PD blown MB motor. You never make great gains with a PD blown app by porting heads.
BTW, for those that are wondering there is a LOT left on the table with the stock 6.2 heads. Don't get me wrong, they are nice heads, essentially a larger bore version of a Ford GT head, however they suffer from the same problems as any mass produced cylinder head--casting quality in the short turn, bowl areas and the valve job can be much improved upon. Obviously we're also reshaping the ports (keeping them small) as well. There are over a dozen other areas that we can easily focus on to make more power to boot.

Originally Posted by MHP

If I said I did it, I did it. If I say we're doing it, we're doing it. Any further questions?

Originally Posted by blackbenzz

I'm not even gonna try to sit here and read through all this BS. Do you have a TCU tune and spacers for a 01 CLK55? I already have a higher stall

Originally Posted by blackbenzz

I'm not even gonna try to sit here and read through all this BS. Do you have a TCU tune and spacers for a 01 CLK55? I already have a higher stall

Originally Posted by jangy

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS. I'm building the tallest building in the world.

Originally Posted by jrcart

Jangy made a half-assed attempt at a back-handed insult towards me as well. When did I become the target on this thread? Just because I purchased a product from this guy????


Jangy, please inform