bassn_07

Haha...these ups come at a high price tag .

Rodney, get Jeremy to tune your car....enough said!!!

chiromikey

i have almost exclusively used dd machines during my progress with this platform. because of that experience i told alan his numbers were going to be hard to swallow and told him to back it up at the track. when he did, i told him to do it again. guess what...he did that too.

it's pretty difficult to refute his numbers if you throw out all preconceived crap and think about it logically. and knowing what i've seen on the dyno as of late, i can all but guarrantee his numbers are accurate.

Marcus Frost

Alan it isn't that I don't want to hear from you, it's that you keep thinking I'm talking about you when I am not. Please go see if anywhere in my thread directed at SERGE did I mention you or your dyno. No, I did not. You seem to have this illusion that when I talk about the dyno I'm talking about you, and I am not. When Serge was posting the numbers he got from the dyno a while back I also questioned them. I am focusing on the dyno, not you.

Again, it's you taking things personally all the time and immediately coming in a flurry of defense when that dyno is spoken of, not that I don't want to see you post.

Additionally, your "opinion" on how your lightweight mods show/help/hurt is an opinion based on your experience. Mine is quite different. I've dyno'd my E55 with 18s versus the significantly heavier 19s and noticed a negligible difference. I've personally experienced with my own cars and many others them dyno with different wheels and the differences on the dyno were often within the accepted margin of error (meaning, it was the same difference heat soak/etc would have).

Your mods may show some power on the dyno, but that does not reflect their true benefit as the fact that you've shaved xxx lbs off your car is not just capable of being shown in a horsepower rating. Another example is if you were to take out your entire interior, that would absolutely show 0hp on the dyno, but it could easily give you a few MPH. That is because there's less weight to propel.

-m

MB_Forever

Quick note here: those upgrades you mentioned may very well be worth 50 rwhp. Alan's car has the new ASP pulley which is true 180 mm unlike their older one, which was called 180 mm but was actually 178 mm. If you assume the 180 mm pulley nets you 20 rwhp over 172 mm one, and we know the 82 mm TB netted +20 rwhp over 80 mm and the custom tune was reportedly an additional 25 rwhp, then you end up with +65 rwhp gain. I'm not trying to argue here, I'm just trying to look at different angles

You said that in your estimate (based on Alan's trap), his car is probably putting down 500 rwhp. So in your estimate, how fast should a 540 rwhp E55 trap? If it's 132 mph, then no worries.... Alan will trap that high the next time he's at the track Alan trapped 130 mph in +1000 ft DA.... if he can run his car at -200 ft, I'm sure he'll hit 132 mph. I actually think he maybe able to hit it if he uses his street tires because he'll spin a lot early in the run.

rberga1

I think its possible especially with those 8 things you have on me. I believe that 10 rwhp =~ 1 mph in the qtr. Sure you ran 5 mph more me and not 7.5 but if you ran in the same conditions like I did (40deg and I think -500 DA) you may have hit 133mph! I always thought that the west coast is harder on traps than the midwest and east coast due to elevation and DA. Time for you to head to MIR!

I know many people say that better 60' fts result in lower traps, but that was not the case for me. However, I did not run anything close to a 1.6 60ft. Here is what I mentioned in this thread https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/...sults-gld.html .

bassn_07

Marcus, if you think this is "coming in a flurry of defense" I don't know what to say. I feel that each one of my post has been well thought out and very level headed. Not once did I attack you but more so questioned your logic....that's all. You mentioned this in almost everyone of your post ?

rberga1

Oh I know ... BTW, please don't get Vadim's 190mm pulley

bassn_07

Marcus, Rodney believe there might be a chance and from your quote you acknowledge him as a honest and knowledgeable person with a well documented car. If Rodney could think this why can't you? Thank you Rodney for your honest post, that's all I ever ask.

I probably made this into a bigger deal than it should be but I just want to know why do you always knock (or question) every one's numbers. Even if you do have a lower number reading dyno doesnt' necessarily make it accurate. It might just mean you have a low reading dyno .

In the end, you have your opinion and I have mine but most seem to agree that there might be that small possibility my car makes a true 540 to the wheels.

Marcus Frost

Again Alan, this discussion was from you coming into Dave's thread and start taking the defense against my comments which were targeted towards the DYNO and not YOU or YOUR DYNO. Serge was questioning Dave's numbers and I defended them saying his frame of references was not inline with what our DDs show here in Chicago.

Marcus Frost

Ok guys I am growing very wary of constantly arguing with 5-6 different people. I have presented very clearly some clear examples of what has shaped my perspective and yet you are all thinking like you need to "convince" me to change my mind. To change my mind would involve changing the numbers, and they aren't going to change - they are what they are.

Rodney ran in 150-500ft DA, goto the infamous Dragtimes.com and put in 11/13/08 @ WI, Great Lakes Dragaway and you will get the weather readings.

Between you and Mo and your obsession with DA it's hard to discuss these things with you guys. You guys think that with -10000DA your cars would fly to the moon and that is likely because you simply have not run in negative DA conditions, and therefore lack the experience as to what too much negative DA can do to you. You guys think I'm diffusional with DA but if you want to talk DA with someone else who knows what they are talking about, PM Jay w/ the CL600. He is also an experienced drag racer who actually lives somewhere that has many days with very cold temps and he will tell you that this holy grail of negative DA you guys are hoping for helps but isn't going to give you guys instant rocket boosters. When I ran my SL65 the other weekend I ran in 1700ft DA, big deal. If I had magical DA, with the right drag tire setup, took out 400lbs, 100 octane, remote reservoir, and jesus as my copilot, blah blah blah I could theoretically be in the 10s! OMG! Who really cares?

With that said, you guys are realistically talking about around ~600ft difference in DA between the days you ran. You are NOT going to pickup 3mph from 600ft of DA. 1000ft DA is actually pretty good conditions as far as I am concerned.

As far as what I would think a 540rwhp E55 would trap, I would guess around 134mph +/-. (and yes, that would apply at 1000 DA)

-m

bassn_07

Haha...are you the one getting upset now .

Our obsession with DA . Oh, you mean where we say track numbers and DA will tell the story? You have to be joking, you really don't agree with this? Wow, you must really love your DD machine over there .

I run my car in all sorts of different weather and conditions, do you? Why don't you go get some runs in your E and come back and post some actual track numbers. I don't need to ask Jay if DA takes a toll on my car or not, I run my car with slips backing up my statements. Where are your slips proving your theory that DA doesn't make a difference in your E? Do you have any or are you going to sit here and tell us what Jay tells you? Get to the track and prove to West coast guys that DA doesn't matter. Have you ever even posted any track sips beside your SL run? I'm just asking because I don't recall ever seeing one...just asking.

Marcus Frost

Alan,

Everything I say you take to one extreme or another. I said 600ft DA isn't going to matter, and I also find that your continuous emphasis on DA comes from a lack of experience. No one who's drag raced is going to say DA doesn't matter, that's just stupid, but you guys are under the impression that the lower the DA the better ad infinitum and my point is that things don't get much better than at 500-1000ft DA, +/-.

You really need to take the time to read my posts thoroughly because the way you respond doesn't indicate to me you understand what I write and are reading it with some serious prejudice.

-m

bassn_07

Okay, maybe I was off on my last post about "DA doesn't matter" and I apologize for that. Let me re-ask my questions and please disregard the last post.

I run my car in all sorts of different weather and conditions, do you? Why don't you go get some runs in your E and come back and post some actual track numbers. Have you ever even posted any track slips beside your SL run? I'm just asking because I don't recall ever seeing one.

Rodney posted that he ran his in -500 DA, I took his word for it. To me, a difference of 1500 is quite substantial. Now you say 150-500 which was pulled from Dragtimes. For now I'll believe Rodney since he made the pass in his car on that day.

rberga1

Actually on my run on youtube I had a typo on my video editing . It should read 11/23/08 instead of 11/13/08. If you look on my comments of that video, I mentioned the date was wrong. So I'm sure its around -500 DA.

I think your both right somewhat. Like I said there are too many variables especially when my dyno #'s vary as much as 25 rwhp on the same day and my traps vary as much as 5 mph on the same day. My lowest trap that day was 120mph.

This variation is making me think that my car is heatsoaking too fast. I had the MB dealer flush out my coolant and bleed it before I took it to the track. I was talking to the tech as he bled the system and he bled it by running the car for a few minutes with the heater on and the reservoir cap off. I mentioned that I thought there was a special way to bleed it and he said that it was only needed for the V12TT. He also said since the reservoir is the highest point of the system, the bubbles would rise to the top.

Think its time for me to start looking at a rear reservoir.

MB_Forever

Marcus, sorry if you got upset or offended by our posts, but I can assure you neither of us meant to do so, but as the title of the thread states, this is a discussion thread where we can throw/share ideas back and forth. I tried to offer you some logical (and possible) explanations for the 50 rwhp difference between the two cars in my previous post, but it got lost in the DA discussion. Here is what I was thinking:

1) 82 mm TB (20 rwhp) - dyno verified
2) CF RennTech Air Boxes (15 rwhp) - dyno verified
3) 180 mm vs 172 mm (10 rwhp) - just an estimate
4) Lightweight mods (5 rwhp) - just an estimate
5) Extensive custom dyno tune (20 rwhp) - yes, they stayed almost the entire day at the dyno shop and made over well over 30 runs

Based on the above numbers, conservatively speaking, Alan's car may very well be close to 50 rwhp more than Dave's car

Regarding the trap speed issue, do you really think that 40 rwhp will net you 4 mph especially after 130 mph? As I understand it, after a certain point in modding, much more would be needed for very little gain. Also, you stated that a 540 rwhp should trap around 134 mph but there are lots of 600/65 models that dyno at 550 rwhp or higher yet they still do not trap 134 mph.... I don't even think there is one 600/65 that trapped 130 mph

juicee63

Your just mad , comon Marcus stop pretending this is about DA or Dyno's. What did you run at 1700 DA in your SL? Obviously you did not trap 130, obviously your car does not dyno @540

Marcus Frost

Rodney it really still doesn't matter. While 1500ft of DA is considerable, it's less significant when it's close to 0. It's much more significant if it were from like 2500 to 1000. Feel free to use the calculator at dragtimes.com and run your times with 1000DA and -500DA. You'll see little difference. I don't like that calculator, but since people don't want to listen to my experience it's another way to support my perspective.

Marcus Frost

1) 20rwhp is a lot, but I do know it makes more power than the 80mm
2) Dave has the VRP airbox... so Alan does not have that over Dave
3) I disagree... 180 makes more boost but also generates more heat...
4) Lightweight mods are hard to see on a dyno...
5) Dave has an extensive custom dyno as well

So I see maybe 20rwhp total over dave, not 50rwhp, which puts Alan where I am thinking, 500rwhp-510rwhp.

If you look at Alan's numbers he picks up a lot of mph on the back 1/8th... so it's a bit of an educated guess where a 540rwhp E55 would trap because a lot would be dictated by where the power is being made/etc. If you look at my SL65 I did 96mph in the 1/8th but just under 121 in the 1/4... in my experience (and compared to other comprable cars that have also gone 96mph in the 1/8th) my car should have hit 123mph or so at the end of the 1/4 with what it did in the 1/8th. Something about these V12s and the back half of the track is just weird to me. They make good power on the dyno, the still run fast, but it seems there's something in software that still holds them back at higher speeds.

FWIW, I have not seen any 600s/65s break the 500rwhp mark on DD, except for 1 CL65, MarkoCL65. There is also 1 65 that has trapped 130mph, and again that is MarkoCL65, but his car and software is a whole different world, and I don't want to bring that into this discussion because his car also is a little "strange". As I mentioned, he's dyno'd huge on Dynojet and DD, but only running 130mph seems like he still has software holding him back at the track (and he thinks so too).

-m

Marcus Frost

Mad? Please my friend, don't even think that this stuff phases me. It does get to be annoying having to respond to 5 people with the same argument over and over, but I don't think anger is the word you are looking for.

My SL ran 11.5 @ 121, and does 487rwhp/600rwtq on DD. However, that doesn't tell the full story, and truthfully I think the V12 cars are just kind of f'd up when it comes to drag racing... I need to hit the track a few more times to see what kind of things affect my car's performance at the track before I can really have a discussion about it. I think an realistic best trap speed with my 65 is around 123mph.

With my 55k cars, 100 octane did **** for power without a tune to take advantage of it... but Treynor ran 125mph in a stock 65 with it! I've seen more than a few V12 cars around the country dyno (not just DD, on Dynojet) and then hit the track to only make a few MPH over cars with much less power. They really are an interesting paradox.

-m

bassn_07

When you say "listen to my experience", what experience are you talking about? Is this actual experience at the track with your car and supporting data? I've ran my car with the current setup in 1000-4000 DA and my car best corrects to "Stock and Mildly Modified Naturally Aspirated" on Dragtimes. The difference here is that I run my car in different weather and conditions and it seems like you don't. Like I asked many times, please post up some time slips to support your claims and I'll do the same. From here you'll see that a 1500 difference in DA would get me .2 in ET and 2 mph + in my traps. We could sit here and argue about this all day long but there's no way you could tell me how my car corrects to DA when you can't even do it for yours. Here's a quote from you that actually states that my car is unique and I have my own correction factors, why change your mind now? Using this Dragtime calculator is weak at best trying to prove your point.

MB_Forever

The 20 rwhp figure, although may seem high, is dyno documented.... Alan made 18 rwhp going from 80 mm to 82 mm while Rodney (a friend of Shawn's) just showed 22 rwhp on a dynojet. In addition, Vadim (who always documents his numbers), in his latest 55 power package also claims 15 to 20 rwhp over the 80 mm TB.

I did not notice he had the VRP airbox, so I agree with you here although RennTech is on their third version of the airbox. Apparently, they have changed to it to accomodate (and probably take better advantage of) the larger throttle body. So I believe there maybe some gain, but I just don't know how much For now, lets assume zero gain.

This argument should really not be used to discard his gains because it can equally be used on a stock pulley vs 168 mm pulley. One could argue that the 168 mm pulley (which is what RennTech and Kleemann use) do NOT make power because although it generates more boost, it generates too much heat.

Also, one could argue that the 172 mm pulley gives you no extra power over the 168 mm pulley because even though there is more boost, there is more heat. Finally, you use the argument again and say that the new 190 mm pulley will not generate more power at all because even though it will make more boost, it will generate too much heat.

To be objective, lets look at the data.... Alan is very good about data logging; he data logs everything. He has actually data logged his IATs so many times and has taken good measures to keep them in check. He has the rear-mounted reservoir, and maybe this is a good proof on the effectiveness of the trunk reservoir in regards to managing some of the heat issues. Alan's car, believe it or not, ran incredibly well in 85 degree weather with high humidity trapping 128 to 129 mph.

I honestly think the bigger pulley attributed more power and because of Alan's cooling mods, heat effects were reduced. I estimated 10 rwhp. You seem to think it adds zero power if not negative. Although I agree that at some point going bigger and bigger without invasive cooling solutions will not yield much better results, but from all the data collected by many members running the 180 mm pulley, it seems that the 180 will still make more power than the 172 mm. It would be a very good test to have any of the members who plan on upgrading from 172 to 180 (and have good cooling) do a dyno before and after the pulley upgrade; this will undoubtedly give us some useful data.

They maybe hard to see but they do exist and can be seen. On my C32, I lost 8 rwhp (dynojet) going from lightweight 17" C-Class rims to heavier 18" chromed AMG wheels with heavier tires. I've also read countless posts about people losing power going from lighter wheels to heavier wheels and vise versa. Dymag claims that their wheels would add 20 to 30 rwhp on a 500 hp car. This was also estimated by Evosport during jrcart's car conversion. So again, I respectfully disagree with you in discounting gains from lightweight mods on the dyno. Drivetrain loss is reduced (which means power loss is reduced), which means more power is being delivered to the ground. I believe Alan's lightweight mods may account for 5 to 10 rwhp.

I don't know when Jeramy tuned Dave's car, but as you know, Powerchip has made many advancements just in the past year that may not have reflected in Dave's file. Also, Alan's extra cooling mod may have allowed Jeramy to squeeze a little more hp before getting stopped by heat. These are questions they would have to answer.

Even very conservatively speaking, if Alan gained

20 rwhp from 82 mm TB +
5 rwhp from larger pulley +
5 to 8 rwhp from lightweight mods +
5 rwhp from the custom tune

I think he is already looking at 35 to 40 rwhp over Dave's car. I'm also excluding the airbox completely out of the equation although I still think that RennTech's version 3 may still net 3 to 5 rwhp over the old VRP one. I know all these "little" gains here and there seem very minor individually, but together, they do add up.

JAYCL600

I dont want to get involved in this DA issue as we have discussed this at great length in the past. I will say this, if you are serious about calculating your DA, I would buy a hand held weather station and not rely on what dragtimes says...they use the closes airport or weather station which doesnt represent actual track conditions.Its not fair to compare two different platforms as there is a weight issue to factor in. That being said...there arent lots of 65/600's making 550rwhp. There is only one 600 that I know of that makes over 550rwp on a dyno jet. Only when modded will the 65 break 550 mark. The highest 600 trap is 127, and there have been two 65's to go 130 traps.

Marcus,

You great observations as you touch on some very good points. Sorry to go OT but we really need another thread about this. This platform falls flat on back half of track. They act very weird ad times...ive run as fast as 102 in the 1/8 to only run 24+ out the back Its very frustrating and yea I am of the same theory that there are other "ECU/TCU" related issues that go on at the higher power levels.

MB_Forever

Jay..... even if you consider Marco's car, which is probably one the strongest and fastest 65 ever, it trapped 130 mph once (not 134 mph) and it has over 820 hp ........ With 18% drivetrain, I'd estimate his car is making close to 650 rwhp yet trapping only 130 mph. Even with 250 lbs difference in weight difference, the traps don't correspond to Marcus' estimates. This would put Marco in the same position Alan is being put in.... either he is not dynoing that high or something is wrong with his car or track equipment he ran at or something else unknown

I'm a little confused here.... So does the one 600 that you know of (that has dynoed over 550 rwhp) ever trap 134 mph or does the 127 mph trap include that car. What did that car trap exactly? Did it ever trap 130 mph? And regarding the two 65 models that have been able to trap 130 mph..... do they dyno 500 rwhp or 550 rwhp or higher?

Furthermore, it is very easy for the 65 platform to reach 550 rwhp. Almost every company out there advertise such increase with a simple box tune (ECU and TCU) they are able to raise power level from 604 to 670 hp (which is around 550 rwhp) yet no 65 model (even with much more hp) have trapped 134 mph or even 132 and very little seem to have trapped 130 mph


Why not assume that the 55 platform also falls flat on the back half or maybe something "unknown" seems to be going on just like the 600/65..... it just doesn't seem fair to say that for one platform either the car is not making 550 rwhp on DD or should trap higher but accept the fact that something strange or "unknown" is happening that allows them to dyno up to 800 hp but only trap 130 mph.

Marcus Frost

Alan,

I am ending my discussion with you. Now you want to question my credibility/experience because I don't have the time/patience to post up all my dyno slips to prove I've experienced various DAs from 10 years of drag racing. I don't give a **** about DA when I drag race Alan. I just don't. I don't drag race to break records, beat other people, brag on forums, and I don't give a flying **** about DA when I race. I said this in another post that all I've used DA for is my own personal reference, not to compare my car to other cars, not to hope and pray for records if it were better, not any of that nonsense. You guys want to break out your calculators and correct everything to fulfill dreams of being the baddest around and I have never been one of those people. The DAs here in Chicago vary drastically, but THAT IS RACING. The bottom line is I go to the drag strip to see how my car can do for my OWN reference/enjoyment and to have fun.

I don't even know if I still have all my time slips. All my experience has come from the real world and I'll be damned if you are going to question my credibility and experience because you take **** so personally and get so defensive when I don't believe your god damned pointless dyno numbers. You need to prove your credibility to me, not the other way around. You keep wanting to say I attack you and I talk about you but you cannot show ONE PLACE where I talked about you in Dave's thread. You were the one who contacted me and asked for my advice when building your car, but now you question my credibility because you've built a quick E55 and anyone who questions it's all-mightiness must be out of their minds. I don't have the time of patience to keep up this asinine discussion going around and around in circles with you and then be called to prove to you that I have experience. That's a joke and a half.

This is a stupid discussion and a stupid argument. I have posted everything I have to say any not one person has been able to prove otherwise, with Mo being the only person who has respectfully tried to make sense of the numbers but still falls short

BTW Mo - out of respect - Dave's car was tuned last week by Jeremy... so the 5rwhp because his tune is "old" is no good. Dave has EVO shorty headers which if you want to get real nit picky probably make a few ponies over Vadim's design. Dave dyno'd with HREs which are fairly lightweight and would be a wash IMO between the wheels Alan used... the only difference between them realistically is Alan's rotors... which I just don't think would should up on a Dyno. It was a good try but you are still at 20 or MAYBE 25rwhp over Dave with Alan's car, not 50... sorry.

Marcus Frost

Jay,

Appreciate the kudos - and it is probably a wise choice if you stay out of the DA discussion. If these guys don't like what you have to say you are going to question your credibility and then you'll have to dig up all your drag racing slips and publish a thesis on your DA experience

I'm going to PM you my cell... I'd like to talk to you more about these back 1/8th demons in the V12s. Now that I've seen it first hand with my own car I'm curious if there's a solution we could figure out, but obviously you've made a lot more passes in the V12s than I have.

-m