|
Open challenge to Weistec W4
Weistec claims 856whp dyno with W4 turbos on 91 Octane fuel.
I am posting my own time slip from last week. Running 780whp on pump fuel. Fuel tank 2/3 full. DA ~4000. Street tires. I did only 2 runs at 20psi. I'm posting my 2nd run which was better than my first. It's nearly identical to the 787whp AMS Alpha 9 E63 1/4mile from a few years back. Weistec, if you are reading this, I give you unlimited number of runs to beat my time slip. Surely you have run the W4 in the quarter-mile by now. If your car is putting down 850 plus to the wheel you should have 2-3mph higher trap speed. Show me what you got. https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...71e4baab88.jpg |
what are your mods?
|
Nice, runs!
|
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...c902afd2de.jpg
Originally Posted by vdubpower
(Post 7446957)
what are your mods?
That's one of many reasons I'm publicly calling them out on their claim of 856whp for w4. Im running GAD Motors turbo upgrade. For this run I had it set up at 780awhp. If Weistec cannot beat this run, then they have an exaggerated false horsepower claim. Silence can be very loud. If they're truthful, this thread will prove to be an awesome endorsement for Weistec. |
⬇️ 😆
|
Still only a 1.85 60 ft; is your tranny stock and stock TCU? The inability to properly launch these cars is very aggravating; you should be seeing at least 1.6x 60 ft times with how fast your car is. Mine has a mild tune and I can't get under 11.5's because the launch sucks, my best 60 ft is also 1.85 |
Subscribed!!
|
Originally Posted by Boostaddict
(Post 7447229)
Still only a 1.85 60 ft; is your tranny stock and stock TCU? The inability to properly launch these cars is very aggravating; you should be seeing at least 1.6x 60 ft times with how fast your car is. Mine has a mild tune and I can't get under 11.5's because the launch sucks, my best 60 ft is also 1.85 tuning company can log data on the track, make adjustments in real time, launch using any technique they like, there are so many advantages. Knowing what I ran is an advantage. Easy challenge if their car makes 856 horsepower to the wheels. A more difficult challenge if the number is manipulated. |
Originally Posted by e65
(Post 7447324)
I have upgraded transmission and tuned TCU. First run I did brake torque launching at 1400 RPM with 2.x 60 foot. 2nd run launch at 2000 rpm got 1.83 60 foot.
tuning company can log data on the track, make adjustments in real time, launch using any technique they like, there are so many advantages. Knowing what I ran is an advantage. Easy challenge if their car makes 856 horsepower to the wheels. A more difficult challenge if the number is manipulated. |
AMS describes how they got 1.6sec 60'.
https://youtu.be/kjU6-vacckk They make it sound very easy and indeed it took maybe half a second to set it up and go. It takes me longer because initially when I brake torque the RPM does not want to go up. Next time I'll try launching from a higher RPM. My intake air temp was 68C/154F at launch. |
Anyone that’s been around these cars for a while knows Weistec is full of sh*t and you won’t get a response. These cars suck ass at launching but you’re either doing something wrong or these TCU tunes are BS, especially if you’re only getting 1.8s. At this point you’d be better off brake tq’ing to 2500 or using Race Start. |
I don't think it's as simple as adjusting the TCU. Our all wheel drive does not put the power down effectively because of a fixed torque split between front and rear. Last year with race start i got high 1.8-1.9 60' because of wheel slip. Stock 2018 E63 got 1.7s 60'. Same day same track. Factory tires.
https://mbworld.org/forums/w213-amg/706365-baseline-results-dragstrip.html Weistec has been notified of this thread. If they post a better time slip maybe I will have to get a better 60 foot. For now I don't want to make it too difficult for them. |
Originally Posted by e65
(Post 7447767)
I don't think it's as simple as adjusting the TCU. Our all wheel drive does not put the power down effectively because of a fixed torque split between front and rear. Last year with race start i got high 1.8-1.9 60' because of wheel slip. Stock 2018 E63 got 1.7s 60'. Same day same track. Factory tires.
https://mbworld.org/forums/w213-amg/...dragstrip.html Weistec has been notified of this thread. If they post a better time slip maybe I will have to get a better 60 foot. For now I don't want to make it too difficult for them. |
Originally Posted by e65
(Post 7447767)
I don't think it's as simple as adjusting the TCU. Our all wheel drive does not put the power down effectively because of a fixed torque split between front and rear. Last year with race start i got high 1.8-1.9 60' because of wheel slip. Stock 2018 E63 got 1.7s 60'. Same day same track. Factory tires.
https://mbworld.org/forums/w213-amg/...dragstrip.html Weistec has been notified of this thread. If they post a better time slip maybe I will have to get a better 60 foot. For now I don't want to make it too difficult for them. |
Why isn't weistec defending their brand?
|
Originally Posted by chiromikey
(Post 7447531)
Anyone that’s been around these cars for a while knows Weistec is full of sh*t and you won’t get a response. These cars suck ass at launching but you’re either doing something wrong or these TCU tunes are BS, especially if you’re only getting 1.8s. At this point you’d be better off brake tq’ing to 2500 or using Race Start. |
Originally Posted by Savage212
(Post 7449104)
After a week or so with the TCU tune, I can say that it is not BS. Hands down, no argument. Does it take care of all the things we don't like about the MCT? No. Will it make every tuned E63 a 10 second track monster? No. Is it worth the $$$$ to have done? Depends on the individual.
|
Originally Posted by chiromikey
(Post 7449152)
I’ll need more convincing. One dragy 0-60 isn’t close to enough data. Obviously I’d prefer timeslips but any reason you didn’t at least do a 1/4 comparison with your device? |
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...81a6236445.jpg
Originally Posted by chiromikey
(Post 7447531)
These cars suck ass at launching but you’re either doing something wrong or these TCU tunes are BS, especially if you’re only getting 1.8s. At this point you’d be better off brake tq’ing to 2500 or using Race Start. |
Originally Posted by e65
(Post 7452331)
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...81a6236445.jpg
How about this 1.7sec 60 foot time. Launched at ~2500. Michelin 4s tires 255/35/19 front and rear. |
Originally Posted by e65
(Post 7452331)
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...81a6236445.jpg
How about this 1.7sec 60 foot time. Launched at ~2500. Michelin 4s tires 255/35/19 front and rear. |
Originally Posted by Ariesfamous
(Post 7449030)
Why isn't weistec defending their brand?
because they dont care to go back and forth publicly with a random person (all due respect) i never tuned my 63 because i was always concerned with issues and as its my DD i dont need issues...stock form u still cant even use all the power for daily....i dont drag so i guess tune is pointless. but......i just drove the new one......wtf.....so damn fast and rapaptatapap all day ams, renntech, gad, dimebag, weistec, oe, who else.....isnt their method to their madness pretty much the same? |
Originally Posted by chiromikey
(Post 7452565)
That’s much better but if your TCU is tuned I’m still not convinced it’s doing anything since my tune/dp only car does those 60fts... |
Originally Posted by Savage212
(Post 7452586)
I dunno man, he's only running a 255, with 4500# car? I don't think anyone can hook one up, you would need a DR to see anything under 1.5's imo.
|
Originally Posted by vdubpower
(Post 7452566)
because they dont care to go back and forth publicly with a random person (all due respect)
I also have a 1k hp set up for the E63. Yesterday I trapped 138 to 139mph and last year 139.5 mph. W4 cannot even beat 135mph trap because it's nowhere near 1000hp. A 900-horsepower E63 is running faster than their "856whp" E63, that's why they will not respond. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:03 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands