I have also just ordered the twin turbo kit from Hughes for my 95 coupe. I'm looking forward to sharing information / tips & results.

Ortolan - thanks for taking the time to type out the articles; I recieved the same sketchy fax from John Pearson & lost patience after the first couple of paragraphs... Richard Meaden is now road test editor for EVO magazine & I always respect his opinion, so it was reassuring to read his positive comments.

I'm also thrilled that I now don't need to do the 500e engine swap! I currently have my car @ Motorwerks, where they are performing a full 500e body conversion (front fenders / lower cladding / custom rear arches to fit 18x10 Carlsson rear wheels) - I was reluctant to have this done without the power to back up the aesthetics & the engine swap is very expensive.

Michigan has no emissions testing, so I'll be running the system without the cats - it will be interesting to see what differences in power we see. I'll be happy with 350bhp - which I will use as my target.

Good luck to us all....

My car arrived yesterday at Willow Automotive in Chicago.
Hopefully by Tuesday the base line dyno will be done on my M103.
I need a cat in Delaware for emissions, so will be using a 2" x 2 in/out high flow cat.
Oddly enough my stock system does not have pre cats or a front silencer.
Down pipes go straight to the cat which is located where the middle silencer is.
Probably install the large bore exhaust from TurboTechnics with just down pipes, cat and rear silencer.
Looking for 280-290 RWHP when done or about 325-335HP at the flywheel.
The torque gain is what will make the M103 / M104 fairly rapid as it comes on low in the RPM range !

Went to the workshop today and there still hasn't been any progress made on the installation. The guy that was working on it had an accident involving a fan belt last week and has been in hospital. Either I wait until he's back at work or I tow the car to the place that will tune by Autronic ECU and have them install the kit too.
This 2nd place told me they can't quote for the tune until they know more about the engine. Some questions they asked regarding my 3.2L HFM M104 were:
Does it use a 60 (tooth/two??) wheel for crank angle?
Does it use coil per cylinder ignition?

Anyone know the answer to these questions?
They also told me I'd be looking at maximum 250rwhp at 7psi which is what the kit is setup for. I tried to explain that this sounded too low given the kit is supposed to make 345bhp with only a piggyback fuel enricher. I pointed out that the engine in stock form probably makes close to 200rwhp but they thought this was highly unlikely.
Ed, I'm very interested in seeing what your 12v makes on the dyno once the kit is on.
If the 3.0L 12v makes 280rwhp then 300rwhp from a 3.2L 24v should be no problem whatsoever.

Almost forgot, my mechanic also told me that he services two 300TE W124 station wagons (estates) which were imported from the UK and have LSD. He's going to ask the owners if they want to do a swap for my differential and some cash. Does anyone know anything about these LSD units?

__________________
1989 300CE "Project HWA124"
(400rwhp Turbo Technics AMG C36 engine)

B.J.

My car is still sitting after a week, waiting for a slot to open up so the work can begin. I'm not in a hurry, want to get it correct, but yet anxious for the base line dyno.

Not sure of your first question, the ignition uses one coil for two spark plugs. Coil mounted direct to one plug, then a short high tension leand to the second plug.

I would think that the install would provide at least in the range of 100HP - 150HP increase (depending on starting condition of the engine), as these are the figures that the Mosselman installs achveived !

I'll post the base line as soon as received, then the final dyno after the tune. My installer has done Mosselman's in the past and has indicated 280HP + dyno on the M103 with mid five second 0-60 times.
Will know hopefully in the next two weeks !!!

Doesn't the LSD in the 300TE have a 2.87:1 ratio?
Not sure of your M104, but the 88 M103 300CE has a 3.07:1 ratio which is better for acceleration. If I were to change I'd look at the 3.27:1 gearing in the 260E's

Remember that there is a significant difference between HP & RWHP - Basic horsepower is what is generated & measured at the engine's flywheel. Rear wheel horse power is obviously what is available at the drive wheels after being transmitted through the drivetrain - there is typically substantial difference between the two totals (loss at the rea wheels) due to many factors (intertia / mass etc).

If our twin turbo conversions are billed to net 350hp, then I would be very suprised if there were more than 260 at the rear wheels.

The torque gain produced is perhaps the more important element.

No matter what, I'm sure we'll all be pleased with the difference...

I would expect a 21% drive train loss for our 722.3xx autos, based on this thread:
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/archive/index.php/t-23527.html
Ed's base line dyno should give some more hard data.

__________________
1989 300CE "Project HWA124"
(400rwhp Turbo Technics AMG C36 engine)

I'm calculating losses at around 15%, based on my experience with new C6 Corvettes with an A6 transmission. Typically dyno around 348HP with a published 400HP.

You must also consider that any dyno pull will have a margin of error of over 1%.
Different makes of dyno's produce somewhat different results.
Consecutive runs can give you variation due to heat soak.

Imperative for me to do the base line as it will give a relationship between published flywheel numbers and actual rear wheel numbers for my engine.

The other power improvement is using the supplied two pipe 2" diameter exhaust with high flow silencers.

I believe 100-150HP is possible depending on the condition of the original engine and how well the dyno tune to obtain optimum air/fuel ratio under boost is performed.

B.J.
Why not do your install with the provided TurboTechnics electronics first..get it running, see how much power you are making and then consider a different type of engine/fuel management ?

Ed A.