e55 baller

My '03 E55 w/ 12k miles made SAE corrected 401.2 rwhp @6,000 rpms, and 438.8rwtq @3200 rpms. Torque was flat over 400 from 1800-5500 rpms.

There have been a few other dyno's on the boards most ranging from 380rwhp on the mustang dyno (most conservative which is the one I used) to other dynos which have shown as much as 424 rwhp and 448rwtq (Evosport).

On the same dyno my Supra on 1.3 bar/93 octane put down 565rwhp and with the same conditions put down 599rwhp on a dynojet. Why such the discrepancy?

Also we pulled 3 runs back to back within 10 minutes on the E55 and started ALL from 1800-2K rpms. 1st and second runs were within 3hp/tq with the last run being 8hp/5tq lower...I did not see any significant cooling problems as mentioned by others observed on the the boards. The HP kept going up and up then peaked at 6,000 rpms and fell very slightly to redline.


mods - K&Ns, snorkle.
12.2@114 Density Alt 2,000 ft.

dgussin1

this is my graph from my dyno run(K&n filters and snorkel tube)...I made another run in better weather conditions and got better tq numbers.

stephens

Umm not wanting to state the obvious, but you are running standard boost. The AIT problem occurs with a boost increase.

e55 baller

I was on stock boost.

dgussin1,

What kind of Dyno where you on? A Dyno Jet or Mustang? Looks like we have the same 1/8 times but our dynos are off a good bit.

CynCarvin32

Is this why my old C32 and my current E55 feel markedly slower after driving them aggressively for an extended period of time? Believe me both cars heat soak after 20 minutes of hard driving and both could use intercooler upgrades. On an 80 degree day both cars feel down on 50+ hp after 20-30 minutes of driving. When it is very cool out the cars both do not heat soak but trouble is, when the sun is up, these motors get a tad "warm."

At the track the C32 had trouble pulling on a stock S4 after two back to back run sessions. The E55 may feel stonger afeter hard driving but it does have a ton more power.

AIT temps are not only an issue with upgraded ECU's and Pulley kits. Mods only make the problem worse.

Maybe my SL55 will not heat soak as severely being that it has the additional intercooler. Not sure why MB skips such parts for the E55. Who knows.

dgussin1

dynojet

stephens

CynCarvin32
The SL55 DEFINATELY only has one charge cooler recovery radiator, it is the large one fortunately, which has a much greater surface area.
I haven't upgraded a CL55 yet, but Adam (awiner) says that his CL has both, so I will defer to his knowledge on this.. I know first hand that the SL definately doesn't and the S definately does!

G Unit

Does that mean the CL55 and S55 engine are slightly more powerful than the SL55, despite the rated 493bhp?

stephens

Not in peak power, only the ability to continue producing the power. Much of the gains I see come from running the two radiators in parallel with one another, rather than in series as configured by MB. They run far more efficiently this way but are more complicated to plumb and require two pumps.

e55 baller

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

Pierre32///AMG

Nice numbers !!!

Symbolic

What's "dp?"

stephens

Down pipes. To fit headers to the Mercs you have to move the first catalytic converter. I've got a set of standard manifolds in the boot of the ferrari at the moment. I should take some pics and post them to show how disgraceful the standard ones are!