I've been reading this forum for 5 years and there have been a lot of discussions on performance gains from mods, but I am curious if anyone has dyno'd the stock SRT6. Chrysler claims 330 hp but the M-B SLK320 claimed 349. Was our SRT6 de-tuned or did Chrysler lie in order to protect the higher price point for the M-B product?? Interested in facts, not speculation.

 

My car stock dynoed 291 whp which is about the same as the SLK32. So both motors are identical and the 349 is more realistic indeed.

 

my slk32 dyno'ed 321 rwhp in stock form so detuned may be more realistic

 

So, if the SRT-6 has been de-tuned. What mods were used to de-tune? Computor or Mechanical?

 

electrical. engines are the same with cosmetic changes

 

Yes, detuned. However, easily fixed by any of the tuners. Bob and I saw this when we both went in for our Eurocharged tune. Fwiw, I also made 323 rwhp completely stock.

 

Wow guys 321 and 323 are great stock #s. Stock my car was 303 rwhp. We all know how different the numbers can turn up on different machines with different test conditions. I am not as knowledgeable as you guys but I heard that you add 18 to 20 % back to the rwhp number to get crank hp which is how most cars are factory rated. This would put Mimio5srt's car at 349 crank hp and your cars at about 390 crank hp using the 20% conversion rate. Did I do this correctly?

 

mine would be closer to 378 crank hp at 18%. i never use the higher #. i think the thing to consider is how close buggins and my car were in stock trim on 2 completely different dynos. mine was done on a mustang dyno on a perfect weather day. low temps low humidity and long cool downs between runs. i actually dyno'd right at 323 but the graph was a mess so we cooled and ran again and netted the 321 with a nice graph pattern.

if i have learned anything about these cars its that weather plays a major role in how they run. in tn this time of yr my 32 is just starting to feel the power. early in the am and after the sun sets the temps are in the 40's and the s/c just loves it. much stronger than the stifling hot weather temps with engine temps hitting 199*F.

 

My SRT stock dyno'd at 299.6

 

I didn't get mine dyno'd while it was still stock, so I don't know about the dyno numbers.

I hate to disagree with you, 32Krazy, but the dragtimes.com numbers from stock C32 AMG and stock SRT-6's are almost identical. I would think if the SRT-6 was detuned, it would show at the drag strip.

 

My thoughts exactly. Same times at the track makes me think they are identicle. 320+ whp is definitely a 12 second car. Maybe because the SLK tires are narrower causing more wheelspin with low 13 sec times?

 

c32 cars are alot heavier than the srt-6. thats why your times are the same maybe?

mimi the oem tires on the slk32 are 245/40-17 and you guys have 19's on the back. if anything the 19's are slower due to higher rotational mass

 

That 20% conversion only works in direction of loss from crank to wheels. For example we lose 20%. You cant reverse it mathematically to determine wheel to crank with the same factors.

Example: 20% taken from a 100 hp engine would read 80hp.

You cant reverse it by saying your 80 hp dyno reading can add 20% (16hp) . It would only equal 96hp.

I hope I explained that clearly..

 

To go the other way you divide by 80%. That is 80 hp divided by 80% gives 100hp.

Mike

 

that is correct, and is basic Algebra:

going the other way ... 80hp / (100%-20%) = 100 hp
so:
300 whp / .8 = 375 crank hp
320 whp / .8 = 400 crank hp

but 15% loss for rwd is more generally accepted:
300 whp / .85 = 353 crank hp
320 whp / .85 = 376 crank hp

maybe our cars don't lose much, or they were all just underrated

the real question is why did MB rate the SLK32 at 349 hp instead of 350 hp

 

the real question is why did MB rate the SLK32 at 349 hp instead of 350 hp [/quote]

could it the metric conversion that equates 349? (to lazy tonite to figure it out!)

 

could it the metric conversion that equates 349? (to lazy tonite to figure it out!)[/quote] could it be insurance quotes?

 

I think it was rated at 354 in Europe, and 349 in the U.S. ... why not 355 and 350? Surely the tolerances would've allowed it.

 

260 KW converts to 348.66 HP. My guess is that the engine was originally intented for a 260 KW goal. I have no idea what allows the European versions to quote 354 HP though, as the same SAE or ISO standards apply to horsepower rating.

I have been lurking at this site for a couple months now, and will be buying a SRT6 coupe soon. I just wanted to say this site is great! Tons of knowledgeable people.

Looking at the stock numbers it seems that both the SLK32 and SRT6 were under-rated from the factory, and it seems the SRT6 is detuned compared to the SLK32. Those 320+ stock HP numbers posted for the SLK32 are awesome!

Anyone have an idea of the difference of mass of a 17" tire/wheel assembly of a SLK32 compared to the 19" tire/wheel assembly of a SRT?