TopGun32

pretty good solid runs..

ShellURT

I just got an automated email from MHPs site with this same vid lol. Looks like the CLS has a definitive advantage. I hear they will be out again next Thursday evening. Look for more races next week. Oh yeah tuner of the M6 claims it won...?

emericr

Thanks for sharing.
Looks like about even runs with CLS gaining most of the time time at higher speeds. Sounds about right for 2 large sedans with similar weight and hp.
Would like to know if the M had a disadvantage with an extra passenger in the car.
Interesting that the M started racing at like 5K rpm on every pull. Shows how efficient the DCT is in this car.
The CLS does not have to be that high as I believe it has higher torque number lower.

Vic55

Good runs---- the M157 engine is definitely more tunable. The F chassis ECU's are not even broken yet so the tunes are all piggy back in nature (resistor) or the ultra conservative OBDII tune called the Press Release tune.

Once true tuning occurs with the S63tu engine- Id like to see gains equivalent to what the the tunes of the M157's have been showing.

matte4life

great post. thanks

TopGun32

dyno runs on stock M5

seems like M5's don't like Dynos

but at the same time.. the more races I see of the F10/12.. it increases my doubts about the cooling system on the car and the turbos placed inside the V8 valley.

dbasons55

The M5 F10 intercoolers core are 50% larger than the M157 engine, plus don't forget that the M157 intercoolers are placed in the V section which is also not the best place being surrounded by the engine heat, to my opinion the M157 advantage is the engine displacement 5.5L versus 4.0L

emericr

I read that for 2013 another intercooler got added on the M157 platform. That must mean they knew it needed improvements. I agree the larger displacement helps.

ShellURT

Good info on the F10 intercoolers. Makes sense, BMW has the sense to overengineer for these things where it seems AMG doesnt.

For what its worth NA ultimate HP is determined by displacement and rpm. With forced induction its about how large the head unit of the turbo, turbos or supercharger is.

So I guess the ultimate question is, is there more room in the Vee of the F10 & F12 or on the sides of the M157?

Im a fan of conventional port routing and turbo mounting as it seems the turbos would be more limited in the vee and they have to be putting some serious heat into the block??? But the M177 is done the same way and audi's 4.0l runs strong with this system so i'm sure it's the future of tt vee engines.

dbasons55

The intercooler upgrade done for the M157 was only splitting the water circuit, where it shared the same circuit with the engine radiator, and splitting it made it more efficient, no larger intercooler cores was added or radiators!


The only reason they are placing the turbos in the V is better emissions and innovation comes for leading in emission issues there is no room in the M157 it's a tight fit, and the F10/F12 aren't being upgraded from that side of the tuning due to space! The problem in the M177 is not going to be the hardware but the ECU it will be a while before cracking the codes! The A45 haven't been cracked yet and it seems it will take a while! People are excited with the E63S but let's see how long it takes to tune them those new ECU's will be no joke

Vic55

This is one dyno---- do more searches---- and who cares about a dyno LOL

Oh I dont see a 500 whp m5 as being bad do you? What do stock M157's run, pp and no pp... and does anyone have their runs on the same dyno? I do... a member here (Vdub e63 pp car, my m5, my c63 black)

Its still not absolutely ideal but its the same dyno and conditions were close- very close

vdubpower

Hey on my best run I hit 501whp

Vic55

Sorry bro thats all that I had LOL.... my best run was 543 I think and Tom didnt use that one

vdubpower

i still win the torque factor

Vic55

Duh--

didnt know it was a competition---


but since you brought it up, look at your curve---- nice and stout but then it drops off after 5250 rpms but mine is flat to cutoff... We all know whose car is faster stock vs stock LOL

AMG E Power

actually we dont. what we do know is the m5 gets destroyed against tuned biturbo.
stock for stock Ive seen m5 win and ive also seen amg cls/E win. Ive even seen 13 c63 beat the m5 plenty of times.

emericr

X2. I think it is a driver's race and there is no clear winner.
I need to find a stock M5 to run with before I get mine tuned.

Vic55

Well I have tangible personal experience- not some youtube vids of others... stock vs stock M5 vs CLS63 (oh did I mention I have and own them both)... As for tuned, we can always throw that in and say the M157 will win (had 2 of them) but the M5 has not yet been cracked- still waiting for someone to truly get into the matrix of that ECU.

But yes its a drivers race- the power bands and hp are close enough up top that he/she who gets the jump should be able to hold on.

emericr

Thanks for being fair .
There is a substantial difference with the PP package versus regular CLS
Just went to the drag strip last friday (my first time ever) and I was able to post better times than tuned C63 and C63BS.
Was real happy for a noob to post 12.2 at 118.8 on a very humid FL night.
Now those pesky GTRs run some crazy numbers but that is a different subject.

TopGun32

[QUOTE=Vic55;5729013]This is one dyno---- do more searches---- and who cares about a dyno LOL

Oh I dont see a 500 whp m5 as being bad do you? What do stock M157's run, pp and no pp... and does anyone have their runs on the same dyno? I do... a member here (Vdub e63 pp car, my m5, my c63 black)

Its still not absolutely ideal but its the same dyno and conditions were close- very close
QUOTE]

Not all bad dyno.. just pointing out this is sample #2 showing M5 with dyno disparity in each run.

You can agree before a E63 M6 needed 450RWHP to beat badly a 525RWHP+ E55.. due to the SMG3 super gearing. For a lightly tuned m6.. with not cats and light version of tune should dyno 560RWHP+ should run close to a 620RWHP+ CLS63. But that is not the case.

We now the M6 is faster than M5 and we know the DCT is superior to just about any transmission out there.. yet the results are not clear compared to the E60/E63 days.

You can agree that advantage is gone.

IMHO: Something is up with the cooling on the F10/12,whether is the turbos in the V or the intercooler set up.. cuz slightly tuned it should be tearing up top end from just about anything.

Vic55

[QUOTE=TopGun32;5731497]apples and oranges--- you are comparing a sequential manaul gearbox with limited parasitic loss (E63 M6) to an E55 with a slushbox 5 speed manual that can not efficiently put down the power VS. a heavier F13 M6 vs a planetarly automatic (mct) with better efficiencies in power (CLS63TT). Two different times in the lives of M vs AMG my friend.

I never thought there was an advantage LOL - and guess what I have owned every single car mentioned and all were modded. Dynos are a measuring stick and not the street: My E55 with 485 "dyno" hp was faster than My E63 M6- with full exhaust, pulley, ecu.... even from a run all the way to 160 plus.

My tuned CLS63 would walk a stock F13 M6 but would have a tougher time beating a resistor box tuned F13 M6..... My post above was to show that the stock vs stock the F10/13 cars are very strong vs the CLS63TT stock and this is my factual ownership experience of having all 3 cars (M5, M6, CLS) and I even had an E63TT wagon.

Im not sure what the point is here- the vids didnt show me a whole lot except that a resistor tune on a F10 chassis can make it fast but a real tune like the M157 has would benefit the F10 that much more. Was it even a resistor tune or a press release tune for that matter... Check it out on the boards the press tune is a limited safe gain tune created from the factory. Yes it makes the car faster but no where near what the CLS gets.

My point is that there is no "real" tune for the f10 series chassis yet- and my dynos came off a higher reading dyno no doubt. I take with a grain of salt for this reason the claimed "700" hp on the M6 which is probably resistor tune piggy backed with a press box tune LOL. Oh did anyone even notice the M6 driving in D mode the whole time- huge mistake in a rolling race. Trust me I know, I have the cars- did I mention that LOL

ShellURT

That's not quite the case. Putting the turbo(s) in the vee and using reverse port ideology means better emissions yes, but also faster spool. Let's not forget that better emissions equates to better efficiency which means more HP and TQ all things equal. I really dont think we've given the bmw crowd time to see what size turbos they can cram in the vee just yet since tuning has only just become available apparently. no sense in making the hardware if you can't tune for it software wise. The M157 wasn't designed this way so no there is no room but again it was a design concession.

I dont disagree with the ecu's being the issue in the future. Ill switch back to domestic muscle if the M177 is unhackable. I'll give the CLA45 a few mos stock before I dump it if I cant tune it.

ShellURT

The tuners for the M5s and M6s in the russian videos posted (PPP) claim they are actually tuning the ecus. No resisitors? Take it fwiw.

Also how can you tell the cars are not in manual mode? Please enlighten a non M5 M6 owner.

Thanks

Vic55

If the tune is only obdII there is only one tune out there as the ECU's are not cracked and its a minor tune at best- maybe 40 or 50 hp gains along with tq in the sweet spot ranges. Some tuners may say more but thats arguable.

I paused the video and in the center of the dash (between the speedo and tach) is the D (drive or auto mode) which was clearly visable. If he was manually shifting you would just see the gear he was in- ala 2, 3, 4, etc. I think the only time he ran manual was the first race which was stopped short by traffic. Running D mode is fast but its not as fast as running manual mode and shifting on your own---

ShellURT

Im wondering if this is the same story Ive heard about a leaked and rough wot tune via alpina or noelle thats supposedly at 700hp ecus only? I guess its good news these are OBD tuneable at least!

Good info, thanks! In your opinion how much time is saved per shift using M vs A in these cars? Also does M allow for a higher shift point vs A?

Makes me wonder why during a race anyone would switch from a faster shift to a slower one lol?

again thanks.