Mercedes-Benz Forum banner
21 - 40 of 79 Posts

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
yeah i did that last time and the result was 25hp down from the second run with filter on ,although that run was without the new resonators providing a bit more back pressure.
Basically im hoping for an improvement with the new throttle body, air intake and revamped exhaust.
There are so many variables when trying to get power out of a car, probably why performance parts are so expensive, they take a lot of R&D.
By doing this I hope to save you guys money in the testing of the diff methods
 

·
Registered
560 SEC Supercharged(sold), E55 AMG, Renntech CL600 Bi-turbo, Porsche 928
Joined
·
1,989 Posts
Ok, I'm going to be the first skeptic. I'm not knocking you for the effort and I think we need more innovative people to make our cars better. I will also be the last person that will tell you to keep your car stock. however, I will be very surprised if the intake you have devised doesn't yield a decrease in power above 2,500 rpm. You are decreasing your overall intake area with the one small filter and one 3" section of intake tubing vs the stock Mercedes intake assembly. Not to mention, you are removing the ram air effect that is achieved by having the intake in the front of the car.

If you are seeing a decrease in power when you remove the filter, your car is runing too lean. You can adjust the fuel mixture so it gets more fuel in the rpm range by adjusting the EHA adjustment screw.

I am interested in the intake piece you are using. That would be ideal for supercharging and would save a great deal in the cost of a kit. What is holding that unit to the CIS metering unit? The part looks to be from a VW CIS and that it's supposed to be held with a clamp at the base; however, I don't see a clamp in your picture. I guess you could just drill a hole in the top and keep the same mounting position as stock.
 

·
Moderator
Mercedes
Joined
·
9,049 Posts
Supercharged SEC - 3/20/2006 11:18 AM

Ok, I'm going to be the first skeptic. I'm not knocking you for the effort and I think we need more innovative people to make our cars better. I will also be the last person that will tell you to keep your car stock. however, I will be very surprised if the intake you have devised doesn't yield a decrease in power above 2,500 rpm. You are decreasing your overall intake area with the one small filter and one 3" section of intake tubing vs the stock Mercedes intake assembly. Not to mention, you are removing the ram air effect that is achieved by having the intake in the front of the car.

If you are seeing a decrease in power when you remove the filter, your car is runing too lean. You can adjust the fuel mixture so it gets more fuel in the rpm range by adjusting the EHA adjustment screw.

I am interested in the intake piece you are using. That would be ideal for supercharging and would save a great deal in the cost of a kit. What is holding that unit to the CIS metering unit? The part looks to be from a VW CIS and that it's supposed to be held with a clamp at the base; however, I don't see a clamp in your picture. I guess you could just drill a hole in the top and keep the same mounting position as stock.
That is exactly what I thought. How can you yield more power from sucking air behind the bumper instead of the sides of the grill where air is being essentially pushed in when car is in motion. The above set up is more or less only sucking air thats staying still.

Mercedes has engineers who went through training. In my oppinion they chose the best set up for sucking air on a N/A engine. I think the intake in the stock position is much more effective than having a "shark gill" fender like seen on some early 90's diesels.
 

·
Registered
560 SEC Supercharged(sold), E55 AMG, Renntech CL600 Bi-turbo, Porsche 928
Joined
·
1,989 Posts
Mercedes has engineers who went through training. In my oppinion they chose the best set up for sucking air on a N/A engine. I think the intake in the stock position is much more effective than having a "shark gill" fender like seen on some early 90's diesels.
Reminds me of the new VW commercials: "Unpimp your ride."
 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
Thanks guys I was waiting for this question.
Firslty you could both be right, I havent resigned myself to believing the feeling of having more power, thats why I said dont go out till ive tested.
The reason I gave myself for the change was that even though I dont doubt that the MB engineers endevoured to get every possible gain (logically) from these engines while still staying within practical guidelines and still staying true to the fact that these are supposed to be luxury sedans not tyre shredders, I looked at the "ram" intakes behind the grill and thought, well good idea but.... with my front bodykit Ive got a better funnel with the spotight hole and then I thought by getting rid of the stock airbox which creates a dirty airflow pattern which doesnt ram the air down into the CIS unit I might be better off having a setup like I have now.
You will argue that the standard setup used air hitting the flat front of the car forcing it down the intake and is a better position, but think of the air getting squished and forced under the car is at a higher pressure with only the filter providing obstruction, no radiator grill or radiator letting air through lowering pressure or air then converging in airbox getting all messed up having the CIS do all the work to suck it down.

All in all Im hoping that this setup is providing a mild FI situation better then the old setup but again the proof will be in the dyno pudding.

The new addition which is the air boot is off an audi 100, it is supposed to have a clamp but the diameter of the audi piece is a bit too small, use the clamp and it shifts up popping the boot off so I trimed a bit of the inside and its on there pretty well but I still cant use the clamp this unit also has a completely smooth inside surface and directs the flow as good as you can get it.

I know the bumpers looking bad but it'll be sanded and repainted after the conversion plus it was like that when I bought it[:(]
 

Attachments

·
Always Remembered. RIP.
'85 500SEL
Joined
·
1,829 Posts
A big improvement over my setup, which although utilizes the existing radiator intake for a more direct, inline path, it's obvious that it is being negated by all the hot ambient air in the engine bay
One day I may get round to trawling through the local car wreakers to look for a suitable airbox for my filter

So before anyone goes slagging off what I've done, yes I do realize I'm probably losing out with it like this, but, like Lander91, I won't make any decisions until I get results from a dyno and compare the different methods

 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
buy another heat sheild like the one you have there, doesnt have to be completely air tight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
There are a couple great comments that address flow, temperature and volume. These are on the right track because, as we all know, engine performance is all about flow, it is simply physics (PV=nRT). The higher the flow IN, the greater the output (assuming the spark is at the right time and temperature)(assuming the fuel is sufficient and mixed to produce a near 14:1 ratio).

Rules of thumb:

* The lower the TEMPERATURE, the more dense the air, the greater the compression, and greater the output. Some say 1hp for every 1C.

* The higher the intake PRESSURE, the greater the compression ratio, the greater the output (ram air and forced air intakes).

* The higher the available VOLUME, and the lower the flow restriction, the greater the output.

* At the higher engine speeds, the greater the flow rate, the more volume is required.

* Everything is in equilibrium. The flow IN is as important as the flow OUT. The lower the restriction out, higher the flow rate out, the higher the output. Keeping in mind that a pulse of forced exhaust produces a vacuum to pull the next pulse along, increasing flow and increasing output. (See my supercharged Miata that I race at LimeRock on www.CarDomain.com)

What headers, exhaust and mufflers?
 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #31 ·
Ive got everything going for me there with the exception of a bit more work on the air ram and I dont have the euro tri-y's[:(] just bog standard log manifold (euro).
My exhaust is 2.5" dual pipes 2.5" from manifold flange back. one 2.5" straight through on each pipe into 15" louvered resonators, again on each pipe.
have just changed the system back to having mufflers again (mufflers are flanged at each end) from having straight pipe in their place over the weekend, SO I should get a more reliable sense of any improvement (if any) as I drive with this exhaust config 98% of the time.
 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
Well here you all go, 1st page is the 1st run with the intake method (blue) I photographed for this post, comparing that to 2 months ago with standard (red).
Second page is comparrison between new intake method (red) standard (blue) and standard hooked up to new filter w. no filter in std air box (green)
As you cna seete green line sux so ignore that one although full standard setup got 2-3Kw at the peak look at the midrange, at the start theres about 7Kw difference (new intake 7Kw higher with same revs)
the new intake metod also netted me better cruising A/F mixture, idle was spot on at 14.2.

So in conclusion the new intake is better and as Id guessed it better midrange too.

P.S anyone know the % loss through the drivetrain so I can get a flyhweel figure??
 

Attachments

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #33 ·
heres their setup, vidoes of 2 runs will be on gogle video soon
 

Attachments

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
Heres the link fro the 1st on, the other is on the left
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2263478758398313616
 

·
Premium Member
Tribute 500SEC AMG Widebody
Joined
·
6,242 Posts
Sounds wicked!
 

·
Registered
1989 560SEL
Joined
·
864 Posts
wish icould make an intake like that ><
 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
you can just follow the pics most is commomn sense the only hard part is matching the filters position with the inside of the engine bay i.e. straightest line for the pipe etc, etc.
 

·
Registered
1989 560SEL
Joined
·
864 Posts
Oh my god lol r u crazy?! i like just turned 17 with like no money and thats my only car (560 SEL) im so scared of f*cking with the engine and everything in there..
 

·
Registered
"500"sel, 560sec
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
Its easier then changing the oil, not expensive either and one of the cheapest (and very few) performance upgrades you can do on the 117.968
All you need is:
-1 High flow washable filter
-2 pipe/filter mounting plates
-1 length of air duct flexi hose 3" in diameter (u get about a meter)
-the CIS intake boot of an Audi 100
-a cutting tool
-some patience

All of the major compenents were from an auto store
 

·
Registered
91' 560SEL, 03' BMW M3, 94' 500E
Joined
·
222 Posts
lol omg he IS crazy! i remember when i was 17 and didnt want to mess around with my car. its cool man pick up some books on fixing cars and youll feel more confident about working on the 560. on top of that you have a GREAT resource here at benzworld. once you get started youll be glad you did. [:D]
 
21 - 40 of 79 Posts
Top