sound and fury (signifying nothing?)

[1FstYota]

I've built/modded/raced so many things it's a little ridiculous. Forced induction includes a TRD blown T100 4X4, E430 MB, and W210 E55. The truck was not bad as the TRD supercharger was a kit that was "blessed" by the factory and was in fact, installed by a local dealer. It was not "perfect" until I took it to TRD and actually had Bob Garner at TRD tweak it.

The MB's were another story. Anything that already has fairly high compression does not lend itself to forced induction. The E430 ran pretty good with a "piggy back" tuning solution. The E55 was a long running project that I was never completely satisfied with. Tuning is everything, and right now, there simply isn't anyway to make that happen on the G whether it's a blower or turbo.

Here's a couple shots:

Sounds like you have or had some nice toys, but yes tuning is everything. The old school train of thought of high compression and boost doesn't mix is just that. Local shop had a 8 second FIS civic that was running 11.5:1 and around 40psi so it's definatly possible just need a good tuner. My new engine build in the supra will be 10.5:1 with around 35 to 40 psi on the street on e85.

With the genny, it kind of comes down to how much intergration is with the OEM ECU, things like ac, smart key etc... I don't think it's possible to just throw on a custom harness and a motec m800 and try and get it to work.

Jalanjalan, I think it sounds really good with the exhaust modifications an the CAI.

 

[Fast55]

I didn't say high compression and boost can't mix, I said anything with high compression wouldn't lend itself to being boosted.

By that, I mean the motor is already that much closer to it's limits and high boost does not mix well with a motor that already has high compression, at least not without other changes or upgrades. Your Supra motor is an oddity. There's almost nothing else that will handle such an increase in power over stock than a JZ motor. The stock block and crank will take boost that would grenade most engines at start up. I would bet that civic motor is far from stock with 40 PSI feeding it.

The more compression you start with and more boost you run, the more critical tuning becomes. I got away with a piggy back setup on the E430 because I was only at 6 PSI on a 10:1 motor. The 2002 E55 was 10.5:1 and I was working on 8-10 PSI, but tuning the stock ECU was not something a lot of people had experience with. It finally made 421 RWHP, but again, the tuning was never what it needed to be and the motors in these cars are freakin' nose bleed expensive to fix if you trash one.

The W211 E55 factory Kompressor car is only 9:1 and was at about 12 PSI stock making 435 RWHP (same 5 speed auto as the '02 car). With a pulley, intake mods, exhaust, and tuning, boost is at 15 PSI and 492 RWHP. Many owners of these cars have learned the hard way not to just slap a pulley on and call it good. It's 30-50K to replace or repair one that dies from running too lean, or in the case of a friend, one that had the cylinders washed down from too much fuel.

Bottom line is, without a VERY good grasp on tuning everything in these ECU's/TCU's (not just fuel tables), I wouldn't even think of trying forced induction on a G.

 

[1FstYota]

I didn't say high compression and boost can't mix, I said anything with high compression wouldn't lend itself to being boosted.

By that, I mean the motor is already that much closer to it's limits and high boost does not mix well with a motor that already has high compression, at least not without other changes or upgrades. Your Supra motor is an oddity. There's almost nothing else that will handle such an increase in power over stock than a JZ motor. The stock block and crank will take boost that would grenade most engines at start up. I would bet that civic motor is far from stock with 40 PSI feeding it.

The more compression you start with and more boost you run, the more critical tuning becomes. I got away with a piggy back setup on the E430 because I was only at 6 PSI on a 10:1 motor. The 2002 E55 was 10.5:1 and I was working on 8-10 PSI, but tuning the stock ECU was not something a lot of people had experience with. It finally made 421 RWHP, but again, the tuning was never what it needed to be and the motors in these cars are freakin' nose bleed expensive to fix if you trash one.

The W211 E55 factory Kompressor car is only 9:1 and was at about 12 PSI stock making 435 RWHP (same 5 speed auto as the '02 car). With a pulley, intake mods, exhaust, and tuning, boost is at 15 PSI and 492 RWHP. Many owners of these cars have learned the hard way not to just slap a pulley on and call it good. It's 30-50K to replace or repair one that dies from running too lean, or in the case of a friend, one that had the cylinders washed down from too much fuel.

Bottom line is, without a VERY good grasp on tuning everything in these ECU's/TCU's (not just fuel tables), I wouldn't even think of trying forced induction on a G.

Agreed on the tuning is a necessity and someone who knows what their doing.

I don't know much about the E55 but they definatly look like a fun car, and I think the reason we don't see many high horsepower ones is the fact like you said it cost an arm and a leg to fix things, and two most people who buys them are very much inclined to modify it to that extent.

The 2J is well know for making big power on stock long block, but the main reason I think the engine can survive is the fact that big power needs a big turbo thus creating lag, and that lag moves the torque curve to the right of the powerband. So when peak torque comes up the car is up to speed, far less likely to bend a rod. Just recently a lot of people are putting on 62mm to 67mm turbos generating a lot more torque download which bends rods quite easily.

On a different note how would you rate the e55 overall vs the genesis? There was a guy with a e55 that tried to race my little 3.8 v6 and yea you can imagine lol.

 

[Fast55]

I really miss the '02 from the pictures above. I think if had it over, I would have kept it and stayed with tuning it until it was "perfect", or returned it to stock with "only" 355 HP, but it was traded for the '06. The car was loaded, but back then, the nav was CD based and the factory phone was a Motorola V60 I think that plugged into the console cradle and support was going away for it (no Bluetooth back then). Very trick in it's day, but obviously dated by the time the W211's came out, or more like ancient history compared to the G. It was the last of the W210 AMG's and very rare in that color. It handled good, comfortable, and when it ran it's best, at least as fast as the '06 when stock. Surprised many "fast" cars, and even some bikes. Very solid with that old Mercedes quality feel. The G isn't quite there.

The W211 is a different car altogether. Of course, stupid amounts of power even stock, and they still have hand built engines, but by this time, Mercedes took full ownership of AMG and they started producing a lot more cars and models. Still very solid feeling and quiet like a Benz, but especially the 2003-2009 years I think MB really was a step behind in tech. like Bluetooth integration and navigation. It does have some things a G doesn't, like a power trunk and active/dynamic/massaging seats, but the nav BLOWS, and the stereo is only average for something 7 years old. It also is a pretty big car, but doesn't have nearly the room of a G, especially the back seats. Even now I don't think a new S class has a better nav than the G.

 

[JasTheAce]

The 2011 glk I have has maps that are every bit as bad as hyundai, or maybe worse. I forget where I was in New England but it wanted me to take the left fork on to an interstate with a different number than my two choices, and I needed to go right, not left. The rest of that trip was flawless, courtesy of Google maps on my phone.

 

[1FstYota]

I really miss the '02 from the pictures above. I think if had it over, I would have kept it and stayed with tuning it until it was "perfect", or returned it to stock with "only" 355 HP, but it was traded for the '06. The car was loaded, but back then, the nav was CD based and the factory phone was a Motorola V60 I think that plugged into the console cradle and support was going away for it (no Bluetooth back then). Very trick in it's day, but obviously dated by the time the W211's came out, or more like ancient history compared to the G. It was the last of the W210 AMG's and very rare in that color. It handled good, comfortable, and when it ran it's best, at least as fast as the '06 when stock. Surprised many "fast" cars, and even some bikes. Very solid with that old Mercedes quality feel. The G isn't quite there.

The W211 is a different car altogether. Of course, stupid amounts of power even stock, and they still have hand built engines, but by this time, Mercedes took full ownership of AMG and they started producing a lot more cars and models. Still very solid feeling and quiet like a Benz, but especially the 2003-2009 years I think MB really was a step behind in tech. like Bluetooth integration and navigation. It does have some things a G doesn't, like a power trunk and active/dynamic/massaging seats, but the nav BLOWS, and the stereo is only average for something 7 years old. It also is a pretty big car, but doesn't have nearly the room of a G, especially the back seats. Even now I don't think a new S class has a better nav than the G.

Nice, I always wondered about the e55, thanks for the insightful post. I remember the motorla phone when I had a 745i, even though it was fully loaded the phone made the car feel ancient lol.

I kept wondering if I should of gotten a tech/premium package G, but seems like there is a lot of gripe with the OE Navi, guess unavi is the way to go.

 

[Fast55]

The 2011 glk I have has maps that are every bit as bad as hyundai, or maybe worse. I forget where I was in New England but it wanted me to take the left fork on to an interstate with a different number than my two choices, and I needed to go right, not left. The rest of that trip was flawless, courtesy of Google maps on my phone.

So Mercedes nav still sucks. I knew it!

The G is pretty good especially compared to the E55, or the $%#!* POS they called nav in my Avalon.

 

[Top Gear]

Sorry I missed this thread till now. This is one thing I learned long ago in street racing: Most low-level mods are total snake oil, and this goes triply for these types of cars we're driving.

Why?? Because these are all-aluminum, computerized, extremely well designed and engineered engines. Just changing the air filter or the gas brand changes the way the engine tunes itself. Car makers today spend a LOT of money and time perfecting every minute aspect of a performance engine, to the point that a normally aspirated V6 beats big block V8s from yesteryear with a much lighter, more efficient platform. You really think a cheap mod is automatically going to outsmart the R&D of a massive design team??

The only way with the same car is to somehow jump to the next level or two of horsepower, and that means forgetting that carbon fibre grill facia and looking to a massive modification, like twin turbos or a supercharger with nitrous, or starting with a bigger engine altogether and still doing forced induction and nitrous. Bye-bye warranty, dependability, flexibility with gas, etc. The other way is to get another new car that jumps you to the next level or two, and that means getting a Lambo, Ferrari, Aston, Porsche or the like - and even some of those are not really that fast compared to an R-Spec, so be careful buying a supercar on the low-end.

I agree with Vince2 above. I see a lot of 20-something ricer/modders who even in this Information Age actually seem to think a sticker, a spring cut, a tail fin, or some other cheap and merely visible modification scares other people into thinking their car is fast. Maybe that scares the minivan moms, but the truth is their modded car is often slower than it was when stock, and when stock was absolutely no match for mine, though it might look cool or "bad" to their entourage with all that junk on it. By 40, we've been burned a few times and realize that being a mere customer of the low-end mod industry is not how we go faster. We've also learned that looking good does not involve a strap-on wing, being slammed with no handling, being loud, ruining a computerized engine with a $100 mod, or by plastering stickers on a windshield.

Make these same points over on the popular Coupe forum and even the moderators there will come out in force to get you off the site (such sites depend on mod money and young modders), but the truth is still true. A handful of horsepower difference is nice, don't get me wrong, and it's usually enough to feel good about, but not enough to change the game or the "level" of the car (ie. 5-sec 0-60, 4-sec, 3-sec,...).

In short, if you want to go faster than an R-Spec, then buy a faster car

 

[JasTheAce]

Sorry I missed this thread till now. This is one thing I learned long ago in street racing: Most low-level mods are total snake oil, and this goes triply for these types of cars we're driving.

Why?? Because these are all-aluminum, computerized, extremely well designed and engineered engines. Just changing the air filter or the gas brand changes the way the engine tunes itself. Car makers today spend a LOT of money and time perfecting every minute aspect of a performance engine, to the point that a normally aspirated V6 beats big block V8s from yesteryear with a much lighter, more efficient platform. You really think a cheap mod is automatically going to outsmart the R&D of a massive design team??

The only way with the same car is to somehow jump to the next level or two of horsepower, and that means forgetting that carbon fibre grill facia and looking to a massive modification, like twin turbos or a supercharger with nitrous, or starting with a bigger engine altogether and still doing forced induction and nitrous. Bye-bye warranty, dependability, flexibility with gas, etc. The other way is to get another new car that jumps you to the next level or two, and that means getting a Lambo, Ferrari, Aston, Porsche or the like - and even some of those are not really that fast compared to an R-Spec, so be careful buying a supercar on the low-end.

I agree with Vince2 above. I see a lot of 20-something ricer/modders who even in this Information Age actually seem to think a sticker, a spring cut, a tail fin, or some other cheap and merely visible modification scares other people into thinking their car is fast. Maybe that scares the minivan moms, but the truth is their modded car is often slower than it was when stock, and when stock was absolutely no match for mine, though it might look cool or "bad" to their entourage with all that junk on it. By 40, we've been burned a few times and realize that being a mere customer of the low-end mod industry is not how we go faster. We've also learned that looking good does not involve a strap-on wing, being slammed with no handling, being loud, ruining a computerized engine with a $100 mod, or by plastering stickers on a windshield.

Make these same points over on the popular Coupe forum and even the moderators there will come out in force to get you off the site (such sites depend on mod money and young modders), but the truth is still true. A handful of horsepower difference is nice, don't get me wrong, and it's usually enough to feel good about, but not enough to change the game or the "level" of the car (ie. 5-sec 0-60, 4-sec, 3-sec,...).

In short, if you want to go faster than an R-Spec, then buy a faster car

I certainly wouldn't call the low level mods "snake oil". When cars are engineered they have to take a LOT more into consideration than specialized aftermarket parts do. They focus on minimizing intake noise, and a balanced character for the car. If you live where you might see snow once every few years (if that) you dont care about preventing a lean condition at -40. you can get a tune that will give the car optimal fuel ratios for 93 octane. you can get a louder and less restrictive exhaust. all things considered with simple mods/tune you can have a car that shaves .2/.3 off a 0-60, and bump the car a little higher up the food chain. I agree it is nowhere on the same level as a turbo/twin turbo/supercharger, or even a good cam/headers/stall setup. Everything comes down to a cost/performance ratio, and CAI/tunes are generally fairly low cost for a small bump in numbers. They are also reversible for people who aren't fully prepared to "pay to play", and generally more difficult to deny warranty over.

 

[Top Gear]

Except that's the very basis of snake oil. Maybe you get 3 - 7BHP at a specific RPM, but you get an overall loss of power and you upset the engineered balance of the machine/computer. Not only is it inadequate to move you to the next level of acceleration or top speed, but before long, your otherwise lovely Genesis R-Spec would be just another strangely loud, smoking example of "sound and fury, signifying nothing". If you want a sports car, buy a sports car.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[jalanjalan]

Except that's the very basis of snake oil. Maybe you get 3 - 7BHP at a specific RPM, but you get an overall loss of power and you upset the engineered balance of the machine/computer. Not only is it inadequate to move you to the next level of acceleration or top speed, but before long, your otherwise lovely Genesis R-Spec would be just another strangely loud, smoking example of "sound and fury, signifying nothing". If you want a sports car, buy a sports car.

What you said

Making the car incredibly loud and unwarrantied is not worth it. I'm pretty sure that it was a tad slower at useful around town speeds with all the mods. I just kept the magnaflows because they sound "sporty" (and because I couldn't swap it out myself

 

[zielritter]

What you said

Making the car incredibly loud and unwarrantied is not worth it. I'm pretty sure that it was a tad slower at useful around town speeds with all the mods. I just kept the magnaflows because they sound "sporty" (and because I couldn't swap it out myself

How much quieter is the R-Spec without the MSA deletes? My 3.8 can get a bit boomy at low RPMs with the Magnaflow and deletes. I've debated removing them at one point.

I will say that a well designed aftermarket exhaust and test pipe should not cause an appreciable loss of torque. What gave rise to this thought is the "less back pressure = torque loss" myth in the ricer world. In reality you only lose a lot of power if you go too large on your pipe diameter and screw up your exhaust pulse velocity.

I know it's not scientific, but my acceleration "tests" showed an approximate decrease in 0-60 times of .2-.3 seconds. Not huge, but about what one should realistically expect without going FI.

 

[scottdk]

I've built/modded/raced so many things it's a little ridiculous. Forced induction includes a TRD blown T100 4X4, E430 MB, and W210 E55. The truck was not bad as the TRD supercharger was a kit that was "blessed" by the factory and was in fact, installed by a local dealer. It was not "perfect" until I took it to TRD and actually had Bob Garner at TRD tweak it.

The MB's were another story. Anything that already has fairly high compression does not lend itself to forced induction. The E430 ran pretty good with a "piggy back" tuning solution. The E55 was a long running project that I was never completely satisfied with. Tuning is everything, and right now, there simply isn't anyway to make that happen on the G whether it's a blower or turbo.

Here's a couple shots:

You familiar with Weistec tuning by chance? Wow

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEyKEh_qdRg"]The 850 HP E63 by Weistec Engineering - /TUNED - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Fast55]

Yes,

BUT, The few extra dollars spent on Renntech or Brabus for MB work is worth it IMHO. There are those who are happy with their work and they have made big numbers on some project cars. Then there are others who are less than happy..............