When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I need to find something to get my 60 foot times down. I was thinking 3.06s with an LSD. At the track on drag radials my car will not cut faster then a 1.9, and that is dead hooking. It is a dog until 5,000 rpm.
I'm not against going with an even shorter gear. Anyone have experience with this in a 63? I contacted Tony about doing the TCU tuning if this will work with the .9 trans.
I'm going to leave it on the Mickey Thompsons for now, and look in to the Magnuson supercharger that will hopefully be coming out. A stall and a shorter gear would really change the dynamics of a 63. It needs both much more then a 55 due to the lack of torque. Need to do it like they did in the 60s and 70s when you don't have boost....
One, I am not sure that you need to flash for the gear change in the 63. The 722.9 has a output shaft speed sensor for ratio calculation so there would not be a ratio error from the rear gears.
Also something to consider is the fact that 1st gear in the .9 is really short. 4.38.
Also a stall converter would probably help a bit more and man the 63 really gets faster the more your run it. You just have to back to back run it over and over.
I'm going to leave it on the Mickey Thompsons for now, and look in to the Magnuson supercharger that will hopefully be coming out. A stall and a shorter gear would really change the dynamics of a 63. It needs both much more then a 55 due to the lack of torque. Need to do it like they did in the 60s and 70s when you don't have boost....
What magnuson kit are you referring to? Is a lower price point supercharger kit coming out? Has anyone really nailed down a reliable boosted m156 tune on stock internals? I would boost my ml but if I melt a piston a decent engine is more than half of the cars value. That's why I'm waiting for the 12-13 ml63's to get into my price range.
Long tube headers will kill his low end even more.
Yeah I realized that after I posted. Although most of the dyno graphs I've seen show the torque higher everywhere (at least with long tubes). So it'd still be a good win, but not the answer to improving his 60'
All mods are in my sig. I have MBH long tubes. I have made 12 passes in a row. It didn't get any faster. I did not know that about the .9. Thanks for sharing that, and I will check out the FS section right now. Check in the 204 C63 forum for the info on the Magnuson supercharger. I do not know if it will be cheaper. I'll be calling them back on Monday for some more information.
I really do not want to be the first to try it and have to pull the rear end and swap the factory gears back in. However if the calculation is done off the sensor what else would I need to worry about? I need to get the car back on a dyno with a wideband to see if there is an issue with tune being too rich.
If you just swap the gear the ESP will go bonkers and give up. Other 63 cars did have lower gear ratios (SL is one step up), so it's just a matter of hacking the TCU and possibly ECU
I never thought about doing that. Any idea how much stall they would be able to get out of a stock converter? My auto trans knowledge is limited. If I did it, I would want a 3k stall. Anything less then that wouldn't be worth my time.
I'm starting to think the used 2.8 Weistec maybe my best option. If I could do some gears and a stall I would be happy keeping it N/A. I have also never seen that ESS piece before.
I'm still confused about how someone ran an 11.9X with a full weight E63 bone stock and my car seems to put down consistent 12.40s with every bolt on possible.
I'm still confused about how someone ran an 11.9X with a full weight E63 bone stock and my car seems to put down consistent 12.40s with every bolt on possible.
Was the density altitude for the 11 second run and your runs similar?
I'm not sure where he was at. All my passes were at Pacific Raceways in Kent, WA. Its about 45 minutes south of Seattle. A TT E63S wagon was running 12.20s and a TT E63 (Both stock) went 11.90s. An E55 on sticky tires and secondary cat delete went 11.90s also.
I have seen other people with E63s running low 13s though also. Its strange how it is all over the board with the 63s. My best pass was 12.29 @114 with a 1.9 60 foot. Not spinning at all. Last time I went out with the TT 63s I only made three passes and they were all 12.40s at 113-114.
I'm not sure where he was at. All my passes were at Pacific Raceways in Kent, WA. Its about 45 minutes south of Seattle. A TT E63S wagon was running 12.20s and a TT E63 (Both stock) went 11.90s. An E55 on sticky tires and secondary cat delete went 11.90s also.
I was just at Pacific Raceways for the Northwest Nationals in August.
Originally Posted by layzie12g
I have seen other people with E63s running low 13s though also. Its strange how it is all over the board with the 63s. My best pass was 12.29 @114 with a 1.9 60 foot. Not spinning at all. Last time I went out with the TT 63s I only made three passes and they were all 12.40s at 113-114.
Most Mercedes owners are relatively new to drag racing and performance driving in general, which is why you would tend to see some E63's running 13's.
The 211 63s make so little torque its not like wheel spin is an issue. It seems that some of them are just plain slow. They do not have the mph through the traps of a 500 horsepower car.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
