(not another!?) c230k turbo conversion

[Coop]

Hi all, I've been a long time creeper of this forum (and in real life), its been very useful in gathering info and now i have a few questions...

First off i have a black, pullied '99 c230 kompressor with 150km (93kmi), owned for 2 years and nothin but bliss, and now same ol'
story... bored of power, wanna turbo...

after wading thru as much info as possible about turbocharging the m111, I feel ive come up with a
relatively inexpensive solution (1500-2g), but im wondering if i can use a boost controller to limit to 10psi, swapping for bigger injectors, a4bar fpr,
while getting away with stock ecu/maybe maf clamping if needed.

I know there is quite a bit of expertise in this field on this forum and i would really appreciate any feedback,thoughts etc.

thanks eh :cool:

[John Jones Jr.]

From what I understand the stock ECU will not be suitable and I don't think clamping the MAF will work either. I reckon too you'd get a far better result with a standalone ECU plus you'd be looking at greater boost pressure too. Krumb or Pagz on here should be able to assist you.

[KrumB]

Hi all, I've been a long time creeper of this forum (and in real life), its been very useful in gathering info and now i have a few questions...

First off i have a black, pullied '99 c230 kompressor with 150km (93kmi), owned for 2 years and nothin but bliss, and now same ol'
story... bored of power, wanna turbo...

after wading thru as much info as possible about turbocharging the m111, I feel ive come up with a
relatively inexpensive solution (1500-2g), but im wondering if i can use a boost controller to limit to 10psi, swapping for bigger injectors, a4bar fpr,
while getting away with stock ecu/maybe maf clamping if needed.

I know there is quite a bit of expertise in this field on this forum and i would really appreciate any feedback,thoughts etc.

thanks eh :cool:

Hi,

You don't need a boost controller as the MB ECU will not allow more than 12 PSI of boost. You also don't need bigger injectors if your goal is up to 280-290 PS.
By removing the kompressor you'll instantly gain 35-40 PS because that's what the S/C takes from the engine in order to run.

[John Jones Jr.]

Hi,

You don't need a boost controller as the MB ECU will not allow more than 12 PSI of boost. You also don't need bigger injectors if your goal is up to 280-290 PS.
By removing the kompressor you'll instantly gain 35-40 PS because that's what the S/C takes from the engine in order to run.


Wow, that's great news Krum, 280bhp is rather appealing without a standalone ECU. So, what are we exactly looking at to convert to a turbo, obviously beside the turbo itself & ex.manifold? Can the standard S/c boost pressure relief valve be used also or is that just bypassed, as in the ECU is fooled into thinking it's operational?

[KrumB]

Haaahahaha J,

I'll tell you in the comming months. Exactly where are the bumps along the way.... ;)

[John Jones Jr.]

Haaahahaha




:cool: :D

I can't wait to hear as in theory it sounds easy, notice the word 'theory'! ;)

[Coop]

Wow, that's great news Krum, 280bhp is rather appealing without a standalone ECU. So, what are we exactly looking at to convert to a turbo, obviously beside the turbo itself & ex.manifold? Can the standard S/c boost pressure relief valve be used also or is that just bypassed, as in the ECU is fooled into thinking it's operational?

Sweet! Thats what I was thinking as well, nice to have some reassurance!
that was my next question, how to go about deleting the stock VDO without the ECU trippin out... I guess you could relocate it and use it in your turbo setup without too much hassle.
Im sure ive read some old threads where someone swapped out the VDO with a BOV. Ill have to keep digging. once thats figured out then I can start amassing parts, as I'd like to do this over the winter ideally.

[John Jones Jr.]

Coop, another item that I presume will need to fooled is the wiring for the S/c pulley as I recall that's wired inline with the cam positions sensor and the cam adjuster.

[Coop]

Coop, another item that I presume will need to fooled is the wiring for the S/c pulley as I recall that's wired inline with the cam positions sensor and the cam adjuster.
I'd have to look at a wiring diagram but I'm sure you could short the vdo for the signal to remain closed and I know lotsa people have gone clutchless with their SC pullies as well, ill dig up a diagram n start dinkin around with my car...being a sparky has its perks I guess...

[John Jones Jr.]

Looking forward to hearing your progress.

[KrumB]

In my opinion you don't need to delete the VDO as it's working perfectly. :) And it'll work just fine with the turbo setup. But it has to be tested.
As for the S/C it'll be fine if you just dissasemble the magnetic coil from the S/C body and leave it connected. That one also has to be tested. :)

[John Jones Jr.]

In my opinion you don't need to delete the VDO as it's working perfectly. :) And it'll work just fine with the turbo setup. But it has to be tested.
As for the S/C it'll be fine if you just dissasemble the magnetic coil from the S/C body and leave it connected. That one also has to be tested. :)

Wow, Krum you're making this turbo modification seem almost like a straight swap..:cool: ;)

[KrumB]

:)) If one manages to modify the ECU so that it accepts the extra load and not dischage the pressure...... :)


P.S. Even if the ECU is not modified it should hold 0.8-0.85 Bar and without the S/C a 35-40 hp gain can be expected not to mention the higher efficiency of the turbo (70-72 % against 52-58 % of the S/C)....

[Coop]

Sweet, this is lookin better by the minute! So you could move the VDO over to before the throttle body and function as BOV? then the rest is straight swap, aside from custom manifold n piping, with a nice little quick spoolin snail. I wonder what the ecu will do in regard to more boost as some members here managed 1bar with pulley etc. with no issues? ill probably run max 12psi anyways on turbo, just curious. Good to know tho thanks eh

[KrumB]

You don't move anything. Probably a BOV can be used as a safety measure.
.....now the BIG question is how will the ECU react to all of the above.... :) :) :)
A VERY, VERY good tuner is a must because everything sounds nice and easy but it surely will not be! :)

....but I intend to find out! ;)

[Coop]

You don't move anything. Probably a BOV can be used as a safety measure.
.....now the BIG question is how will the ECU react to all of the above.... :) :) :)
A VERY, VERY good tuner is a must because everything sounds nice and easy but it surely will not be! :)

....but I intend to find out! ;)

I gotta be missing something then, would you just fit a mechanical BOV as a failsafe for the VDO:confused: I thought you might
relocate it to after the IC but before MAF and run a vac line to the other side of the throttle plate:cool:.Or I wonder if you could delete the VDO
by wiring in a resistor and fooling the ECU into thinking its still there then use mechanical means of boost regulation. But id rather just use it...
I thought the stock ECU tuning ability was virtually nil outside of "performance chips" or remaps (upsolute, eurocharged etc.):D

[John Jones Jr.]

Guys, what sort of money is a good standalone system anyway? It just seems to me that if you're going turbo and want to take advantage of the low compression 230K lump the investment in a standalone really looks the way to go.

[Coop]

depends on what your looking for, full standalone can get very pricy (1000's) but for a low boost application like this I think piggyback is the way to go personally.. I think I'll go with an aem f/ic unit just for engine management (300-600$), that way you can wire it according to your application and still retain all the stock non engine related functions of the car. But that's if we can't figure out a way around it using stock ecu lol.

[KrumB]

I believe that a custom ECU tune is achievable but if not an AEM piggy-back is the way to go as it can emulate needed/expected from the ECU signal and it's low cost.

[John Jones Jr.]

Krum, how difficult is it to wire in the piggyback and get the basic parameters set up?

[KrumB]

John, if you have the ECU wiring diagram it's not that hard but for tuning the engine you HAVE to know what you're doing. :)

[Coop]

The aem units come preloaded with a basic map so you can start your car and drive it (out of boost) to the tuner as well.

[John Jones Jr.]

tuning the engine you HAVE to know what you're doing. :)

Yep, I reckoned that. Using a set of instructions first time round wouldn't be the way to go, well not for me anyway.:D

[John Jones Jr.]

The aem units come preloaded with a basic map so you can start your car and drive it (out of boost) to the tuner as well.

O.k, that's good to know and could save a lot of hassle.

[John Jones Jr.]

Now, an important question. If I had smaller S/c pulley plus the large 220mm crank pulley that's already fitted, no porting of S/c and standard I.C. would my car benefit much from fitting a piggyback - any ideas?

[Coop]

John, it would most certainly be of benefit to support your mods, it would give the ability to do a much more in depth custom tune than a reflash would plus you still retain the unit when you switch vehicles.

[KrumB]

John as I suspected the ECU has an algorithm to prevent the engine from overload.

I removed the 220mm pulley and installed the original 185mm one then I tested the car with that phone app PerfExpert. Here's the result

http://snimkitemi.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/20131022-110339.jpg

Here's a test with the 220mm pulley

http://snimkitemi.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/20131022-110426.jpg

So I can safely say that we need either a VERY GOOD tuner that knows our cars (too hard to find) or a GOOD piggy-back system that can emulate expected ECU values.
Otherwise it's worthless to throw money and time on upgrades.
In my opinion the optimum would be bigger crank pulley, 4 bar FPR and colder plugs. No remaps.

[John Jones Jr.]

John, it would most certainly be of benefit to support your mods, it would give the ability to do a much more in depth custom tune than a reflash would plus you still retain the unit when you switch vehicles.

A bloody good reply there Coop. Just what I like to hear. :cool: May consider it in the New Year so, lets see.

[John Jones Jr.]

John as I suspected the ECU has an algorithm to prevent the engine from overload.

I removed the 220mm pulley and installed the original 185mm one then I tested the car with that phone app PerfExpert. Here's the result

http://snimkitemi.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/20131022-110339.jpg



Here's a test with the 220mm pulley

http://snimkitemi.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/20131022-110426.jpg

So I can safely say that we need either a VERY GOOD tuner that knows our cars (too hard to find) or a GOOD piggy-back system that can emulate expected ECU values.
Otherwise it's worthless to throw money and time on upgrades.
In my opinion the optimum would be bigger crank pulley, 4 bar FPR and colder plugs. No remaps.

Wow, Krum. The above raises many questions by me (no surprise eh.., but you're use to that now I guess :D). So, without me pointing out the obvious (well, the one's that are obvious to me anyway) on the above readings are you thinking that a piggyback is he only way to go not allowing for cost of the unit and the set up I have is probably best value? Also, are you gains with the 220mm pulley not being hampered due to your car being a 200K rather than a 230K? What's your plan of action now, just go straight in and do a turbo install and for get about chasing BHP with S/c set up?

[Coop]

A bloody good reply there Coop. Just what I like to hear. :cool: May consider it in the New Year so, lets see.

lol thanks, Im rarely that articulate, musta been all the caffeine...

KrumB,
interesting indeed
whats got me stumped is how to delete that electronic bypass completely..
I really dont want to incorporate that bypass into the turbo system, Id much prefer mechanical means..
I agree with going piggyback as it seems to be less of a ***karound and allows for further modification.
Definitely going through with this project, just the info so far does'nt really inspire confidence.

[KrumB]

John, your setup is optimal by my opinion. As for the 2.0 ltr engine I shiould have much less power with the 185 mm pulley. The VDO bypass is just not allowing more....

Coop, mechanical is always better. I'm not much of an electrician but the VDO incorporates a step motor which I don't know must be emulated.....I do some research.
As for tuning Mercs....it's much, much harder than tuning Audi or BMW or a muscle car. The info is too scarce....

[Tony_AMG]

Man, I want my car to go fast, i'm barely gonna do the Head gaskets and gonna see if I can redo as much of the engine if i have to send the head out to machine shop... Makes me wonder, in easy to understand english, i'm not much of the Expert on Engine and modifications, what can be done as poster said i can gain like 40HP, on stock, what is basic HP limited and what is HP when there is no limitor?

[KrumB]

Tony,
It's proven that these engines can hold up to 400 hp on stock internals. The setups are no S/C but a burbo instead and a standalone ECUs (or AEM FMSs)..... :)

[John Jones Jr.]

John, your setup is optimal by my opinion. As for the 2.0 ltr engine I shiould have much less power with the 185 mm pulley. The VDO bypass is just not allowing more....



Yeah, agree there Krum. But what do you reckon is giving you the extra power over stock with the 185 pulley?

[KrumB]

:))) That must me the smaller S/C pulley and the bigger I/C. :)

[John Jones Jr.]

Of course, I forgot about those.

So, really you should have with all the modifications something in the region of 240bhp+ but thanks to the ECU you are only at 213bhp. What's the plan of attack now, piggyback first and then a turbo install?

[KrumB]

I already have a pibby-back but it's not that complicated. It can only emulate MAF signal and control ignition and additional fueling.
I'm trying with the help of a friend to hack the ECU and if succesfull a turbo will be added. I'll open a thread when there's any progress. :)

[Coop]

Managed to snag the last Haynes manual on amazon, ill have it on Friday and ill try to figure a way around the bypass, ill also take pics n post up the wiring diagrams and pin outs.

[KrumB]

Please do! I'm VERY curious!

[KrumB]

Here's what I found:

1682

[Coop]

Oh nice work Krum!!
So you could maf clamp with a Zener diode so that the ecu thinks its always on boost? Leave the s/c coil energized and let power cycle thru the bypass contacts maybe?

[KrumB]

I don't think that will work because the ECU reads RPM/engine speed also...... :(

[Coop]

Talked to a local tuner and he said to leave it hooked up and plumb around it lol, said I can get away with stock ecu and he'll reflash the new map with different load points. But he also quoted me 1200 for a custom manifold...LOG STYLE! That's like 8 welds... Ill get my welder buddy to lop my flange off n weld a new manifold for a case of beer instead. Anyone know what grade stainless our stock ones are? Maybe get real scabby and weld a flange on it hahaha

[KrumB]

1200 LOL

4G63 and M111 have very similar exhaust. If you can compare the exhaust flange sealings you might have a cheap way out. :)

http://www.ebay.de/itm/TD05H-16G-20G-14B-TUBULAR-TURBO-MANIFOLD-EXHAUST-90-99-ECLIPSE-DSM-1G-2G-4G63T-/350808158636?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item51adcbb1ac

[Coop]

Yeah I laughed my ass off and promptly hung up, that's crazy I was just on eBay lookin at 4g63 manifolds and tdo5 turbos wondering the same thing

[KrumB]

If I'm to be honest I bought a spare exhaust seal for the M111 but I have hard time finding a seal for 4g63. Even if they don't match exactly they should be pretty close and if you have a welder friend it shouldn't be that hard to match. The only other issue will be how close to the sidewall the snail will come..... :)

[Coop]

Yeah eh, weld the m111 flange on the 4g63 manifold if the ports are close? I did see an old thread where buddy had what looked like that manifold setup with a td05 hanging underneath. maybe my friend will let me pull his manifold off his evo so I can check lol

[Coop]

4g63 ports are 92.5mm centre to centre, dunno what ours are tho lol

[KrumB]

I'll tell you in a couple of hours. :)

[KrumB]

Here's what I measured.
1687

It's close to 97mm

[Coop]

nice work krum! dang, a lil off eh? looks like the same shape/size ports though

[Coop]

what if you use our stock manifold? Flip it around weld the turbo flange where it normally meets the flexpipe, then flip the header flange around to match the bolt pattern? Provided its strong enough steel.. I dunno maybe I'm just being silly

[KrumB]

I've fought of that but there are 2x2 runners.....it'll be simpler/faster to do it from scratch....I think. :)
A simple 4in1 design with unequal runners will be just fine...

...and let's not forget - http://www.ebay.com/itm/400241312014?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

:) :)

[Coop]

Of course, that'd be too easy! haha disco potato! Those eBay turbos make me nervous, I have read good things about godspeed tho and corky bell of maximum boost fame did a write up about how he tested a whole bunch of china-chargers and found them to be of equal quality of brand name Garrett's etc. the most common reason for the china chargers failure is lack of oil restrictions so the fails were on the user/installer end not the turbo itself.

[Pagz]

One thing that caught me out on the turbo project was the large valve overlap, it may not seem like an issue now but I think it play's a more significant part the more you up boost pressure with turbo setup's , as boost increases so does exhaust pressure, combine this with large increases in combustion pressure and the stock internal emmission system(large overlap that spits combustion back up the intake) could cause all sorts of issues with tuning/fueling. to make the M111 run really well with a high pressure ratio I think custom cam gears to allow less overlap are the way forward(delete the cam advance and use an exhaust sprocket maybe) if that's not enough cams as well.

food for thought.

[Coop]

Pagz droppin some science on our heads! Thanks for blessin this thread with your presence lol :D
Your build is what inspired me to give it a go! I remember reading that you milled an old m104(?) cam gear to get around this problem somewhat.
Im hoping it wont be as much of an issue on mine as i dont plan on running as much boost as you did (see how long that lasts...)
but that is something i will definitely keep in my back pocket as the need arises.:cool::cool:

[KrumB]

Pagz, nice to hear from you!
I have a question. :)
What pressure did you run?

[Coop]

old video shows 1.2 bar

[Pagz]

Hey Guys,
Np I'm always keen to see FI work in the pipeline,it's a very rewarding mod if you get it right!.

The old cam gear we slotted was not initially intended to correct overlap,however the 10hp increase from retarding some 5 degree's showed stock cam timing was far from ideal,retarding it would have reduced the overlap slightly but at the cost of opening the exhaust later,that's where you would want to experiment with both intake and exhaust timing and then cam duration etc. If I was to do it all again I would start the journey with cam design.

Boost pressure with the GT2860rs was around 16psi towards the end of the project(it will always creep up no matter how hard you try haha),in the beginning I found the T25 .63 and .82 turbine housings to be too small as boost control and surge became a problem. later I ran T3 .82 which corrected surge issues and boost was much more controllable. I'd put money on if the cam setup was better you would be able to run a smaller turbine housing with more response without surge issues, top end may be slightly effected but low to mid range power ftw.

Ironically A friend sent me this yesturday http://www.speedhunters.com/2013/10/a-volvo-powered-time-attacking-mercedes-benz/ Its fairly clear why these guys ran the turbo volvo engine over the MB engine;)!.

Edit - This is pretty cool too http://www.speedhunters.com/2013/07/predictability-is-dead-the-turbo-mercedes-190/

[John Jones Jr.]

Cheers Pagz, it good reading those.

[KrumB]

Tanks Pagz!

[Coop]

Cool thanks for the awesome info Pagz, really appreciate you sharing your knowledge! those were some badass articles too

[Coop]

well im back, ive started amassing parts for the project and am set to start after i replace my leaky trans adapter plug! Ive decided to go piggyback with an adjustable rrfpr and a split second AIC to control 2 injectors welded into the aluminum m111 manifold. Ill be clamping the maf at 4.7v or so and converting the belt system to N/A as i have all the parts. One question i have tho is what to do with my secondary air injection system...can i just plumb it into my charge pipe? any thoughts or ideas are much appreciated! thanks

[KrumB]

Hi,
I'd leave the bypass valve as it is or connect it to the intake before the turbo. Maybe add a BOV somewhere after the I/C.
Below is what I've done to add some more fuel for testing purposes:
http://snimkitemi.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/photo.jpg?w=908

Keep us posted how it goes :)

[Coop]

Nice work krum! I was gonna do that but I got lucky n pulled an aluminum manifold off a 94 c220. I'm gettin rid of the vdo bypass completely but I meant the secondary air series of check valves that plumb into the supercharger. I see a vac line goin to a sensor so I figure if I plumb it into my ic piping it should see a similar value as when the sc is engaged at cold start. Theories are great...in theory

[John Jones Jr.]

Very interesting Krum. Looking forward to hearing about the results.

[Coop]

How'd that extra injector setup work for ya krumb? just tee'd off the depressure fitting?

[KrumB]

I connected it to the fuel pressure check fitting and the injectors to a piggyback ecu.
Wanted to try different AFRs. As expected, the engine gave most power with AFRs around 12.5
We tried 10.5/11.0/11.5 with no gain and a bit of smoke so decided not to use it.....for now... :)

[Coop]

thats awesome dude, you gotta 4bar in there too right? that sure makes things easy tho. i wonder what the smoke was about? i got all my parts together to convert to N/A including an air pump so i can delete the charger and still have functioning secondary air injection at cold start. using 2 spst relays in series i can connect the supercharger 12v to the coil and 12v from the switchover relay to the other relay coil allowing 12v fused to come from the battery thru the relays and boom air injection occurs and no CEL or S/C open circuit codes. just gotta replace my barely leaking trans plug adapter and then im set to go ahead with the project. split second AIC, MAF clamp, 2 extra 550 injectors and a T3 60-1 and ill be boostin boys!

[KrumB]

Good to hear youre ready with all the parts.
The smoke was because of the rich mixture.
One more thing.
I while ago i had issues with one of the clamps after the S/C. I couldn't tighten it well and it was frequently throwing out the hose so i've driven the car with s/c engaged and with no pressure to the engine. It was running perfectly wiht no error codes and with non of the power of course. :)))
It was running fine just like a non komp engine. ;)

[Coop]

oh yeah i thought id ask you what the fitting was you used for you injector feed at the fuel rail was to save myself some time. Also where you took your tach signal from, behind the cluster or at the ecu? thanks eh

[KrumB]

I don't remember the fitting. I took signal from the ECU.