Close

    • Weistec Engineering now offering Stage I Naturally Aspirated M156/63 AMG tune - +47 wheel horsepower on 91 octane, $990

      We thought this eventually might come but not so soon. Weistec has decided to sell a naturally aspirated tune for the M156 V8 which offers gains of 47 wheel horsepower on 91 octane, impressive. In addition to the horsepower gain torque is upped by 32 wheel, the speed limiter is removed, and the throttle response is optimized. The price is a very reasonable $990 which also is credited toward a supercharger purchase should one decide they want more power.




      Key Features:

      • +47 Wheel Horsepower
      • +32 Wheel Torque
      • Eliminate Top Speed Limiter
      • Increased Throttle Response
      • Optimized Fuel and Spark
      • Credit towards Stage 1/1+ Supercharger Systems


      To order: http://weistec.com/m156nas1.html
      This article was originally published in forum thread: Weistec Engineering now offering Stage I Naturally Aspirated M156/63 AMG tune - +47 wheel horsepower on 91 octane, $990 started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 400 Comments
      1. BAD430BENZ's Avatar
        BAD430BENZ -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cpais Click here to enlarge
        I learned everything I know from MBWorld, LOL
        Click here to enlarge
      1. Dodger63's Avatar
        Dodger63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cpais Click here to enlarge
        I learned everything I know from MBWorld, LOL
        Figured as much you must hang out with jons95c36 or whoever that character is,,,,
      1. propain's Avatar
        propain -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cpais Click here to enlarge
        I don't have a Long Island accent, at least I hope I don't.
        We all do! LOL
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by propain Click here to enlarge
        The idea you cant grasp the point someone else is making is your problem and always will be. You simply just wait for your turn to speak and brush past anything you dont like. This is why debating you is the brick wall. I believe a brick wall would read more at this point though..

        Again... MICRO results NOT DETECTABLE ON THE TRACK. Said this about 10 times now. How many times until it sinks in? Round and round.... pointless.. Have the last word... so silly at this point.
        If I brushed past anything I did not like I would not even bother responding to you.

        It doesn't matter how many times you choose an example to minimize horsepower gains or lower the % or change it in any way. It does not matter as it is simply the way the world functions. It is simply the laws of physics. If you need sophisticated equipment to see the difference of 10 horsepower on a car with thousands of horsepower so be it but whether it be 1 horse or a billion nothing changes there will be an affect. It does not matter how small, this is a universal constant.

        You have no point here. You can not change anything I just typed. You have proved nothing except you are unwilling to accept reality.
      1. propain's Avatar
        propain -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        If I brushed past anything I did not like I would not even bother responding to you.

        It doesn't matter how many times you choose an example to minimize horsepower gains or lower the % or change it in any way. It does not matter as it is simply the way the world functions. It is simply the laws of physics. If you need sophisticated equipment to see the difference of 10 horsepower on a car with thousands of horsepower so be it but whether it be 1 horse or a billion nothing changes there will be an affect. It does not matter how small, this is a universal constant.

        You have no point here. You can not change anything I just typed. You have proved nothing except you are unwilling to accept reality.
        Yup.. thank you. You win Joe. You know everything. I forgot. Moving on... Click here to enlarge
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by propain Click here to enlarge
        Yup.. thank you. You win Joe. You know everything. I forgot. Moving on... Click here to enlarge
        I don't know everything and I'm not trying to say I do. I know enough that horses gained don't wander off when you get to the track.
      1. cpais's Avatar
        cpais -
        I remember back in the day when people would bring new drag cars out to race against us. You would always here stuff like "So and so is bringing a bickel chassis and just made 1500 horsepower on the dyno." They would get to the track, car would never go anywhere and you would wonder why they must have left all that horsepower back at the dyno....

        It's funny how that happens sometimes. You will see it here too. Once people start tubbing some of these C's out and putting twin turbos on them (don't laugh, it is bound to happen sooner than later), the same thing will happen with them too.
      1. JonsC63AMG's Avatar
        JonsC63AMG -
        Ahh.. Sticky does it again! At least you agree with me. BTW Sticky I just bought a vbox and found a 1.5% decline which is good for low 9sec 60-130. Actually my friend found the decline with the vbox he just bought. He ran on the same road where I got my 9.74. He got 10.6. Then ran the 1.5% decline and got a 9.8sec. Did this within 1hr. So that decline is .8sec faster! I cant wait for my runs there!
      1. Exeenom's Avatar
        Exeenom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Are you familiar at all with what was modified in this tune vs. what other tuners are doing? Your entire body of knowledge that has been applied has been with results on other dynojets with other tuners. Have you even bothered to look into what they might be doing differently?
        I take it you didn't look at the tune yourself. Hoever, that was not my point. My point was even if they happened to do "magic" stuff with the tune and the results came to be inline with everybody else, then all other tuners did the same thing without all the "magic" stuff. So nothing out of the ordinary.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Sorry bud, this is what you stated and you are now backtracking. No harm in simply admitting you were wrong:
        I clarified it a few times in a few different posts for you, but for some reason you insist on ignoring it. I was talking about your replies to my first post in this thread.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        That is pretty clear isn't it? The funny part is that I never said anything? Yet I did on page 2 page 28 and you missed it and you missed the graph in the very first post? Not a big deal to simply say oops I made a mistake. I believe you kind of owe me an apology there for making that accusation in the first place when you are at fault. How can you try to blame me for your mistake?
        Wow... I didn't know you were that sensitive little buddy.... common Joe... you're the internet forum king man????? I can't believe I just read that you are asking for an apology. I hope it's a joke LOL Click here to enlarge And don't forget you still didn't mention anything for 2.5 hours after initial post which you directly replied to. I saved the entire thread if you want to go back and check. But it's really no big deal bro... even the great Joe can make an oops.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        I have no idea what air filters were used but I really doubt there is any kind of significant difference between aftermarket filters available. BMC and AFE filters are both going to be better than the stock filters which I would assume have a charcoal element in them which is really the main point of restriction.
        There's many filters for this platform on the market now: BMC, AFE, K&N, Foam, Green, custom, etc... However, there's more than just gains to using filters. The quality difference and "hassles" one may encounter due to sensitivity of modern electronics is big part of it. Some people reported that some of the BMC filters were over oiled and tripped CEL; others have encountered filters breaking apart and so on.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Why is a graph not good for detailing specs exactly when you can write text on the graph to show what changes were made between pulls? What more is necessary? A giant billboard of some sort with neon lights? It's all there.
        A graph traditionally shows gains between various runs, but was not mean to detail what a package contains, etc.... having too much writing on the graph may block parts of it. I'm guessing that's why the brand of the filters was not listed and possible other changes were not listed.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Mo, you missed the info. You also missed the subsequent post in addition on page 2. You operated under the assumption this was tune only. I realize in retrospect you may want to blame me for not spelling everything out for you as if that would alleviate your mistake but these are solely your own mistakes. Not a big deal, I'm glad it is all clear now and people can see there is nothing crazy about the gains.
        Again, I apologized a couple of times in the thread and pointed out that someone told me. I did NOT blame you for anything.... I merely made a suggestion. I need an apology from you for this accusation Click here to enlarge You on the other hand, don't want to admit you missed my first reply for almost 2.5 hours and went off about other stuff. It's no biggie bro... I don't know why it's hurting you that much. Relax.... Click here to enlarge
      1. JRCART's Avatar
        JRCART -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dodger63 Click here to enlarge
        To be honest I had many reservations but in the end, the way that eurotec took claim for all the records and what not made me decide I didn't want to do anything else for them, I was contomplating moving to another company, when Andy contacted me and said he had a new tuning partner, I decided to be loyal and "try" it out before moving on,

        Obviously whoever it is has maps got maps or knows some new paramiters in the programming or whatever they do in there, I'm more of a hard parts type of guy,

        In the end what could it really hurt if it worked it worked if not move on,,,,

        As im sure you no records will come and go, Im content with my old run of 10.78 so I chanced it!
        That's a fair enough answer I guess, I also understand the loyalty comment, just make sure that loyalty runs both ways. After what Hagi posted about Andy wanting to charge him is exactly what I'm talking about. I know you're not Hagi and that's an entirely different situation but that was a crap ass move on Andys behalf because Hagi was loyal and always singing the praises of MHP and look where it got him.
      1. Exeenom's Avatar
        Exeenom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        I'm going to make this crystal clear. It is a physical impossibility assuming equal conditions, launch, weight, fuel, etc., that additional horsepower will not show.
        Sorry, but I think your argument may not relevant or applicable to the initial proposal. Propain and I suggested that a 10 whp gain on the dyno may not show on the track (1/4 mile track). The reason it may not show was not because it wasn't there, but because there are a lot of other variables that could interfere.... it's just part of going from theory to reality. In fact, if you want to go that route, it would be almost impossible to fix conditions to make them 100% identical even between two consecutive runs. DA will change even if it's by 0.001%, temp is constantly changing, wind direction, speed, engine temp, oil temps, tire pressure, launch, and everything else. And even if somehow you were able to race in a wind-tunnel controlled environment, the ECU may still react differently because it's programmed to constantly adapt.
      1. Exeenom's Avatar
        Exeenom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Nothing? Really? All of a sudden additional horsepower that always adds something before stops because the car is hitting 150 and it weighs 3900 pounds? The resistance will increase at that point but horsepower will still make an appreciable difference.

        Use a drag racing calculator if you want to see this yourself. Here is an example: http://www.darkside.ca/tool.asp

        Simple equation as stated: HP = Weight * (MPH / 234) ^3

        3900 pounds with 150 trap estimated at 1027.3 horses. With 151 trap horses change to 1048. Wow, so only 20 crank horses to add a MPH at 150 and 3900 pounds? Sure looks to me like "only" 20 crank horses or for you drivetrain loss enthusiasts 16 at the wheels SAE on a dynojet despite your inflated example. How about that? A lowly 16 whp will add a MPH when already at over 1000 horses? Insanity.
        Joe.... your equations above do NOT take into account wind speed, air resistance, friction of tires, or a hundred other variables that come into play. It was meant for approximation purposes only. I think it is a bit reckless, knowing that you are not a physicist, to throw theoretical equations up and use it to draw 100% firm conclusions Click here to enlarge Didn't really expect that from you.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        The only reason you will have a hard time discerning the difference of 10 hp on a top fuel dragster is because that 10 HP is such a low %. It will still make a difference though even being minute.
        I'm sorry but that is an incorrect statement. I stated and clarified a few times (and I believe propain agreed) that the shape of the car, weight of the car, air resistance at high speeds, and modern electronics may all play a factor in having the 10 hp not show up on the track. So it is definitely not "the only reason" but one of the reasons.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        These cars are not top fuel dragsters though and we aren't dealing with thousands of horsepower. What validity is there to an example you choose to minimize the difference which must be there? Just because it will be harder to tell the difference due to 10 hp being such a lower % gain on a top fuel dragster does not mean the 10 hp has no affect simply that it is more difficult to discern. Really? This is what you have? The fact is the laws of physics apply and you can't argue with them.
        Again, law of physics takes into account everything in real world conditions. We were not talking about any certain car.... we said it is definitely possible to have gains on the dyno not show up on the track. We both know that going from 100 mph to 101 mph may take 10 hp on the track but going from 149 mph to 150 mph may take a lot more. The speed makes a big difference.... it's the law of physics.
      1. propain's Avatar
        propain -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        Joe.... your equations above do NOT take into account wind speed, air resistance, friction of tires, or a hundred other variables that come into play. It was meant for approximation purposes only. I think it is a bit reckless, knowing that you are not a physicist, to throw theoretical equations up and use it to draw 100% firm conclusions Click here to enlarge Didn't really expect that from you.



        I'm sorry but that is an incorrect statement. I stated and clarified a few times (and I believe propain agreed) that the shape of the car, weight of the car, air resistance at high speeds, and modern electronics may all play a factor in having the 10 hp not show up on the track. So it is definitely not "the only reason" but one of the reasons.



        Again, law of physics takes into account everything in real world conditions. We were not talking about any certain car.... we said it is definitely possible to have gains on the dyno not show up on the track. We both know that going from 100 mph to 101 mph may take 10 hp on the track but going from 149 mph to 150 mph may take a lot more. The speed makes a big difference.... it's the law of physics.
        Its like pissing into the wind Moe. LOL
      1. Exeenom's Avatar
        Exeenom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        If I brushed past anything I did not like I would not even bother responding to you.

        It doesn't matter how many times you choose an example to minimize horsepower gains or lower the % or change it in any way. It does not matter as it is simply the way the world functions. It is simply the laws of physics. If you need sophisticated equipment to see the difference of 10 horsepower on a car with thousands of horsepower so be it but whether it be 1 horse or a billion nothing changes there will be an affect. It does not matter how small, this is a universal constant.
        Joe.... his argument was not that you can't "detect" the hp.... his argument was that in some situations, you may not be able to detect results on the 1/4 mile track. It is very clear physics.... on the track, there are many conditions affecting increase in power. If we take them out of the equation, then we're not talking reality anymore, we're talking theory, which is still okay because even then, his statement is not wrong.
      1. Exeenom's Avatar
        Exeenom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by propain Click here to enlarge
        Its like pissing into the wind Moe. LOL
        I think this thread has turned into comedy.... Click here to enlarge I saved the entire thread and forwarded to a friend of mine and he hasn't stopped LOLing me every 5 minutes Click here to enlarge

        I still believe it's cool though that all parties have agreed to disagree yet still find the humor in all this Click here to enlarge
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JonsC63AMG Click here to enlarge
        Ahh.. Sticky does it again! At least you agree with me. BTW Sticky I just bought a vbox and found a 1.5% decline which is good for low 9sec 60-130. Actually my friend found the decline with the vbox he just bought. He ran on the same road where I got my 9.74. He got 10.6. Then ran the 1.5% decline and got a 9.8sec. Did this within 1hr. So that decline is .8sec faster! I cant wait for my runs there!
        Decline has a huge impact. It seems almost like now everyone is trying to find that perfect 3% decline spot.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        I take it you didn't look at the tune yourself. Hoever, that was not my point. My point was even if they happened to do "magic" stuff with the tune and the results came to be inline with everybody else, then all other tuners did the same thing without all the "magic" stuff. So nothing out of the ordinary.
        I discussed the tune with them. Did you? If you did "magic" would likely not be mentioned.

        Has anyone else demonstrated larger gains on 91 octane with a filter and tune?

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        I clarified it a few times in a few different posts for you, but for some reason you insist on ignoring it. I was talking about your replies to my first post in this thread.
        I'm not missing it anything you made the same mistake twice and took what, 4-5 pages to catch it? This is not my responsibility.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        Wow... I didn't know you were that sensitive little buddy.... common Joe... you're the internet forum king man????? I can't believe I just read that you are asking for an apology. I hope it's a joke LOL And don't forget you still didn't mention anything for 2.5 hours after initial post which you directly replied to. I saved the entire thread if you want to go back and check. But it's really no big deal bro... even the great Joe can make an oops.
        Mo, I'm not sensitive I just don't like that you accused me of not mentioning something I did that you missed. That is your fault not mine and you should point fingers at yourself.

        You don't need to apologize I just want to make it clear the error was yours. There is no need to deflect, you were incorrect...

        I would admit if I made a mistake but record shows I did not?

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        There's many filters for this platform on the market now: BMC, AFE, K&N, Foam, Green, custom, etc... However, there's more than just gains to using filters. The quality difference and "hassles" one may encounter due to sensitivity of modern electronics is big part of it. Some people reported that some of the BMC filters were over oiled and tripped CEL; others have encountered filters breaking apart and so on.
        I do not know what errors people encountered with BMC filters but my point is that I believe the charcoal element in the filter is eliminated with essentially any of these filters, correct?

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        A graph traditionally shows gains between various runs, but was not mean to detail what a package contains, etc.... having too much writing on the graph may block parts of it. I'm guessing that's why the brand of the filters was not listed and possible other changes were not listed.
        Usually people will explain what each run is and that is done on the graph. If you look at it each run is detailed or else what is person supposed to do, guess? There isn't too much writing, all the necessary information is there. You know filters were used if you want to know the brand or what station the 91 octane gas came from I suppose you can ask them.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        Again, I apologized a couple of times in the thread and pointed out that someone told me. I did NOT blame you for anything.... I merely made a suggestion. I need an apology from you for this accusation You on the other hand, don't want to admit you missed my first reply for almost 2.5 hours and went off about other stuff. It's no biggie bro... I don't know why it's hurting you that much. Relax....
        No worries at all! I understand your suggestion and provided my perspective on it. I have nothing to admit to because I did not make a mistake, you did. I'm not even wound up and not sure why would you think so? This is how I always am.
      1. propain's Avatar
        propain -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        I think this thread has turned into comedy.... Click here to enlarge I saved the entire thread and forwarded to a friend of mine and he hasn't stopped LOLing me every 5 minutes Click here to enlarge

        I still believe it's cool though that all parties have agreed to disagree yet still find the humor in all this Click here to enlarge
        Sadly Joe hasn't even agreed to disagree. That would be giving in to much for him! hahaha...

        Ive shared it with a few of my friends on the domestic side just to see if I was off my rocker as well. Good laughs all around. Click here to enlarge
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by propain Click here to enlarge
        Its like pissing into the wind Moe. LOL
        Hey man, if you need a friend to help I completely understand.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Exeenom Click here to enlarge
        Joe.... his argument was not that you can't "detect" the hp.... his argument was that in some situations, you may not be able to detect results on the 1/4 mile track. It is very clear physics.... on the track, there are many conditions affecting increase in power. If we take them out of the equation, then we're not talking reality anymore, we're talking theory, which is still okay because even then, his statement is not wrong.
        His argument stated that sometimes horses won't show up. I stated that in equal circumstances horses have to. If it's enough of a gain, even in poorer conditions you will still see a trap gain.

        There aren't conditions affecting an increase in power as the increase will be there. Total power output can be affected by weather but traction and other factors like the suspension will affect how the power is put down not how much horsepower you have. This why there is a difference between ET and trap.

        His statement is wrong because on paper a horsepower increase will always show. There is no arguing it, you change one side of the equation (horsepower) you change the result.