Mercedes E55 AMG hunt (W211)

[kevm14]

Have appt for inspection on Sat. Going to do windows down and cross my fingers. The tint isn't as dark as the STS was. Hopefully they don't reject it outright. Wondering whether I should try talking to the tech first or leave it alone. Really don't want to remove this tint as it is not super dark and helps with a black on black car...

They rejected it outright last Saturday. However, I was told if I remove just the side window tint (the part that rolls down), that would be acceptable. I'm going to hold them to that. I parked it with the windows down and the tech immediately rolled them up when he got in it. Later the manager told me if they run it in the bay with the windows down, they "get a phone call." Love that big brother stuff.

My neighbor came over this morning and he helped run the steamer while I pulled the tint. Took about an hour.

20200703_093546.jpg

20200703_093605.jpg

[kevm14]

Brought the car to Tire Pros. It passed. Had several interesting interactions that I'll capture.

I noticed a white Tesla Model 3 with a RI vanity plate RNWBL3 and they pulled it into the inspection bay. When the tech finally came 15 minutes later to get my car, he noticed me standing outside with Ian, facing my car. As he was getting in he goes "this yours?" I said yeah. He said "Nice car. I was just talking to the guys inside and said I'd rather have this than that Tesla." I've talked to this guy before. He has an 88 Lincoln Mark VII. Another tech has a high mileage Impala SS.

So eventually he pulls it in the bay and I saunter down to hang out near it. First thing he says is "I think I offended the owner of the Tesla, because when I was about to pull in your car, I said, now here comes a real car." Ha.

Anyway it passed the plug in and I noticed he was taking pictures with a digital camera. Apparently he has to take 5. Is this "the camera?" Or is there ANOTHER camera in the bay? I should have asked.

We talked about stuff for a while. He reiterated how much he liked the E55. I said it was my first Mercedes but I'm liking it so far. Then I said you won't believe what I paid, so I told him. Yeah he was impressed. He made a comment about the E63 and I sort of talked him out of them but told him to do his research.

I also mentioned that I was going to sell my Roadmaster. He asked the tech with the Impala SS but apparently he already has too many cars. Gee what's that like? They asked how much and I just threw 2 grand out there. Not trying to make a profit - just seems like a fair price. No bites but I didn't push very hard.

He even asked me whether I wanted the inspection sticker above the Mercedes logo on the windshield or next to it. I said above. It's like a decal - seems to be an OEM windshield so I guess he thought I would have a strong opinion.

He pulled it around front at the end and we talked for another minute. I told him about the gears and the tune and said, as this car sits, it's probably a low 12 second car. He was like.....damn, now you're making me want to look for one of these. Ha!

So I had a pleasant, classically Tire Pros experience (once I made the car legal, or legal enough).

[kevm14]

I entered everything and noted the trip computer said 17.8 mpg since I last reset it (beginning of this tank). What did Fuelly say? 17.8. No shit. Highly unexpected, honestly, but I'll take it.

Second tank was exact as well, down to the tenth. Guess it wasn't a fluke. I'm blown away, especially given the gears and tune.

[kevm14]

Had a bit of a revelation today.

I cruised at 100 for a bit on my commute (got there quickly in 5th with very little throttle - car is awesome). About 3,000 rpm at 100. Seems high for a 2.65 gear. Then again I already thought 2000+ was high for 70. This got my curiosity piqued.

I found my speed vs gear spreadsheet, looked up revs/mile for a Continental 265/35-18 and plugged in the trans ratios. Sure enough I was onto something. With a 2.65 it should only be turning 1,8xx rpm @ 70 mph and 2,5xx rpm @ 100 mph. Did a little digging and 3.07 is a common Mercedes ratio. Plugged 3.07 in and guess what - it lines up PERFECTLY. Calculates to 2,086 rpm @ 70 and 2,979 rpm @ 100 which is basically exactly what I saw on the tach.

So apparently this car has upgraded diff gears. That's pretty cool though I don't think it needs it. Then I got all nervous about the trip computer. I had noted in excess of 22 mpg highway. What if that was off and some coefficient in the trip computer thought I had traveled further then the car really did and thus calculated a higher fuel economy? Well, I filled up this afternoon and this was the first time Fuelly had calculated fuel economy data. I entered everything and noted the trip computer said 17.8 mpg since I last reset it (beginning of this tank). What did Fuelly say? 17.8. No shit. Highly unexpected, honestly, but I'll take it.

Oh, on my drive home I did check to see what the computer reported for speed and rpm vs the gauge cluster. They are exactly in agreement, so that's good. It rules out the tach being way off and making me think the car has different gears when it doesn't, but it clearly does.

I got under it tonight and the stamping on the diff does say 2.65. So that means they upgraded the gears in the stock housing which is normal. What would be REALLY cool is if they also upgraded the carrier to a Quaife or other Torsen-style limited slip. These cars had open diffs with just traction control based limited slip, stock. A real limited slip is always better.
20200626_170311.jpg
20200626_171216.jpg
20200626_171222.jpg
20200626_171555.jpg

So if I may bench race for a moment...this car has a tune (allegedly) and probably a 3.07 and maybe even a mechanical limited slip. It seems to me that on a prepped strip, this car might be good for a low 12 second 1/4 mile (OK, after I replace the intercooler pump I guess). That ain't too shabby, eh? For 1/2 the price of a V2 (which runs low 12s).

So this turned out to be all wrong. Bob dug up the test data from a 2003 C&D E55 test.

Gears 1-4 matched almost exactly to my spreadsheet. However, 5th was off, and that was the gear obviously for my 70 and 100 mph RPM measurement. What happened? I screwed up the formula when I expanded the spreadsheet to 5 gears. It was previously set up for 4 speeds. So that was my bad.

The good news is, my spreadsheet is very accurate, matching the C&D test data almost exactly. Online calculators are off by 100 rpm or more, because they use the generic tire size. I learned long ago to use the spec for revs/mile. Some Continentals in my rear size are 821 revs/mile and using that gets the closest.

C&D shows that in 4th at 155 they were turning around 5650 rpm. My spreadsheet shows 5620.

Using Car and Driver, 70 mph should be 2115 rpm in 5th. My spreadsheet shows 2110.

Yeah, I have the stock 2.65s. Actually, I am fine with them. I guess I had it right at the beginning. I think Bob may recall my quote. Something like "well if this is 3.06s, I wouldn't want 2.65s." Meaning I liked them the way they were. Turns out the stock gears are fine.

And when you look at Car and Driver (or my spreadsheet), the gearing doesn't seem totally stupid for a car at this power level, given an older 5 speed automatic.

1st goes to 50, 2nd goes to 81 and 3rd goes to 127. It scratches the tires through 1st gear anyway. Not sure what good a 3.06 would do, at least on the street.

[kevm14]

Bob called me today (PO of car). He wanted to know if he left his old license plate in my car....I guess he can't find it. No, he didn't.

But then we talked for like 18 minutes about stuff. I gave him a summary of what I've done to it since I've had it. He also told me he finally did the engine mounts on his S550 or whatever that thing is and said it was awful but he got it done and saved like $2k.

He did admit that the car probably barely saw rain since he owned it, other than I guess washing it. This was in response to my telling him about the various water issues that I've fixed. That's pretty much what I thought.

[kevm14]

I have updates, though maybe more of it is comparing contrasting to the CTS-V.

Plus I didn't even finish my brake/loaner thread.

For now here's a random tidbit that maybe I knew but wasn't sure exactly how functional it was: the automatic instrument cluster backlight brightness control (during daytime noticeable as the LED info screen).

Of course all cars since forever will dim the cluster and like the radio when the headlights are on. That's nothing new. So with auto headlight cars, it dims automatically but really just as a function of needing to turn on the headlights. None of that is new. What this car does, however, is probably something that much newer cars do but maybe even then I'm not sure. It varies the brightness of the cluster based on ambient lighting conditions. And not just ambient conditions, it must have some kind of forward viewing sensor because it is not just sensitive to day/night but how much direct sun I may be driving into vs more diffuse lighting. So what it does is brighten the cluster when I am driving into the sun to almost perfectly and then dim again so it's not all awkwardly bright (like with backlight bleed and stuff). I just thought that was kind of cool because it does it pretty seamlessly and it's a nice touch that makes a lot of sense. I bet this is a problem on most cars where with info in the gauge cluster, the sun glare washes out your eyes so you can't really read anything in that condition. Not on this car! Cool eh?

[kevm14]

Found this in WIS. It outlines the differences between the M113 (non-supercharged, non-AMG version of my engine) and the M113K. There are some substantive differences and this mainly stuff outside of the engine.

M113 vs M113k specs WIS.PNG

I wonder what the story is behind each of these differences.

Of note: No EGR on K, much higher fuel pressure, speed density fuel control, no fuel pressure damper on M113, some non-211 applications of the K got what I assume is closed loop feedback fuel pressure control (including pressure sensor), and the 850W fan is pretty serious. I also got "lucky" and have a higher output (180A) air cooled alt as opposed to the lower output water cooled unit in the M113.

850W divided by 13.5V = 63A. Steady state. Good lord. That is a crazy fan! It's PWM controlled so I'm sure the startup current is managed but that must be at least a 70A fuse/relay (probably 80A??). I also have an engine oil cooler mounted in front of the pass front wheel well area with its own dedicated fan.

[kevm14]

Attempted to check the oil with my dipstick. It seemed quite low. I ran the oil check routine in the car and it said add 1.5 qts. My first question is, why didn't it have me add 1 qt before it got to 1.5 qts low? Second, exactly how low is the actual level? Hard to say. Really not getting a good reading with the dipstick.

I added everything I had left of my LiquiMoly 5W-40 which was something under 2L. That satisfied the computer so that checks out I suppose. But checking the level I still couldn't get a good reading on the dipstick. Annoying.

I also need to check the computer because it tracks how many miles until the next oil change (decrements from 10,000, no real algorithms). Then I can divide by my 1.5+ qts of oil added and see what the consumption is. It's going to probably end up around a quart every 1,400 miles which is....not as good as I thought it was since it never asked me to add and I also never checked. I guess I'll have to run the check procedure periodically though I expected it to alert me before 1.5 qts. Maybe at 2 qts? I thought it was supposed to do it at 1 though.

Also I think it's going to need a main battery. But that seems like something better to do next spring.

[kevm14]

The car sat since about 2pm on Tuesday of last week so call it a full 6 days of sitting. It's been fairly cold. I wasn't sure it would start but it did. It cranked slow for the first two compression strokes but sped up and was fine overall. For having a weak battery and sitting for 6 days in the cold, not too bad.

[kevm14]

Took it to work today. It was in the upper teens overnight so I was curious if it would even start. It did though the first two compression stokes were quite labored. This car is definitely the inferior winter vehicle to the STS though. Which is why I still have the STS. And it's really not even the tires. These are summer only Continentals but they are far from a racing tire so I had no issues at all driving in (in the upper 20s). Actually felt pretty normal, not like I was on ice or something.