Akry,
Your welcome. I'm always glad to help out a fellow enthusiast. MB has something of a rep for "underestimating" or "under-rating" their cars from that generation. As tight as things are today with BMW and Lexus, I'd guess their numbers are more accurate. The 400E was rated at 7.1 to 0-60 but I could consistently pull 6.5's. (6.2-6.4 on a cold night) I have not timed the 500E but I can tell it is MUCH faster. The 500E was rated at 6.3 but I know that was about a second high. There is a particular stoplight and later a bridge near my house. If I floor it when it goes green I could be at 60-65mph by the time I reached the bridge in the 400E. In the 500E, I am at 90+mph.

There is the old addage of 1% power for every 10 degrees change in ambient temp. The 94+ cars seem to hold pretty close to that. I've seen some of the pre-93 cars just "fall on their ass" when the temp got up over 100F and conversely "run like a raped ape" when it was just above freezing. In the normal swing of temp for a day you should only gain/lose 3-5%. That translates into about a 14-15HP change for the V8's. As big a difference in performance as I've seen it has to be closer to twice that.

It could be said the fuel/air/ignition maps are a bit too conservative when it comes to temp changes. I've heard that a smart tech can trick a temp sensor into thinking it is cooler than it is. The ECU would then *theoretically* turn the power up. That is the only trick to combat the high-temp power loss I can think of offhand. If any of you have found something really trick, do tell!

Lee