Mercedes Experts? Fixing/modifying E270Cdi

nope. Not bulllshit at all. Admittedly only timed with an AP22 not with anything fancy and (I correct myself here) that's a 0-60mph not 0-100kph.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp
Loading thread data ...

So you are claiming to be able to knock 2 full seconds of a 0 to 60 by driving it "better" than the pros did to get those figures in the first place???

I spent LOTS of time working with bike magazines and at the drag strip both with accurate timming equipment. NEVER in a month of sundays with cars or bikes could that happen! I spent years trying to knock a full second off various cars and bikes with different chassis mods, clutches, nitrous, turbos, etc. It takes a HUGE mod to make a 1 second to 60 difference, Never mind 2 secs which is four times as hard!

Do you realise that a 50bhp nitrous kit would be very unlikely to knock 1 second off and it gives 50bhp from 1000 rpm! ???????

Simple physics says its not remotely possible.

Pasted from a web page to save me re inventing the wheel... We analysed the manufacturer's 0-60 times for a range of popular sports cars and found that in practice the quoted 0-60 times are easily and quickly calculated to the nearest second by dividing the weight of the car in Kg (Kilogrammes) by the cars' maximum brake horse power. Further analysis revealed that the more precise formula for most cars is:-

weight of car in kilogrammes 0-60 time --------------------------- maximum bhp of car * 0.9

OK, it's not a precise science, but it does work (most of the time),

So for example, take the current Toyota MR2 which weighs in at 975Kg and has a maximum power of 138bhp. Using our formula we calculate the car's 0-60 time to be 7.9 seconds, and the quoted figure is 8.0.

Further analysis suggested that this tended to be true across quite a wide range of cars, and where it wasn't true, it was possible to explain why the car was achieving better than, or worse than figures.

Using this theory, we accurately predicted the figures for many cars to within 1/10th of a second.

For example:-

TVR Tuscan S (Manufacturer's quoted 0-60 time 4 seconds) weight 1100Kg, Max Power 310bhp, Calculated 0-60 time 3.9 seconds.

Porsche Carrera 4 (Manufacturer's quoted 0-60 time 5 seconds) weight 1405Kg, Max Power 316bhp, Calculated 0-60 time 4.9 seconds.

Porsche Boxster S (Manufacturer's quoted 0-60 time 5.7 seconds) weight 1320Kg, Max Power 260bhp, Calculated 0-60 time 5.6 seconds.

BMW M3 CSL (Our test 0-60 time 4.3 seconds). weight 1385Kg, Max Power 355bhp, Calculated 0-60 time 4.3 seconds.

Porsche Carrera 4s (Manufacturer's quoted 0-60 time 5.1 seconds) weight 1470Kg, Max Power 316bhp, Calculated 0-60 time 5.2 seconds

Burgerman.

Reply to
Burgerman

Being a farm manager, I can say yes, nearly all the tractors here can go from 1000rpm to 2000rpm in less than 1 second, turbo and non- but all mechanical injection.

Those with electronic injection will only respond properly when under some load- as the ECU knows the engine is unloaded and purposefully knows not to give it full response.

Tim..

Reply to
Tim (Remove NOSPAM. Registry corupted, reformated HD and l

In article , snipped-for-privacy@bouncing-czechs.com spouted forth into uk.rec.cars.modifications...

OK Vamp, you can own up now.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

I'm claiming that my best 0-60 in my current car is 2s faster than my best without wheelspin and clutch abuse.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

Almost totally unrelated question - do you find the TC in the Merc any good? I've never had TC before, but a drove a Merc Vito around for a few weeks that had it fitted (the 110CDi model - no idea what engine), and i have to say it was bloody annoying. The slightest little hint of a wheel losing the tiniest little bit of traction and the warning light would come flashing on and you wouldnt go anywhere. I had it turned off when i was in a hurry, it was so much easier and much smoother. Bloody nice van other than that. The engine is luuuvrerly!

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

Burgerman,

I'll drop you a line when I am in the UK: I own you more than 1 beer for your formula (even if you stole it for some-one). If that some-one is Mr D. Baker then I will bring a huge bag of pennies for lots of beer ;)

I did my tests standing 0 to 100 kph (which is not 0 to 60 but close) using a DL90 datalogger (which calculates speed from GPS -coordinates, 10 samples/sec)

Porsche 928 GTS 350 HP, 1620 kg => 5.14 sec Reality = 5.21 sec. NSX 280 HP, 1340 kg => 5.31 sec Reality = 5.24 sec.

With an error of ±0.07 sec I can live! On powerside of the equation this is an error of less than ±5 HP!

If I needed a extra stimulus to get the Sierra Cossie (estimated power 300-340 HP) back on the road, your formula counts double!

Thanks, happy New Year and I am in your debt!

Tom De Moor

Reply to
Tom De Moor

Why dave???

No, its a formula I have used for a bit, that seemed to work pretty well, found on the net. (Dunno where) but its figs always seem close and the maths is easy.

I like beer... What do you "do" for a living? Mags?

Reply to
Burgerman

If it was the 110CDi, then it was the 110bhp...CDi...!

Tim..

Reply to
Tim (Remove NOSPAM. Registry corupted, reformated HD and l

I thought it useful myself.

There seem to be two kinds of traction control:

"Traction Control" as fitted to base model Jaguars and some Ford Focuses; which cuts all engine throttle "forever" at the slightest hint of chriping a wheel. Designed so that the marketers can list 'traction control' as a feature, not because its any good.

Actually F**king dangerous to have turned on whilst driving as it'll let you pull out of the junction into traffic before cutting the engine (always handy); and neither vehicle was fitted with ESP/Stability Control so if you did need opposite lock and some power on the focus to stop the arse overtaking the front you couldn't and if you did need to trim the line of the s-type on the throttle you couldn't either.

Traction Control as fitted to the E270 which you can feel holding back on the throttle and hear rat-tat-tating the brakes under the bonnet but allows you to plant your foot on full lock out of a junction and pull away with the inside wheel going cheepcheepcheep instead of a smoking inside rear wheel and going nowhere. Can't say I've tried it at speed or mid bend as if I so much as scratched that car my life wouldn't be worth living, LOL! If you do want to play there is always the off button.

I think the van one is just a cheapie affair - the E270 TC appears to actually do something useful.

Reply to
marko

Anybody know how to tell the ECU to give it full response and behave just like a mechy diesel of the good old days? I presume the only reason they don't do what you tell them to is emissions, which are not regulated here.

Have had a look at the throttle pedal and its one of those never designed to come apart two-piece plastic mouldings weleded together. 'tis plugged in though. Will see if dealers are open again tomorrow.

Reply to
marko

Unless "too much" fuel is added (which only adds black smoke - not power) then running it weaker at low rpm makes no sense. (This would of course give less power though). So theres no reason why the electronic ones have naturally slower pickup other than a "slow" computer....

Reply to
Burgerman

Sounds familiar! More of a liability than a safety feature! It certainly didnt need it.

Sounds a bit more useful. Eventually i'll get the opportunity to try a decent system out :)

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

Maybe. But then surely the 108CDi isnt called that because it has 108bhp? Besides, i still dont know which engine it has (capacity wise is what i was talking about).

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

The naming convention on Merc vans has always been as follows:

The first number is the chassis type (e.g 1=Vito, 2 = Sprinter etc.) In general, the higher this number, the higher the load capacity of the vehicle. IIRC, the 7.5t trucks are numbered 8xx

The other two numbers denote the engine power. e.g x08 = 80bhp, x10 =

100bhp, 12 = 120bhp

So, a 110CDi is a 100bhp Vito with a CDi engine, and a 316CDi is a

160bhp Sprinter etc.

IIRC a 110CDi is fitted with Merc's 2.1 4-pot engine

Andy

Reply to
Andy Tucker

"marko" wrote in

Who on earth puts the turbo AFTER the cat? Total tripe IYAM

Reply to
Fishman19

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.