Mercedes A-Class Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Is nobody in the uk looking for a remap DMS are looking for a A45S if I was in the uk I would have giving them my car

just think what they could do with the crackles and bangs
For instance on start up holding the lever when they get into the ecu they can make that happen through gear change
And give us another 60-70 hp

anybody live near they’re premises?
They have mapped 3 of my A45
And 2 of my transporters
Never had one problem with them or most importantly the cars and vans and they are professional team
Be great to hear your thoughts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Re Archie’s numbers stacking up:


The A45s produces 310kW Engine Power.

This is equivalent to 421 PS (The A class brochure has converted this wrong, it quotes 421hp).

310kW is approx 416 bhp (415.7 bhp)

Archie in the video is measuring wheel horse power, they have to do a conversion, and an assumption of losses through the 4 wheel drive system (nominally around 20-25% for AWD).

So, if they calculated 411 bhp that’s only 5bhp adrift which could be many things, fuel, atmospherics, new engine, calculation/conversion accuracy.

I don’t think it’s as bad as he makes out as there’s too many variables, plus the conversion/assumption/guesstimate of losses involved going from whp to bhp.



PS this is my 1600th post on this forum, still a way to go catching up @JB-A45 :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,284 Posts
I had missed the link on my phone.

It's interesting about the guesstimate of the power loss for AWD. It would have been similar for the E63s. So massively higher power and torque numbers could be due to insufficiently accurate calibration and I guess this is borne out in terms of the M5 competition being fractionally quicker in some drag races yet not significantly lighter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,459 Posts
Re Archie’s numbers stacking up:


The A45s produces 310kW Engine Power.

This is equivalent to 421 PS (The A class brochure has converted this wrong, it quotes 421hp).

310kW is approx 416 bhp (415.7 bhp)

Archie in the video is measuring wheel horse power, they have to do a conversion, and an assumption of losses through the 4 wheel drive system (nominally around 20-25% for AWD).

So, if they calculated 411 bhp that’s only 5bhp adrift which could be many things, fuel, atmospherics, new engine, calculation/conversion accuracy.

I don’t think it’s as bad as he makes out as there’s too many variables, plus the conversion/assumption/guesstimate of losses involved going from whp to bhp.



PS this is my 1600th post on this forum, still a way to go catching up @JB-A45 :p
LOL half of my count was trying to organise the first ever meet up we did from here, before the days of WA, still got a number of good friends from those days and we all meet up regularly to this day
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,284 Posts
3.88 0-60. Was it dry.

It will be interesting how it goes even without the exhaust change and remap after a few thousand more miles as currently those who have been able to are finding we are not hitting the MB 0-62 time of 3.9s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,139 Posts
Just popped down to my local abandoned runway. It was dry and about 10 degrees.
tried a few different setups ie S+ Race, traction half off/fully off.
settled for traction fully off and in race. Also noted that before dumping the brake if you pull the UP paddle the revs increased a bit more so went for that. Here’s the results with car and Dragy running simultaneously.
E7366BDD-8DA6-43B6-991E-31E2860BE629.png
63B462BE-3E42-4793-8348-D4F10842B158.png
54B21EFF-4AF8-44CA-A755-A7FDF15ED526.jpeg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,459 Posts
thats interesting, my DMS mapped 176 45 would regularly register 3.5s but my best ever 1/4 at Pod was virtually the same time of 11.92
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,284 Posts
I reckon with a few more miles it will open up even more. I'm guessing you're only a couple of hundred over the thousand miles. 3.72 to 60 mph must be below 3.9 to 62 mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I am at around 1140 miles
Will take a run later on the roads and see and will try with traction control off and see if that’s any better
Cheers for the info Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,139 Posts
thats interesting, my DMS mapped 176 45 would regularly register 3.5s but my best ever 1/4 at Pod was virtually the same time of 11.92
I think its because it launches differently to my 176 fl. on that one it would wheel spin off the line where as this one sort jumps forward a bit before accelerating. Once going there is no wheel spin whatsoever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
I think its because it launches differently to my 176 fl. on that one it would wheel spin off the line where as this one sort jumps forward a bit before accelerating. Once going there is no wheel spin whatsoever.
From the videos I’ve seen it’s like it has almost too much grip on launch and it drags the revs down too much ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Just popped down to my local abandoned runway. It was dry and about 10 degrees.
tried a few different setups ie S+ Race, traction half off/fully off.
settled for traction fully off and in race. Also noted that before dumping the brake if you pull the UP paddle the revs increased a bit more so went for that. Here’s the results with car and Dragy running simultaneously.
View attachment 5114 View attachment 5115 View attachment 5116
Guess you found this part in the feature list!
Maybe if the conditions are good and traction is high then increasing the revs will help the launch revs stay higher 👍🏻

5124
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top