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.
So went back out tonight. It is coldish here in Phoenix, but the DA was the best I have seen yet. I set my tires to Mercedes recommended psi. 41 psi front and 33 psi rear while they were cold.
I roughly had 4 gallons of 91 octane in the tank. I added two gallons of Sunoco 100 octane. Octane calculator calls it 94 octane.
I went on a 10 mile drive like I do every time to get the trans and oil temps up. Went to my normal spot.
It spun about 100 feet out. The 4Matic + gathered it up quickly but almost 2 tenths slower 0 to 60.
60 foot was 1 tenth slower, 1/8 mile was .15 slower but best mph, and the elapsed time was slower by one tenth. PR for mph. If it went what it does normally, that pass is a low 10.80 pass.
I believe it would have been a low 10.80 pass because it picked up .36 tenths 60 to 130. I almost made it back up on the big end. It just goes to show how important short times are in regard to Elapsed Time. Couple of other observations. Usually when I run my passes it has been in the low 60's for temp and my tire temps are in the low 100's. Tonight it was 50 degrees and my tires temps were in the low 80's. Most of my passes have been with roughly a 1/2 tank of fuel. Tonight it was roughly a 1/4 tank of fuel.
My thoughts. I have good inclinations that it is making more power. Better fuel, colder temps, and good DA. Usually it spins 200 feet out. I think it spun 100 feet out tonight. To pick up .36 tenths from the 60 to 130 is a big deal. The tuner said it would run harder with 93/94 octane...boy was he right. I also think having less fuel in the car hurt the short time as well.
So went back out tonight. It is coldish here in Phoenix, but the DA was the best I have seen yet. I set my tires to Mercedes recommended psi. 41 psi front and 33 psi rear while they were cold.
I roughly had 4 gallons of 91 octane in the tank. I added two gallons of Sunoco 100 octane. Octane calculator calls it 94 octane.
I went on a 10 mile drive like I do every time to get the trans and oil temps up. Went to my normal spot.
It spun about 100 feet out. The 4Matic + gathered it up quickly but almost 2 tenths slower 0 to 60. 60 foot was 1 tenth slower, 1/8 mile was .15 slower but best mph, and the elapsed time was slower by one tenth. PR for mph. If it went what it does normally, that pass is a low 10.80 pass.
I believe it would have been a low 10.80 pass because it picked up .36 tenths 60 to 130. I almost made it back up on the big end. It just goes to show how important short times are in regard to Elapsed Time.
Couple of other observations. Usually when I run my passes it has been in the low 60's for temp and my tire temps are in the low 100's. Tonight it was 50 degrees and my tires temps were in the low 80's. Most of my passes have been with roughly a 1/2 tank of fuel. Tonight it was roughly a 1/4 tank of fuel.
My thoughts. I have good inclinations that it is making more power. Better fuel, colder temps, and good DA. Usually it spins 200 feet out. I think it spun 100 feet out tonight. To pick up .36 tenths from the 60 to 130 is a big deal. The tuner said it would run harder with 93/94 octane...boy was he right. I also think having less fuel in the car hurt the short time as well.
Nice times but you should not be spinning this much at your power levels unless your tune is too heavy on the low end (slam the boost = lots of low-end torque). This is something the MAJORITY of MB tuners love to do and it results in nothing but slower than usual times unless you have some sticky tires. It feels good as hell from a slow roll though, but you arent actually moving faster.
My tuned times are 10.3-10.5 at 134-136mph, some in conditions worse than yours, others in conditions better than yours (DA, temperature, etc etc). Granted I do have access to 93 octane for all my runs
Since your car seems to be tuned like what most MB tuners like to do (which I do not like at all), I would activate racestart and launch the moment racestart flashes on the screen. Do not allow the car to build boost at all!!!
Nice times but you should not be spinning this much at your power levels unless your tune is too heavy on the low end (slam the boost = lots of low-end torque). This is something the MAJORITY of MB tuners love to do and it results in nothing but slower than usual times unless you have some sticky tires. It feels good as hell from a slow roll though, but you arent actually moving faster.
My tuned times are 10.3-10.5 at 134-136mph, some in conditions worse than yours, others in conditions better than yours (DA, temperature, etc etc). Granted I do have access to 93 octane for all my runs
Since your car seems to be tuned like what most MB tuners like to do (which I do not like at all), I would activate racestart and launch the moment racestart flashes on the screen. Do not allow the car to build boost at all!!!
Your last statement makes a lot of sense. I will try that next and see what happens. My car does make almost 800 ft right at 4k rpms, and I stay on the racestart for a couple of seconds. Thank you for your input, I really appreciate it.
Your last statement makes a lot of sense. I will try that next and see what happens. My car does make almost 800 ft right at 4k rpms, and I stay on the racestart for a couple of seconds. Thank you for your input, I really appreciate it.
In addition, make sure traction control is all the way off and suspension is on full stiff. Not sure why but I always got my best times that way, its like you get the best power output from the ECU if everything is on full stiff (that's what she said??) or something
So the new GCA catless downpipes are on the car. Wow the sound is incredible! This is how it should have sounded coming out of the factory. Here is the video of the uncut actual first cold start with the downpipes.
Also I took it back to Dyno Comp for the re-tune and something interesting happen. Actually two things happened. I did not expect the downpipes to pick up so much without a tune revision. The tuner caught the fuel pressure drop and aborted the run. If you look at the graph on the aborted run it was choochin to over 700 hp+ and over 825 tq. Also the tq curve moved a bit earlier into the RPM range. This officially has put the stock HPFP into the donzo zone if we want to continue. The tuner turned her down into a safe zone with the second dyno pull. We talked about HPFPs. They spoke to the AMG Performance Center at Scottsdale Mercedes and the general consensus was, that Spool HPFP would be the best route/economical route for my intentions. Dyno Comp is now working to become a retailer for Spool Performance now. Next up will be HPFP's. I am excited to see what we can do.
wow
Thank you
I always thought catless/cats was a wash and just for sound.
Seems like there is good power to be had catless if the fuel can keep up.
Good work!
wow
Thank you
I always thought catless/cats was a wash and just for sound.
Seems like there is good power to be had catless if the fuel can keep up.
Good work!
Honestly, videos DO NOT DO THE SOUND JUSTICE. It sounds so good. Just that sound alone was worth the install even if there was zero performance gain. In comfort it is still pretty quiet. Mine under WOT in comfort sounds like when it had stock catted DP's with the flaps open. The performance gain in power band on my E63s was a nice addition as well.
You guys don't have Pump 93 out there? You'd pick up more with just better octane.
Nope just craptastic 91 octane here in AZ. I have the ability to get Sunoco 100 Unleaded out of the pump near my house. The tuner said that it would pick up on a 93/94 octane. I want to get a solid tune on 91 and have the the ability to octane up when I want. I will take this car to CA 5 to 6 times a year to see family, and they only have 91 in the area that I travel too.
The pumps should make a difference, splash in like 3 gallons of E85 with your 91 whenever you fill up to help.
those 60-130 times for ecu/tcu/cpc are a bit slow IMO. When i was only stage 2 (catless dps, intake. Stock pumps and stock turbos) on ecu/tcu/cpc my car was doing 7.2 60-130 on 93 octane.
Any best estimate on what you’ll run down the 1320? That’s too bad on what octane you guys have out there.
Good Numbers
It went 10.96 on the dragy tune only.. I really didn't get to run it again after the tune revision with the downpipes. Now with the fuel pumps, and another 50 hp and 50 ft lbs of tq, I would hope it runs in the high 10.70's.
The pumps should make a difference, splash in like 3 gallons of E85 with your 91 whenever you fill up to help.
those 60-130 times for ecu/tcu/cpc are a bit slow IMO. When i was only stage 2 (catless dps, intake. Stock pumps and stock turbos) on ecu/tcu/cpc my car was doing 7.2 60-130 on 93 octane.
The pumps did help. I only drove the car a couple of hours, before I took it back to Dyno Comp for a tune revision. However, the mid range really woke up. 845 ft lbs will do that. This is Dyno Comps first time tuning the Spool Pumps. They were only a PTG dealer, and they were willing to work with me. So I knew tune revisions would be on the docket because of a new product. The throttle tip in was pretty sensitive, and the car was long cranking. I guess some Spool pumps have a problem with pressure bleed off. Dyno Comp is it contact with Spool to figure out a solution.
The 8.11 sec 60 to 130 was ecu, cpc, and tcu only. I never got a chance to run the car with the catless downpipe revision. I would hope that it would gone a 7.75 ish. However, we will never know. I actually have a uncracked 55 gallon drum of Torco T-85 sitting in my garage just for what you said. 91 is a real power killer, and I want the E for knock control when it gets 115+ degrees here in Phoenix for the summer.
Car is back. Dyno Comp was having an issue with fuel pressure bleed down. This was causing long cranking. Spool asked Dyno Comp to do a multitude of tests. I personally didn't realize that the fuel rails had to be removed and drilled ect. Maybe you just learned something too? Even with great care, it seems that injector 8 got something stuck in it and hung it partially open. Dyno Comp replaced all of the injectors on that bank. The opposite side injectors seemed okay, but they still sent them out and had them professionally cleaned (even though they didn't have too). Dyno Comp has gone above and beyond with the tune, installation, and customer service. I 100% recommend them.
The Spool Pumps have seemed to be doing a great job. Fuel pressure is great across the board. I believe we have found the threshold of stock turbos coupled with 91 fuel at 720 hp and 846 tq to the tire. Not even mad about it.
Here are a couple more dragy pulls as the car sits currently.
Still struggling with the 0 to 60 times. The best I have gotten was 3.17. This one at 3.26 was in race mode, full stiff suspension, traction off, PS4's at recommended MB tire pressures. I did what @kponti said " I would activate racestart and launch the moment racestart flashes on the screen. Do not allow the car to build boost at all!!!" With almost 850 tq and 48 degree pavement this was the best I could get. I am sure that with more seat time, I will get this number down.
New PB from 60 to 130. 7.90 > 8.11. Believe this time is hampered by 91 octane fuel. I do have 5 gallons of 91 in the car right now, and I added 4 gallons of Sunoco 100 octane fuel. I will go out soon and rerun all of these tests to see if the car will pick up with the increase of octane like it seems the 93 octane cars do.
This is a PB for the car. Against the last 10.96 PB. Of course a 10.95 to a 10.96 doesn't seem like much. However the numbers are interesting.
10.96 sixty foot = 1.72 / 10.95 sixty foot = 1.83. This was .11 second slower. Every tenth off the sixty foot is roughly 2 tenths off the quarter. Following that pattern this pass could be a 10.7x if I can get the same sixty foot again.
10.96 330 ft = 4.64s / 10.95 330 ft = 4.72. Again .08 tenths slower.
The 10.96 run had 794 ft tq which yielded a faster 1/8 mile and 671 hp which yielded a slower big end. The 10.95 had 846 ft tq which yielded a slower 1/8 mile (mechanical grip challenged), but 720 hp which yielded a faster big end.
