New E55 spotted at MIR drag today (11.6 @ 12x.xx)
06-02-2004, 05:57 PM
#26
Open up your hood and look at the driver side black plastic air inlet tube. It is kinked and thus very restrictive. I just ordered the passenger side one for $14 and put it on. Also you can bend open the flaps.
Some say they have used tubes from S55s and SL55s but I am not certain they are any different than the passenger side E55 tube. Can anyone verify if they are different?
Some say they have used tubes from S55s and SL55s but I am not certain they are any different than the passenger side E55 tube. Can anyone verify if they are different?
06-02-2004, 06:45 PM
#28
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55, F550, S600 Ducati 999
Re: The path to low low 11s
Originally posted by e55 baller
Give it a full season or 2 and I think you will see W211 E55s running LOW 11s with NO NOS, maybe high 10s with an EXCELLENT driver.
If you can cut a 1.8 60-foot at 22psi or so on the stock radials then you should be able to manage a 12.3@115 at a density altitude of 0 feet.
I'd figure the K&Ns drops ins and the snorkle mod is good for 10whp ---> 12.2@116 cost $100
Add the LSD, BFGs, and 283 gearing for the S55 and you should see 11.8@116 (no HP gained) cost $4500
Add the Evosport chip/SC pulley for 50-60 whp and you should get 11.4@120 cost TBD
Add Kleeman Headers & downpipes for 35-50 rwhp should net 11.1@123 cost $4.5k
Add an Eisman race exhuast for 22hp or 10-15 rwhp and you should see 11.0@124 cost $3k
Fix the intercooler efficienty like Stephens is working on and you could pick up another 20-30 whp and end up with ~675hp and 775 tq
note the low trap speed...the wide torque band is what is getting this ET. I have seen Cartek C5s with 500wrhp running 10.7@126 with 1.46 60-foot times. On another note my 700 rwhp/600 rwtq Supra went 10.8@136 and I have gone 12.2@114 at 2,000 ft DA in my E55 so far.
Give it a full season or 2 and I think you will see W211 E55s running LOW 11s with NO NOS, maybe high 10s with an EXCELLENT driver.
If you can cut a 1.8 60-foot at 22psi or so on the stock radials then you should be able to manage a 12.3@115 at a density altitude of 0 feet.
I'd figure the K&Ns drops ins and the snorkle mod is good for 10whp ---> 12.2@116 cost $100
Add the LSD, BFGs, and 283 gearing for the S55 and you should see 11.8@116 (no HP gained) cost $4500
Add the Evosport chip/SC pulley for 50-60 whp and you should get 11.4@120 cost TBD
Add Kleeman Headers & downpipes for 35-50 rwhp should net 11.1@123 cost $4.5k
Add an Eisman race exhuast for 22hp or 10-15 rwhp and you should see 11.0@124 cost $3k
Fix the intercooler efficienty like Stephens is working on and you could pick up another 20-30 whp and end up with ~675hp and 775 tq
note the low trap speed...the wide torque band is what is getting this ET. I have seen Cartek C5s with 500wrhp running 10.7@126 with 1.46 60-foot times. On another note my 700 rwhp/600 rwtq Supra went 10.8@136 and I have gone 12.2@114 at 2,000 ft DA in my E55 so far.
The low 12 sec times people are getting are on a very sticky drag strip where traction isn't a real problem. An LSD will net you zero time.
However when you add another 100hp you need the LSD to put the power down.
To produce the power numbers quoted by Evosport for more than 4-5 secs you must upgrade the cooling system capacity, it doesn't really increase power at all, just enables the car to produce the power expected all the time rather than for a few brief seconds.
As an example Shine a tuner in Asia, has worked with a 480rwhp E55. First run was 480hp, third run was struggling to get 420. These are based on shortened 4-6k rpm runs to minimise heat soak. With the mods, you will get 480hp run after run repeatedly.
Based on my calcs, 650-700hp is the most we will reliably see out of the E55 without pulling the motor down.
This is a low to mid 11 at best.
Before anyone starts quoting Treynors S600, yes in ideal conditions it has done an 11.4, very very cold, very little humidity etc. In the magazine test it only managed a 12.5 in less ideal circumstances.
Do not mistake freak times due to unrealistic atmospheric conditions as a baseline for your car.
An average E55 will do 12.6-12.8 in the 1/4 mile in 25 C (77F ) conditions.
Yes you may get a flat 12 in 10 C (55 F) temps, if you have a sticky track, but you will find your car has an additional 50-80hp at the rear wheel more than when it was hotter at the 1/8 mile point, because of the greatly decreased air intake temps the lower ambient conditions have afforded the standard cooling system.
06-04-2004, 03:25 PM
#29
I ran 1 12.2@114 STOCK with 28.4 baromterer, mid 60s, high humidity on a poorly prepped track. If I was not at 2,000 feet density altitude it would have been lower.
I don't think 12.6-16.8 is average based on the times I have seen on the boards assuming no one is being decptive. Unless you have a non functioning right foot a 1.8 60-foot is a given. Its not like launching a Supra that has peak TQ near redline.
I'd say average is 12.4 and I was traction limited even on a prepped track with boost braking at 1.2k rpms w/ ESP off and BFGs.
Also it appears that somone has run a 11.4x @12x.x at MIR. I doubt this guy has all the mods I have listed. 40 more rwhp and that car could conceivably be at 10.99.
I will post my results pre/post the LSD 306 gearing install.
I don't think 12.6-16.8 is average based on the times I have seen on the boards assuming no one is being decptive. Unless you have a non functioning right foot a 1.8 60-foot is a given. Its not like launching a Supra that has peak TQ near redline.
I'd say average is 12.4 and I was traction limited even on a prepped track with boost braking at 1.2k rpms w/ ESP off and BFGs.
Also it appears that somone has run a 11.4x @12x.x at MIR. I doubt this guy has all the mods I have listed. 40 more rwhp and that car could conceivably be at 10.99.
I will post my results pre/post the LSD 306 gearing install.
06-04-2004, 06:01 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55, F550, S600 Ducati 999
e55baller
60 degrees is not average! When you can do a 12.2 in 75-80 degree temps stock, that will be impressive. My figures of 12.6 to 12.8 are indicative of most magazines performance figures world wide.
What is the point of quoting your cars performance as 11.9 in the 1/4, when on a normal day, or under less than ideal conditions, it is going to do a 12.5? - This is a generalisation and not a personal attack on you e55baller.
see the link below. -Treynors car started, from memory, with a 12.2 after the Renntech upgrade. With some practice and better conditions he got an 11.9x. Under ideal conditions, drag radials (slicks?) and must practice, he has done better than 11.5. In the hands of C&D who are notorious for getting very good performance figures out of cars (the quickest times of any actually), they only achieved a 12.5.
http://www.renntechmercedes.com/C%26DS600.pdf
Does this make Treynors claim a lie? No, but it puts some perspective on performance claims generally. rather than stating a Renntech S600 does 11.5 in the 1/4 (which treynor does not say, I am only using this as an example), it should be stated, that under perfect conditions (freezing cold and lots of traction) and must practice, it is possible to do an 11.5 in a Renntech S600, which has been setup for the strip. The two statements are very different and I feel this is what is happening here.
Can't wait to see the result of your gearing change, personally form discussions in another thread, I think 2.83 is going to be a better bet, to avoid a gearchange to 4th. I'm looking forward to eating my words and following your lead!
In reference to your comments of a 10.9, how much HP do you think is required to do a 10 in a 4200lb laden car?
Some people here appear to be living in an alternative universe that does not obey the same basic laws of physics as the one I know of. have I misunderstood something?
60 degrees is not average! When you can do a 12.2 in 75-80 degree temps stock, that will be impressive. My figures of 12.6 to 12.8 are indicative of most magazines performance figures world wide.
What is the point of quoting your cars performance as 11.9 in the 1/4, when on a normal day, or under less than ideal conditions, it is going to do a 12.5? - This is a generalisation and not a personal attack on you e55baller.
see the link below. -Treynors car started, from memory, with a 12.2 after the Renntech upgrade. With some practice and better conditions he got an 11.9x. Under ideal conditions, drag radials (slicks?) and must practice, he has done better than 11.5. In the hands of C&D who are notorious for getting very good performance figures out of cars (the quickest times of any actually), they only achieved a 12.5.
http://www.renntechmercedes.com/C%26DS600.pdf
Does this make Treynors claim a lie? No, but it puts some perspective on performance claims generally. rather than stating a Renntech S600 does 11.5 in the 1/4 (which treynor does not say, I am only using this as an example), it should be stated, that under perfect conditions (freezing cold and lots of traction) and must practice, it is possible to do an 11.5 in a Renntech S600, which has been setup for the strip. The two statements are very different and I feel this is what is happening here.
Can't wait to see the result of your gearing change, personally form discussions in another thread, I think 2.83 is going to be a better bet, to avoid a gearchange to 4th. I'm looking forward to eating my words and following your lead!
In reference to your comments of a 10.9, how much HP do you think is required to do a 10 in a 4200lb laden car?
Some people here appear to be living in an alternative universe that does not obey the same basic laws of physics as the one I know of. have I misunderstood something?
Last edited by stephens; 06-04-2004 at 06:12 PM.
06-04-2004, 09:26 PM
#31
Super Member
Originally posted by stephens
In reference to your comments of a 10.9, how much HP do you think is required to do a 10 in a 4200lb laden car?
Some people here appear to be living in an alternative universe that does not obey the same basic laws of physics as the one I know of. have I misunderstood something?
In reference to your comments of a 10.9, how much HP do you think is required to do a 10 in a 4200lb laden car?
Some people here appear to be living in an alternative universe that does not obey the same basic laws of physics as the one I know of. have I misunderstood something?
And treynor was using slicks on that run.
here is the timeslip off his cardomain site
06-05-2004, 01:07 AM
#32
<<60 degrees is not average
I would suggest that 60 degrees is relative. To be exact it was 64 degrees. No worries about personal attacks. I just wanted to make a point...disagreement is no biggie.
The way I look at it is...
SAE Seal-level is:
0 ft. elevation
29.92 in Hg
0% humidity
59 degrees F
ALL of these parameters for my 12.2 run were worse than the baseline or "average" comparison above.
If I ran at 30.0 in Hg. and 90 degrees i *should* in theory have the same density altitude at 2,000 ft...my run should be the same...I will be able to test it out soon though when I go back to the track soon.
My point is if you have average weather (SAE as indicated above) its tough to see how one could only bang out a 12.6-12.8...I'd say something would be slightly out of wack or your 60 foot is > 2.0.
I understand that Treynor's run was probably in the upper 1% tail of a S600 chipped due to weather conditions but at the end of the day I don't put complete stock in the mags all the time. After all their margin of error is like 0.3-0.5 on the ET.
I was able to pop a 13.4@103 in my 1993 RX-7 BONE STOCK when all the mags where quoting 13.9@100...that might have been a freak car but with 400rwhp I don't think i have a factory freak E55...I wish I did.
http://www.turbofast.com.au/Drag.html
@ 4200lbs looks like 625hp is needed to go 10.99. I think these calculators are ballpark at best as they omit the characteristics if a torque curve and how power is developed.
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 114 trap
Output: = 515 rwhp...this is far far off as I have 401 rwhp
Input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 12.2 ET
Output = 484 rwhp...again way high
It too me 700whp to go 10.8 in a car that produces 200rwtq at 3,000 rpms, 595 rwtq@5,000 rpms, my buddies LPEC5TT has gone 10.0 w 560rwhp and I've seen friends Cartek C5s go 10.7 with 500 rwhp and they all weigh about 1000 lbs less than our E55. To overcome 1000lbs you need around 100-120 more rwhp. Get to 580-600whp in the E55 and I say it has a great chance.
What did Treynor's whp read? I believe 530 rwhp...and he has an extra 200lbs over the E55...lets say he averages 11.7 not 11.4 at the track. He needs roughly another 70-80rwhp to hit 10.99. That means he needs 600-610rwhp. Subtract 20whp for the 200lbs his car weights over the E55 and you arrive at ~590rwhp for the E55 to reasonably hit a 10.99...thats 735 hp at the crank.
Do you think you can find another 125 rwhp? Sounds like you already have 465rwhp. Someone will hit a 10.9x in the E55 w/ no NOS...question is when and with what mods.
I would suggest that 60 degrees is relative. To be exact it was 64 degrees. No worries about personal attacks. I just wanted to make a point...disagreement is no biggie.
The way I look at it is...
SAE Seal-level is:
0 ft. elevation
29.92 in Hg
0% humidity
59 degrees F
ALL of these parameters for my 12.2 run were worse than the baseline or "average" comparison above.
If I ran at 30.0 in Hg. and 90 degrees i *should* in theory have the same density altitude at 2,000 ft...my run should be the same...I will be able to test it out soon though when I go back to the track soon.
My point is if you have average weather (SAE as indicated above) its tough to see how one could only bang out a 12.6-12.8...I'd say something would be slightly out of wack or your 60 foot is > 2.0.
I understand that Treynor's run was probably in the upper 1% tail of a S600 chipped due to weather conditions but at the end of the day I don't put complete stock in the mags all the time. After all their margin of error is like 0.3-0.5 on the ET.
I was able to pop a 13.4@103 in my 1993 RX-7 BONE STOCK when all the mags where quoting 13.9@100...that might have been a freak car but with 400rwhp I don't think i have a factory freak E55...I wish I did.
http://www.turbofast.com.au/Drag.html
@ 4200lbs looks like 625hp is needed to go 10.99. I think these calculators are ballpark at best as they omit the characteristics if a torque curve and how power is developed.
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 114 trap
Output: = 515 rwhp...this is far far off as I have 401 rwhp
Input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 12.2 ET
Output = 484 rwhp...again way high
It too me 700whp to go 10.8 in a car that produces 200rwtq at 3,000 rpms, 595 rwtq@5,000 rpms, my buddies LPEC5TT has gone 10.0 w 560rwhp and I've seen friends Cartek C5s go 10.7 with 500 rwhp and they all weigh about 1000 lbs less than our E55. To overcome 1000lbs you need around 100-120 more rwhp. Get to 580-600whp in the E55 and I say it has a great chance.
What did Treynor's whp read? I believe 530 rwhp...and he has an extra 200lbs over the E55...lets say he averages 11.7 not 11.4 at the track. He needs roughly another 70-80rwhp to hit 10.99. That means he needs 600-610rwhp. Subtract 20whp for the 200lbs his car weights over the E55 and you arrive at ~590rwhp for the E55 to reasonably hit a 10.99...thats 735 hp at the crank.
Do you think you can find another 125 rwhp? Sounds like you already have 465rwhp. Someone will hit a 10.9x in the E55 w/ no NOS...question is when and with what mods.
Last edited by e55 baller; 06-05-2004 at 01:11 AM.
06-05-2004, 04:42 AM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55, F550, S600 Ducati 999
I will have 530-550rwhp on the equivalent of your Mustang dyno next Friday, but I don't see the car doing a 10. I am expecting mid 11's, 11.4-11.7 to be precise.
06-05-2004, 10:52 AM
#34
Wow 530-550rwhp, thats a boatload. What are you mods again or what will they be for that setup?
I assume you have the Evosport, your cooling system and headers, downpipes, and exhaust? I can't wait to see your ET and dyno.
Also you think the 306 gears will actually be worse in the 1/4 since the extra shift to 4th will get the cat a bit out of powerband? Definitely would like your feedback there Stephens, thanks!
I assume you have the Evosport, your cooling system and headers, downpipes, and exhaust? I can't wait to see your ET and dyno.
Also you think the 306 gears will actually be worse in the 1/4 since the extra shift to 4th will get the cat a bit out of powerband? Definitely would like your feedback there Stephens, thanks!
06-05-2004, 05:42 PM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55, F550, S600 Ducati 999
The car will only be running a pulley kit, charge cooler kit, headers and downpipe and ECU remap to suit.
I have been running upgraded boost for 6 months now, we build the pullies from CNC machined steel. It all started for my own purposes, but from word of mouth locally, we are now building kits for other cars.
I have been running upgraded boost for 6 months now, we build the pullies from CNC machined steel. It all started for my own purposes, but from word of mouth locally, we are now building kits for other cars.
Last edited by stephens; 06-05-2004 at 05:48 PM.
06-08-2004, 02:06 PM
#36
S55 dyno #s
Just got these #s and plots from Corey at Kleeman. #s speak for themselves.
Stock vehicle: 418 RWHP 480 RWTQ (interestingly both #s are higher than the E55 despite the same tq ratings)
Stage 1: 457.9 RWHP, 515 RWTQ +39.9 RWHP, +35 RWTQ
Stage 2: 513.5 RWHP, 582.5 RWTQ +95.5 RWHP, +102.5 RWTQ
stage 1 is chip/pulley
stage 2 incl. headers/dp
all #s on a dynojet dyno.
Headers really add about 70/80 crank hp/tq. The stage 2 dyno has a massive torque plateau over 500 from 2.5-4k rpms
Stock vehicle: 418 RWHP 480 RWTQ (interestingly both #s are higher than the E55 despite the same tq ratings)
Stage 1: 457.9 RWHP, 515 RWTQ +39.9 RWHP, +35 RWTQ
Stage 2: 513.5 RWHP, 582.5 RWTQ +95.5 RWHP, +102.5 RWTQ
stage 1 is chip/pulley
stage 2 incl. headers/dp
all #s on a dynojet dyno.
Headers really add about 70/80 crank hp/tq. The stage 2 dyno has a massive torque plateau over 500 from 2.5-4k rpms
06-08-2004, 05:34 PM
#39
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55, F550, S600 Ducati 999
Originally posted by dgussin1
not directed to me, but...I think 520whp and over 500rwtq is required with a prepped track and either d/r's or slicks.
And treynor was using slicks on that run.
not directed to me, but...I think 520whp and over 500rwtq is required with a prepped track and either d/r's or slicks.
And treynor was using slicks on that run.
06-14-2004, 11:54 PM
#40
To clarify a few points:
My S600 runs consistent 11.6s @ 120 these days. I always run on drag radials (not slicks). And my 12.5 run in C&D involved wheelspin through 60 MPH on the stock tires, in 102F weather at 1500ft altitude
My 11.59 run was also on DRs, in low-60F weather on an otherwise normal day. I was hot-lapping all afternoon, about a run every 15 minutes, with no icing the engine or other funny business. I imagine with really COOL weather, a cooled-off engine, ice bags on the intercoolers etc. I might be able to dip a bit lower.
My S600 runs consistent 11.6s @ 120 these days. I always run on drag radials (not slicks). And my 12.5 run in C&D involved wheelspin through 60 MPH on the stock tires, in 102F weather at 1500ft altitude
My 11.59 run was also on DRs, in low-60F weather on an otherwise normal day. I was hot-lapping all afternoon, about a run every 15 minutes, with no icing the engine or other funny business. I imagine with really COOL weather, a cooled-off engine, ice bags on the intercoolers etc. I might be able to dip a bit lower.
06-15-2004, 12:55 AM
#42
ECU software, tranny software, and BFG g-force 265/40-18 DRs on the stock rear rims. Otherwise the powertrain is stock, down to the paper air filters.
Non-power mods are front brake upgrade to 15" rotors and 8-piston calipers, RENNtech 19" wheels, and a 1" drop.
Anyone found a source for K&N or Green air filters for the S600?
Non-power mods are front brake upgrade to 15" rotors and 8-piston calipers, RENNtech 19" wheels, and a 1" drop.
Anyone found a source for K&N or Green air filters for the S600?
06-16-2004, 07:22 PM
#43
Ben,
How much boost are you running with that chip? If they have an upgraded IC and cams for your car hello 10s. Those 2 mods alone netted me 90 rwhp on my V6 3.0L Toyota Supra.
How much boost are you running with that chip? If they have an upgraded IC and cams for your car hello 10s. Those 2 mods alone netted me 90 rwhp on my V6 3.0L Toyota Supra.
06-16-2004, 11:45 PM
#44
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: FL
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Porsche Twin Turbo, Supra Turbo, EVO Turbo
Originally posted by e55 baller
<<60 degrees is not average
I would suggest that 60 degrees is relative. To be exact it was 64 degrees. No worries about personal attacks. I just wanted to make a point...disagreement is no biggie.
The way I look at it is...
SAE Seal-level is:
0 ft. elevation
29.92 in Hg
0% humidity
59 degrees F
ALL of these parameters for my 12.2 run were worse than the baseline or "average" comparison above.
If I ran at 30.0 in Hg. and 90 degrees i *should* in theory have the same density altitude at 2,000 ft...my run should be the same...I will be able to test it out soon though when I go back to the track soon.
My point is if you have average weather (SAE as indicated above) its tough to see how one could only bang out a 12.6-12.8...I'd say something would be slightly out of wack or your 60 foot is > 2.0.
I understand that Treynor's run was probably in the upper 1% tail of a S600 chipped due to weather conditions but at the end of the day I don't put complete stock in the mags all the time. After all their margin of error is like 0.3-0.5 on the ET.
I was able to pop a 13.4@103 in my 1993 RX-7 BONE STOCK when all the mags where quoting 13.9@100...that might have been a freak car but with 400rwhp I don't think i have a factory freak E55...I wish I did.
http://www.turbofast.com.au/Drag.html
@ 4200lbs looks like 625hp is needed to go 10.99. I think these calculators are ballpark at best as they omit the characteristics if a torque curve and how power is developed.
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 114 trap
Output: = 515 rwhp...this is far far off as I have 401 rwhp
Input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 12.2 ET
Output = 484 rwhp...again way high
It too me 700whp to go 10.8 in a car that produces 200rwtq at 3,000 rpms, 595 rwtq@5,000 rpms, my buddies LPEC5TT has gone 10.0 w 560rwhp and I've seen friends Cartek C5s go 10.7 with 500 rwhp and they all weigh about 1000 lbs less than our E55. To overcome 1000lbs you need around 100-120 more rwhp. Get to 580-600whp in the E55 and I say it has a great chance.
What did Treynor's whp read? I believe 530 rwhp...and he has an extra 200lbs over the E55...lets say he averages 11.7 not 11.4 at the track. He needs roughly another 70-80rwhp to hit 10.99. That means he needs 600-610rwhp. Subtract 20whp for the 200lbs his car weights over the E55 and you arrive at ~590rwhp for the E55 to reasonably hit a 10.99...thats 735 hp at the crank.
Do you think you can find another 125 rwhp? Sounds like you already have 465rwhp. Someone will hit a 10.9x in the E55 w/ no NOS...question is when and with what mods.
<<60 degrees is not average
I would suggest that 60 degrees is relative. To be exact it was 64 degrees. No worries about personal attacks. I just wanted to make a point...disagreement is no biggie.
The way I look at it is...
SAE Seal-level is:
0 ft. elevation
29.92 in Hg
0% humidity
59 degrees F
ALL of these parameters for my 12.2 run were worse than the baseline or "average" comparison above.
If I ran at 30.0 in Hg. and 90 degrees i *should* in theory have the same density altitude at 2,000 ft...my run should be the same...I will be able to test it out soon though when I go back to the track soon.
My point is if you have average weather (SAE as indicated above) its tough to see how one could only bang out a 12.6-12.8...I'd say something would be slightly out of wack or your 60 foot is > 2.0.
I understand that Treynor's run was probably in the upper 1% tail of a S600 chipped due to weather conditions but at the end of the day I don't put complete stock in the mags all the time. After all their margin of error is like 0.3-0.5 on the ET.
I was able to pop a 13.4@103 in my 1993 RX-7 BONE STOCK when all the mags where quoting 13.9@100...that might have been a freak car but with 400rwhp I don't think i have a factory freak E55...I wish I did.
http://www.turbofast.com.au/Drag.html
@ 4200lbs looks like 625hp is needed to go 10.99. I think these calculators are ballpark at best as they omit the characteristics if a torque curve and how power is developed.
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 114 trap
Output: = 515 rwhp...this is far far off as I have 401 rwhp
Input: 4450 lbs w/me in it. 12.2 ET
Output = 484 rwhp...again way high
It too me 700whp to go 10.8 in a car that produces 200rwtq at 3,000 rpms, 595 rwtq@5,000 rpms, my buddies LPEC5TT has gone 10.0 w 560rwhp and I've seen friends Cartek C5s go 10.7 with 500 rwhp and they all weigh about 1000 lbs less than our E55. To overcome 1000lbs you need around 100-120 more rwhp. Get to 580-600whp in the E55 and I say it has a great chance.
What did Treynor's whp read? I believe 530 rwhp...and he has an extra 200lbs over the E55...lets say he averages 11.7 not 11.4 at the track. He needs roughly another 70-80rwhp to hit 10.99. That means he needs 600-610rwhp. Subtract 20whp for the 200lbs his car weights over the E55 and you arrive at ~590rwhp for the E55 to reasonably hit a 10.99...thats 735 hp at the crank.
Do you think you can find another 125 rwhp? Sounds like you already have 465rwhp. Someone will hit a 10.9x in the E55 w/ no NOS...question is when and with what mods.
06-17-2004, 02:48 PM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: West Toluca Lake, CA.
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SL55 AMG
Snorkle Mod
Hey All:
Can someone tell me if this snorkle mod can translate to the SL55? I believe that the SL55 has a pretty straight-forward intake and highly efficient to the point that it acts like a Cold-Air intake. Anyways, I'm just curious.....
Thanks!
Can someone tell me if this snorkle mod can translate to the SL55? I believe that the SL55 has a pretty straight-forward intake and highly efficient to the point that it acts like a Cold-Air intake. Anyways, I'm just curious.....
Thanks!
06-17-2004, 03:11 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: West Toluca Lake, CA.
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SL55 AMG
OT: Treynor K&N Filter for S600
Hey Treynor:
I've just recently ordered a set of K&N Filters and thought that they offered a set for the S600. I double-checked and saw that the 2003/2004 CL600 & SL600 showed the same K&N part# of 33-2217 even though they don't list the V12TT designation.
You should give K&N a call to confirm, but I imagine it's the same set of filters for the S600 most likely.
Good Luck!
I've just recently ordered a set of K&N Filters and thought that they offered a set for the S600. I double-checked and saw that the 2003/2004 CL600 & SL600 showed the same K&N part# of 33-2217 even though they don't list the V12TT designation.
You should give K&N a call to confirm, but I imagine it's the same set of filters for the S600 most likely.
Good Luck!
06-17-2004, 05:09 PM
#47
Super Member
Re: Snorkle Mod
Originally posted by RU_MATRX
Hey All:
Can someone tell me if this snorkle mod can translate to the SL55? I believe that the SL55 has a pretty straight-forward intake and highly efficient to the point that it acts like a Cold-Air intake. Anyways, I'm just curious.....
Thanks!
Hey All:
Can someone tell me if this snorkle mod can translate to the SL55? I believe that the SL55 has a pretty straight-forward intake and highly efficient to the point that it acts like a Cold-Air intake. Anyways, I'm just curious.....
Thanks!
