Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.

Again, thanks for your clarifications on this; I am looking forward to getting this tune!!

 

I've already posted this up on the thread further up but I'm happy to do so again. I got this tune 26th December I think I was one of the very first to get it, I'm in France and we have E85 everywhere.

I loaded the tune I got my dragy and I went out testing my best 60-130mph was 7.27secs I never got many 1/4miles because I had terrible tyres and couldn't hook. I'm also RWD. Since getting better tyres I've got my 0-60 down to 3.53secs in a Rwd car on the street which is pretty impressive.

 

​​​​​​Mine is a stock car with nothing other than the Eurocharged tune, the 725ps/983nm equates to 714rwhp/725ftlbs

 

Thanks for responding Sebastian, but My question was concerning the AWD model which I believe you reported you do not have. Don't you have the RWD model in France or am I mistaking you for someone else??? If so, than much is lost in both HP/TQ from one AWD modele to the RWD model. I was asking for better clarification. Thanks for you input.

Just to be clear, can one expect a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG (AWD-M157) on your E85 tune will yield 680-720awhp & 750awtq? If not, can you convey what you believe the average numbers will be? I do understand every car is different and dyno the same among other contributing factors.

 

The dyno sheet loungn14 posted are from an awd car; most, if not all, who are running the EC flex fuel tune are in that range. My ‘14 model with awd made 641awhp and 731 awtq on a dynojet; while I’m not sure if the lower numbers are a result of poor airflow on the dyno or less ethanol in the fuel, the dragy times are right there with the others running it. Best so far is 11.01@129 on an unprepped surface.

mods are: EC flex fuel tune, UPD intake spacers and filters, resonator delete. All else is stock.



.

 

The dyno sheet you are showing from Brutus_TX is E50 blend...yes AWD, but the numbers from Sebastain_bird are from a RWD car and with DPs too.

 

Mine is the same tune as Brutus_TX; from my conversation with Jerry, the tune at the beginning of this thread is a revised version of the same tune.

The dyno sheet Im showing is for my car.

I believe Sebastian's car had stock DPs on the dyno as they were changed later.

 

Thanks again for responding! I am not sure why you would have a dyno on this tune if you were unsure of proper ethenol levels as that seems counter intuitive to me but to each there own reasons. I do wish you had confirmed this, because your data is very close to the tune I currently have through AMR with race gas.

Again, thanks for your help in responding to this.

 

Rest assured, I've since picked up an ethanol tester so i can verify the ethanol levels at the pump and spoke with Jerry about ethanol sensors some time ago as well; I'll be installing the one from Spool once they are available as it seems more tailored to the car than other offerings. As stated, the car runs 129 and some change in the quarter mile, 102 and some change to the eighth mile, so it is undoubtedly making the power; those were all done after implementing the ethanol tester at each fill-up to ensure an E50 blend. If you're on Dragy, all of the data is there under the same username, along with many others on here running the tune.

 

Thanks again for providing better insight, but I noticed you are stating E50 blend. EC is advertising the straight E85 tune and stating the numbers to be 680-720awhp and 740wtq. I saw the original post from Brutus_TX on all this and he too was using the E50 blend reporting phenomenal numbers but said to me in a private message that they would be scaled down on the E85 tune. I might have misinterpreted what he was saying, but thought that was what he was conveying to me?!?!

Your numbers seem decent no doubt! I was seeking clarification on specific model E63 S-AMG AWD M157 which you seem to have, yet you are conveying the same E50 blend tune not the straight E85 unless I am mistaking here from what you wrote. Moreover, Sebastain_Bird is reporting his is the straight E85 tune but he has RWD.

I not trying to beat this to death, but wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting $2700 since I already have a tune that is coming in with pretty much the same numbers as your current dyno shown above this post. Obviously, if I could get a significant bump in HP with comparable TQ being leveled off throughout the RPM range, I would want to try it out especially since what we are talking about is from a completely stock car...discounting your UPD spacers, etc.

Again, I really appreciate the responses from everyone.

 

Happy to help. I keep stating E50 blend because that is what Im running in the exact car you referenced, E63s AWD, which are all powered by the M157; mine is from 2014.

As previously stated, i was told the tune in the original post is a revised version of the tune im running, which is the same tune as Brutus_TX; Sebastian is running full E85 and his car is RWD.

I'm.not sure about your area, but I cant get 100 octane race gas from an ordinary filling station. Being able to run a E85 (or a blend in my case), which is available at many filling stations, and not having to switch tunes to do it and enjoy the extra power is quite a value, IMO. I have no doubt the tune in the first post performs as stated. Best of luck, whichever path you choose to take.

 

EC stated earlier this E85 tune is flex fuel and would automatically adjust in ECU to accommodate blends from E85 all the way to 91/93 octane. Is this not true, and one has to switch the E85 tune for blends or to run 91/93 efficiently?

 

You took that quote out of context; it was stated that not having to switch tunes in addition to getting E85 from an ordinary filling station is a value. This is in comparison to the tune MBHR is stated to have which is a pump gas tune and a race gas tune which requires switching between the two, in addition to the limited availability of 100 octane race gas.

So no, there is not a need to switch tunes with the EC tune.

 

BCP, again thanks for all your input on this!! I would agree, the benefits to the particular E85 tune are such that the car can maintain emissions compliance and having the ECU capable of detecting fuel types i.e., 91/93 octane as well E85 without having to whip out the handheld and switch between the two.

I am still considering it, but wish you had the newer straight E85 tune and or comparable fuel ratios to support the overall claims of EC on the particular 2014 E63s M157 AWD . Yes, I know you said you have an updated version of the tune, but also said you were unsure of fuel ratios during your posted dyon test. Again my current 93 tune with spacers and mid pipes and plugs (only mods) is reporting an average of 600awhp and with 100 race gas mapping it is around 640awhp give or take. For me the 40awhp gain you are reporting without having to switch between mappings might not be worth it to me for the $$$, but the EC claims of a gains around of 80-120awhp from my current 93 tune of 600awhp would be well worth the money! ...Obvious reasons why I was going back and forth on this thread trying to get someone to show their dyno results from a stock 2014 E63 S-AMG M157 AWD car on the EC E85 tune. *On a side note, I find it a bit silly that most of the companies selling their tunes rarely show dyno results for the particular products they are selling. Since most of them do in-house dyno's, you'd think the results should be readily available to share or post to all for a decent number of various cars.

I will say this though, I do feel this tune is a value to anyone considering any tune on the market, because no other tune (stage 1) is even reporting 641awhp (see your dyno test) or even 680-720awhp for the same price point, let alone on a stock car!! I certainly feel EC is more than a reputable tuner as they carry thousands of tunes under their belt. Moreover, I have only heard great things about the owner "Jerry" there; his reputation speaks for its self!!

 

I see my name being bandied about and thought I'd jump in...the dyno BCP posted is for his car. 640/740. He is running the same tune as I am... if you concentrated less on the numbers and more on the profile, you can see they are very similar
Dyno's are notoriously variable.

Here's my dyno... 680/780... why the difference? variations in dynos and temperature, etc. Mods are STOCK



The important thing is the trap speed we are seeing with this tune.

There is another member, Marine_1, running the same tune as well as myself and BCP... he is also stock. I leave it to him to post a dyno if he has one.
When you compare all three of our cars draggy times you would be hard pressed to determine which is which. All three are running the almost exact same 1/4 mile times... 11.0/10.9 @ 129/130.

The thing to remember here is, regardless of claimed horsepower numbers and associated time slips, no other tuner is approaching these numbers.

Instead of listening to your tuners claim about getting this amount of horsepower or torque blah blah, ask them what your expected trap will be in the quarter... if they state anything over 125 mph I would ask to see hard evidence.

The onus of these power claims does not reside with EC or the guys running the tunes. We've been nothing but transparent in all our postings. The onus sits with all the other tuners spouting "our tunes make the same power, same torque etc."
When those tunes start posting 129/130 mph traps and 11 second FLAT times on a stock platform, then I'll say they are comparable. I haven't seen anything out in the market nearly as competitive... and that's for all of them.
/end rant

At the end of the day... choose your team and run with it. We have nothing to prove from our end...

 

Are you serious??!! Go back and re-read my postings as I know who is reporting what from their data! I was only seeking apples to apples data and nothing more!! When it comes to focusing on numbers, I take all the numbers in to consideration prior to shelling out thousands of dollars and yes, trap speeds as well regardless of their variations and such!! Go back and re-read what I have stated and you will find your particular post here is irrelevant!

Moreover, I have also stated that I felt the tune (from what is reported by EC and others) is of value and have complimented EC on their efforts and well as stated I heard great things of the owner Jerry there!!!

PS The variations would also include AWD vs RWD which you have; we know power loss is greater through the AWD!

PSS Now I can understand why people were shutting you down in other threads I read! You simple do not read all the thread posting prior to blurting an opinion!

 

huh? shutting me down? seriously...
You are not the only one blowing up my inbox with PM's... I'm just tired of repeating the same stuff over and over again... how much clearer do we need to be? I came into this conversation when you mentioned my name.
Can you show me where I was shut down in other threads? I'm seriously curious now....

 

thanks for the kind words

Do you have any draggy results on your race gas tune? We have tuned a few amr cars over their existing tune and seen quite a difference in power

Feel free to pm if ya want.

 

Gentlemen, I recently pulled the trigger on the E85 tune from Eurocharged. I had their stage 2 tune before that was great. But this tune is on another level my car picked up over 4mph in the 1/4. There really is a difference on how hard it pulls now after 4-4.5k rpm. The car overall feels much crispier. Here is the before and after. Notice also that the DA in the 125mph run on the stage 2 was much better.

 

You (brutus_tx) obviously care less about the true context of my postings and missed the facts of what I was saying and or asking altogether!

People were reporting considerable differences which is important to me to clearly understand prior to spending $$$
Keep in mind EC respond to my post and I recognized the data (photos of dyno etc.) was different from what was stated by them (680-720awhp). This caused me to inquire further for clarification nothing more! ...I assume anyone would have done the same?!?!

The differences that I found were as follows, which only led me to ask about the EC E85 tune, not blurt out opinions.

• E50 vs E85: brutus_tx reporting higher numbers due to different blend and other
• AWHP: Sebastain_Bird was reporting different HP based on both different blend/tune
• TQ: Torque was being reported differently
• AWD vs RWD: Sebastain_Bird was reporting differently based on his RWD M157 and other
• Ethenol Content: BCP was reporting different HP and thought it might be due to an uncertain ethenol content
• ETC: Etc...

It goes without saying dyno's are different, temp is different, and location where data is collected is also different. Aside from these subjective outcomes, I have found "similarities" when people report, trap speeds, HP/TQ from the same tune of the same car, in this case 2014 E63 S-AMG AWD M157. My digging down for the data and trying to better understand it as it relates to what I currently have should not bother anyone. After all, I thought the forum was supposed to be for this among other things. In short, if you read what I wrote, you can clearly understand I was trying to see if "I" found a value enough for me to take the plunge in the particular tune; not anyone else!

No one ever said anyone was not being "transparent" and I appreciate people speaking up on what they found concerning the tune overall. No one ever said EC was misrepresenting numbers, on the contrary I said they seemed of value and paid a compliment.

I guess I am out for now...thanks for everyone's input.

 

I get it... you're an enthusiast like the rest of us... I apologize if it came across as a personal attack. Having reread my post I can see where that appears so.
My post was born out of frustration. What tweaked me was when BCP posted his dyno and you said it was mine....

I also understand you are just trying to get to the bottom of all the information being bandied about in here. As a fellow enthusiast, I agree 100% in your wanting to be absolutely sure of a product before purchasing.
One of the problems with all this transparency and differences in posted dynos is in the true variability of all these E85/E50 postings from various members. None of use are running an OTS tune. Everyone of them started life as a "Brutus_Tune", but were subsequently tweaked by Jerry for each individuals car and location. We have dynos from France, Texas, NY and California sprinkled throughout this forum from different dynos and different drive line configurations. They will all be different. What is UNIFORM across all platforms is the reported trap speed in the quarter. We are all trapping 129/130 regardless of car or location. I want people to start looking at those numbers. Absolute dyno numbers are meaningless as a true metric of performance. What they are good at is showing how the power is applied. If people would just look at the graph and not fixate on the numbers they would be much happier.

As you mentioned above,there is a apparent lack of information from EC regarding this tune This may partially be due to IP concerns regarding the tune. I get that as well. EC need to protect their investment.
The duty, as enthusiasts, then falls on us early adopters of the tune to answer those questions, if they won't.

Since this is EC's thread, I'm hopeful they will come in here and answer all your questions.
If this were to happen, it would definitely cut down on the number of PM's and What's App questions I field daily from fellow enthusiasts answering the same questions over and over.

Perhaps we need a Flex Fuel Tune FAQ thread!

 

Happy to provide some insight. My Dragy data is all on an E50 blend - as mentioned, I received the ethanol tester after the dyno pull and can now confirm content at the pump, which can then be calculated to ensure I am running the target blend. Sounds like you need to get your car on the dyno to see what you are actually making before comparing tuner stated numbers to actual dyno numbers. These arent mfg claimed numbers we're giving you, they are actual whp/wtq numbers and trap speeds. Have you actually run your car to get some numbers? Track/Dragy/etc? .

Or, as stated, it could have been due to a lack of airflow on the dyno as previously mentioned. You'll see the car picked up 10awhp between the first two runs; that was the result of allowing it to sit and cool off a little, which led to IAT being 10 degrees cooler. All of the pulls were datalogged, and the IATs were still on the high side, hence my thread seeking input on aftermarket heat exchangers. It could have been a combination of the two, it is hard to say honestly. The car runs 129 just like the others, so the hp would have to be pretty similar being they are the same cars and nobody is running in mineshaft DA.

 

Thanks for saying...I apologize as well. I know you have been more than patiently trying to feed the mouths of many questions including mine; thank you. I was comparing the graph (RPM range) from what I have to others especially the one BCP posted because it is very similar. I do also understand the value in the trap speed but was still also interested in understanding the differences is in all the data I previously mentioned. If I wasn't so lacking in functionality of the forums, I could show you mine, but I honestly do not know how post it here and cut and paste function doesn't seem to work??!!

Perhaps, you are right, maybe EC will chime in, but I do think all this has helped me get a better picture of the EC E85 tune overall. As previously stated, I do think it is a value to so many out there and certainly those exploring a tune for the first time! EC has certainly moved the needle light years among others (E85) and hats off to them for potentially saving others thousands of dollars on unnecessary mods producing similar or less than standard results for a whole lot more money. As someone on the forums once said, those suggesting you need mods are more than likely trying to sell them to you. A solid tune will always weight out and in case and point, the Eurocharge E85 tune is the best example!!!

 

Not a bad idea!

 

I don't have downpipes my car was stock when I done that dyno here in France and yes it's a RWD. I understand there is a loss in power being an AWD model but the numbers are going to be pretty comparative. And as for the numbers on dragy it shows, I done a 7.27 60-130mph and i've managed to get my RWD car down to 3.5 secs 0-60mph. The AWD model thats running the tune is doing a 7.41 60-130mph. Oh and my best 1/4 is 11.28 @129.8 with a 2.05 60ft...I really struggle with traction!

@MBHR I hope you do go with the EC E85 tune just to feel how your car will be transformed into an absolute rocket!