E55 AMG dyno graph (must see)
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
E500
E55 AMG dyno graph (must see)
HyperPower hosted an open house and dynoed Nissan GTRs, E55 AMGs, an EVO X. Follow the link to see the graph of the E55 AMG.
http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index....st=20&start=20
This is the same dyno used in the MotorTrend Nissan GTR dyno video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY5WVmAgy5g
http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index....st=20&start=20
This is the same dyno used in the MotorTrend Nissan GTR dyno video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY5WVmAgy5g
Last edited by GGPE500; Feb 3, 2009 at 08:22 PM.
Banned
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 460
Likes: 2
2004 E55
Seems they took the dyno run and then skewed it to read the published numbers
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
E500
The Wheel Drag, by looking at the graph posted, is approximately 50+hp.
The ambient correction is at 0% for the stock E55. There were no dyno correction factor input for this dyno. The only operator inputs were temp, pressure, and humidity. The ambient correction percentage always show on the graph.
I want to point out a fallacy when using "estimated" percentage loss.
Let take a forced induction car, we would strap a car to dyno and do a base line run at normal boost and another run at double the boost pressure. Both runs are made in the same gear, fourth if prefered. Base line run yield 300hp and high boost run yield 500hp. If one were to use "estimated" percentage loss of 20% then a base run would have 60hp loss whilst the high boost run would have 100hp loss? Same gear, same wheel, same tires, but different loss?
Let's look at this from another angle. The base run yield peak 300hp at 5000 rpm and 200hp at 7000rpm. Using the 20% "estimated" percentage loss would yield 60hp loss at 5000rpm and 40hp loss at 7000 rpm? We know the higher speed the higher the friction and loss would be. But this estimate method would prove otherwise.
This dyno "measure" wheel drag, no guessing, no estimating.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Please have a look at the MotorTrend Video for further information.
The ambient correction is at 0% for the stock E55. There were no dyno correction factor input for this dyno. The only operator inputs were temp, pressure, and humidity. The ambient correction percentage always show on the graph.
I want to point out a fallacy when using "estimated" percentage loss.
Let take a forced induction car, we would strap a car to dyno and do a base line run at normal boost and another run at double the boost pressure. Both runs are made in the same gear, fourth if prefered. Base line run yield 300hp and high boost run yield 500hp. If one were to use "estimated" percentage loss of 20% then a base run would have 60hp loss whilst the high boost run would have 100hp loss? Same gear, same wheel, same tires, but different loss?
Let's look at this from another angle. The base run yield peak 300hp at 5000 rpm and 200hp at 7000rpm. Using the 20% "estimated" percentage loss would yield 60hp loss at 5000rpm and 40hp loss at 7000 rpm? We know the higher speed the higher the friction and loss would be. But this estimate method would prove otherwise.
This dyno "measure" wheel drag, no guessing, no estimating.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Please have a look at the MotorTrend Video for further information.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,123
Likes: 3
From: Chicago, IL
Real Cars
GGPE,
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
Estimating drivetrain loss is far from an exact science, however the notion that as power increases, so does loss is true - although it is not a 1:1 ratio as the percentage drivetrain loss would calculate out. It's possible to get a good idea of what the loss is, however without pulling the engine out and putting it on an engine dyno, you are still guessing.
Just my $.02
-m
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
Estimating drivetrain loss is far from an exact science, however the notion that as power increases, so does loss is true - although it is not a 1:1 ratio as the percentage drivetrain loss would calculate out. It's possible to get a good idea of what the loss is, however without pulling the engine out and putting it on an engine dyno, you are still guessing.
Just my $.02
-m
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 20
From: Southern, CA.
V12-Biturbo
First it's proven to the 9th degree the loss thru drive-train is 18% not 20%
The Wheel Drag, by looking at the graph posted, is approximately 50+hp.
The ambient correction is at 0% for the stock E55. There were no dyno correction factor input for this dyno. The only operator inputs were temp, pressure, and humidity. The ambient correction percentage always show on the graph.
I want to point out a fallacy when using "estimated" percentage loss.
Let take a forced induction car, we would strap a car to dyno and do a base line run at normal boost and another run at double the boost pressure. Both runs are made in the same gear, fourth if prefered. Base line run yield 300hp and high boost run yield 500hp. If one were to use "estimated" percentage loss of 20% then a base run would have 60hp loss whilst the high boost run would have 100hp loss? Same gear, same wheel, same tires, but different loss?
Let's look at this from another angle. The base run yield peak 300hp at 5000 rpm and 200hp at 7000rpm. Using the 20% "estimated" percentage loss would yield 60hp loss at 5000rpm and 40hp loss at 7000 rpm? We know the higher speed the higher the friction and loss would be. But this estimate method would prove otherwise.
This dyno "measure" wheel drag, no guessing, no estimating.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Please have a look at the MotorTrend Video for further information.
The ambient correction is at 0% for the stock E55. There were no dyno correction factor input for this dyno. The only operator inputs were temp, pressure, and humidity. The ambient correction percentage always show on the graph.
I want to point out a fallacy when using "estimated" percentage loss.
Let take a forced induction car, we would strap a car to dyno and do a base line run at normal boost and another run at double the boost pressure. Both runs are made in the same gear, fourth if prefered. Base line run yield 300hp and high boost run yield 500hp. If one were to use "estimated" percentage loss of 20% then a base run would have 60hp loss whilst the high boost run would have 100hp loss? Same gear, same wheel, same tires, but different loss?
Let's look at this from another angle. The base run yield peak 300hp at 5000 rpm and 200hp at 7000rpm. Using the 20% "estimated" percentage loss would yield 60hp loss at 5000rpm and 40hp loss at 7000 rpm? We know the higher speed the higher the friction and loss would be. But this estimate method would prove otherwise.
This dyno "measure" wheel drag, no guessing, no estimating.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Please have a look at the MotorTrend Video for further information.
wheel drag
RWHP 400/.82 = 487.80 Crank HP
RWHP 420/.82= 512.19 Crank HP
469 Crank HP figure has been proven solely due to Marketing Strategy, the aforementioned S55/SL55/CL55 kompressor models are ALL advertised at 493 Crank HP
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 20
From: Southern, CA.
V12-Biturbo
GGPE,
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
Estimating drivetrain loss is far from an exact science, however the notion that as power increases, so does loss is true - although it is not a 1:1 ratio as the percentage drivetrain loss would calculate out. It's possible to get a good idea of what the loss is, however without pulling the engine out and putting it on an engine dyno, you are still guessing.
Just my $.02
-m
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
Estimating drivetrain loss is far from an exact science, however the notion that as power increases, so does loss is true - although it is not a 1:1 ratio as the percentage drivetrain loss would calculate out. It's possible to get a good idea of what the loss is, however without pulling the engine out and putting it on an engine dyno, you are still guessing.
Just my $.02
-m
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
GGPE,
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
-m
Most of us are aware that any kind of chassis dyno will never give EXACT hp #s, however, it is well proven here that E55s and the 496hp rated CL/S/SL55 make the same RWHP on a dyno, not to mention the E55 tends to run slightly higher trap speeds than almost any of the other 55 cars.
-m
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,123
Likes: 3
From: Chicago, IL
Real Cars
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
E500
Did you have a look at other graphs of the car tested on the same day? I also have graphs of many other makes of cars that was tested and confirm the factory figures.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,880
Likes: 9
From: Seattle
05 E55
Did you have a look at other graphs of the car tested on the same day? I also have graphs of many other makes of cars that was tested and confirm the factory figures.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
But then again, numbers are numbers....the true test of those numbers is how you do at the track. No debating that....well, on this forum, anything can be debated.
edit:
+1 on it being peculiar that two cars are near the same.
Last edited by str8ridin; Feb 4, 2009 at 12:53 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,123
Likes: 3
From: Chicago, IL
Real Cars
Did you have a look at other graphs of the car tested on the same day? I also have graphs of many other makes of cars that was tested and confirm the factory figures.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
I'm well aware of the testing manufacturers have to do to get an SAE rating for their engines, as well as what the EPA requires. In reality, heat soak, ambient conditions, engine break-in, fuel quality, and a million other factors can all have a small, yet visible effect on the power figures an engine will make. We have seen MANY 55 cars make dyno pulls, and while cars like the SL55 are rated at 493hp, they do not make more power than an E55.
This isn't up for debate. How this particular dyno saw two E55s make exactly the same HP (within decimal points of each other) is beyond me. Smells pretty funny, though.
-m
Banned
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 460
Likes: 2
2004 E55
Did you have a look at other graphs of the car tested on the same day? I also have graphs of many other makes of cars that was tested and confirm the factory figures.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
Factory rated figures is witnessed test. I have taken officials, in my previous job, to do a witness test on emission and learn that the power test is also a witnessed test.
You will NEVER see those numbers on a chassis dyno, that's why your numbers look very suspect
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,799
Likes: 1
From: Khalifonia.
4 wheeled car.
The E55/S55/SL55/CL55 kompressor models ALL put down on average 400-420 rwhp. Kinda hard to understand what you're trying to say (ESL?) though you're totally lost as far as Mercedes E55 rwhp or drive train losses IE Transmission/Drive shaft/Wheels/ETC.. Not just
RWHP 400/.82 = 487.80 Crank HP
RWHP 420/.82= 512.19 Crank HP
469 Crank HP figure has been proven solely due to Marketing Strategy, the aforementioned S55/SL55/CL55 kompressor models are ALL advertised at 493 Crank HP
RWHP 400/.82 = 487.80 Crank HP
RWHP 420/.82= 512.19 Crank HP
469 Crank HP figure has been proven solely due to Marketing Strategy, the aforementioned S55/SL55/CL55 kompressor models are ALL advertised at 493 Crank HP
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Wasn't sure what the differences are... but I do know (for example) that SRT-6's trap several MPH higher than comparably modded C32s, even if they put down the same power - because the SRT-6 is several hundred pounds lighter. Logically, it makes sense - it would take more power to accellerate a heavier mass to the same speed in the same distance (other factors being equal). Conversely, less power *could* accellerate a lighter mass to a higher speed, if the weight difference was greater than the HP difference. If the weight difference is negligible, and the traps are slightly higher, that would seem to anecdotally reinforce your point that they make the same BHP.
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Likes: 3
From: Toronto
2011 Black C63 Eurocharged V5
Just an FYI, Factory numbers are produced on an engine dyno. On that dyno the engine is not turning a waterpump, Powersteering pump, Alt, AC compressor, trans or any other accessory drive.
You will NEVER see those numbers on a chassis dyno, that's why your numbers look very suspect
You will NEVER see those numbers on a chassis dyno, that's why your numbers look very suspect
If the engine on a engine dyno puts out 493hp(the amount we all assume for the E55).
Now add in the aux drives(alternator,wpump,ect)--its entirely possible that the car loses 20hp from that....making this dyno's actual number seem accurate.
Dont know what all the fuss is about---its just a dyno---theyre just good for tuning.
Marcus--your CPT dyno for stage 1 says what 435whp??str8ridin's STOCK dynojet says 487whp??
bottom line--->who cares what a machine says and long as its repeatable and consistant.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
E500
Just an FYI, Factory numbers are produced on an engine dyno. On that dyno the engine is not turning a waterpump, Powersteering pump, Alt, AC compressor, trans or any other accessory drive.
You will NEVER see those numbers on a chassis dyno, that's why your numbers look very suspect
You will NEVER see those numbers on a chassis dyno, that's why your numbers look very suspect
You are absolutely correct. But that's was in the 70s with Gross rating.
The current (after 2005) SAE testing standard, all the accessories must be included as in a production cars. The standard even dictate how much oil to have in the oil pan. Some Japanese makers, use the loophole (pre05) to reduce amount of oil in the Pan to reduce windage to show higher number and were fined heavily in 2005. The current SAE testing method must be follow and witnessed in order to use the word "SAE" in their brochure.
Kindly have a look at other graphs we tested at http://www.gtrcenter.net/
I should have the video of the E55 test posted soon.
