You might want to consider a 722.6 5 speed transmission with a PCS stand alone controller. 5 speeds is really nice. Also it sounds like your engine may be having some wiring problems like cams not moving etc.
You might want to consider a 722.6 5 speed transmission with a PCS stand alone controller. 5 speeds is really nice. Also it sounds like your engine may be having some wiring problems like cams not moving etc.
Vehicle: 1997 SL600 Silver with grey/dark metal interior, 140K miles
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 76
Best of luck with the K&Ns on a 600. Plan on replacing your MAFs down the road.
I also concur with the dubiousness of the "hog out the MAF screen" mod, as I think the MAF actually flows better with the directional grid.
Also, those are pretty quick 0-60 times for a 4400lb car (minus driver) on original rims where a stock V12 posted 5.9 sec. Looks like your tuner mods netted you about 200+ HP, bravo.
Vehicle: MB SL600, MB 380SE, Suzuki Grand Vitara, 38' Chris-Craft, Volvo V70XC, and my own two feet...
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by mahunt
Best of luck with the K&Ns on a 600. Plan on replacing your MAFs down the road.
I also concur with the dubiousness of the "hog out the MAF screen" mod, as I think the MAF actually flows better with the directional grid.
Also, those are pretty quick 0-60 times for a 4400lb car (minus driver) on original rims where a stock V12 posted 5.9 sec. Looks like your tuner mods netted you about 200+ HP, bravo.
That 5.9 figure published by MB is nowhere near accurate.
Mercedes continued using the same original performance figures for the V12 all the way from 1993 through the end of the production run, even though multiple upgrades were made to the car over the years which greatly improved its performance.
Over the years, the car picked up variable valve timing, a 5-speed electronic transmission that replaced the 4-speed hydro unit that started off in second gear, revised throttle bodies, etc., etc. The transmission change alone is probably good for shaving around a full second off the original 0-60 figure, because the 5-speed starts off in 1st, while you have to hit the kickdown switch and wait a second or two for the 4-speed to downshift into first before you really get going..
In my experience, the real-world performance of the car is closer to <5 seconds, especially when the weather is cold and you don't lose traction.
If you don't believe me, get or borrow a gtech or get dynolicious on an iphone, and time your car. You will be very pleasantly surprised if you're expecting a 6 second run.
__________________
"Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire." (I came, I saw, I want to go home.)
Vehicle: 1997 SL600 Silver with grey/dark metal interior, 140K miles
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 76
I've owned and driven sub 5 sec 0-60 cars (all over 500+HP and much lighter) and my 1997 4400lb 389HP SL600 isn't one of them. The SL is fast but hardly quick.
Never the less, the starter of this thread should be congratulated on his amazing tuner accomplishments.
Who of thought that hogging out the airboxes and MAF grids and not improving the skinny snorkles than snake past either side of the radiator would add up to so much performance improvement.
Vehicle: MB SL600, MB 380SE, Suzuki Grand Vitara, 38' Chris-Craft, Volvo V70XC, and my own two feet...
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by mahunt
I've owned and driven sub 5 sec 0-60 cars (all over 500+HP and much lighter) and my 1997 4400lb 389HP SL600 isn't one of them. The SL is fast but hardly quick.
Never the less, the starter of this thread should be congratulated on his amazing tuner accomplishments.
Who of thought that hogging out the airboxes and MAF grids and not improving the skinny snorkles than snake past either side of the radiator would add up to so much performance improvement.
My 996 was a published <5 second car, and the SL600 pulled it from a roll. Go search youtube, there is a video of an R129 SL600 hanging right with an E46 SMG M3, which is a published 4.7 second car. And that car was a 1993 with the 4-speed tranny, the newer ones are much quicker.
We can go back and forth all day on this. Maybe something's wrong with your car?
Vehicle: MB SL600, MB 380SE, Suzuki Grand Vitara, 38' Chris-Craft, Volvo V70XC, and my own two feet...
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,218
And you should dyno your car. Something might be wrong. Mine put out 316rwhp on a 103f day with 80%+ relative humidity, and 2 bad o2 sensors. That equates to around 395 at the flywheel, and if you corrected for the terrible atmospheric conditions, then the figure would be well north of 400, probably closer to 410+. The motor is underrated from the factory.
My dyno sheets are floating around the forum somewhere, you're welcome to do a search and look at them yourself. I'm not just pulling this outta nowhere. My own experience with my car is low 5's during most of the year, and much quicker when the temperatures are under about 50f.
Last edited by chriswufgator : 06-23-2009 at 01:48 PM.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
now you are talking!!! hehe
Linear Mode
