W126 overload suspension. got 1000 LBS of junk in my trunk
W126 overload suspension. got 1000 LBS of junk in my trunk
So far one of my teams main problem is that where planing to carrie well over 100 gallons of WVO, test show that we can cruse at 80 with out a problem but it looks avoids and dangerous. did mercedes make a over load spring for the w126? or should i look im to making a helper coilover for the rear? the pros of the coilover is that i could get the spring rate/shock. the con is they may fail leaving me with out a suspension!
![[Image: img1231808006712-1.jpg]](http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/cannonballsdl/img1231808006712-1.jpg)
![[Image: img1231724701604-1-1.jpg]](http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/cannonballsdl/img1231724701604-1-1.jpg)
![[Image: img1231603208122.jpg]](http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq320/cannonballsdl/img1231603208122.jpg)
cannonballSDL
09-14-2008, 10:08 AM #1hey Mercedes deisel guys! over the next few months will be asking some random and dum questions! some time next year there will be the first cannonball in 30 years, i plan to bring a slightly modified SDL. anything that can raise my MPG well giving me some extra power(225 whp would be great) but ill get to that in the engine forum.
So far one of my teams main problem is that where planing to carrie well over 100 gallons of WVO, test show that we can cruse at 80 with out a problem but it looks avoids and dangerous. did mercedes make a over load spring for the w126? or should i look im to making a helper coilover for the rear? the pros of the coilover is that i could get the spring rate/shock. the con is they may fail leaving me with out a suspension!
You won't do very well on track day with that much weight and you'll need that 225hp to maintain speeds above 85! You'd be far better off plotting BioDiesel sources along the route or having a fuel hauler drive ahead while you sleep.
ForcedInduction
09-14-2008, 10:21 AM
#2
The suspension can't handle more than a few hundred pounds without hitting the bump stops when it bounces. I'd look into adapting the SLS suspension from a 560SEL. The 300TD can carry a hair under 1000lbs payload in the rear with it's SLS.
You won't do very well on track day with that much weight and you'll need that 225hp to maintain speeds above 85! You'd be far better off plotting BioDiesel sources along the route or having a fuel hauler drive ahead while you sleep.
ForcedInduction You won't do very well on track day with that much weight and you'll need that 225hp to maintain speeds above 85! You'd be far better off plotting BioDiesel sources along the route or having a fuel hauler drive ahead while you sleep.
im not planing to be on a track or make many turns, not sure what SLS is but with stock springs and light duty truck shock i stayed off the bump stops...
making fuel stops would kill us. the drive plan calls for 33 hours of driving...non stops dirving , i should be able to cut a few hundred LBS from the benz(fron seats alone must weight 80 lbs each plus shaving the hood trunk and doors). and that should help us.
but i think a coilover with a 1100 pound spring may work...or fail
cannonballSDL
09-14-2008, 10:42 AM #3ForcedInduction You won't do very well on track day with that much weight and you'll need that 225hp to maintain speeds above 85! You'd be far better off plotting BioDiesel sources along the route or having a fuel hauler drive ahead while you sleep.
im not planing to be on a track or make many turns, not sure what SLS is but with stock springs and light duty truck shock i stayed off the bump stops...
making fuel stops would kill us. the drive plan calls for 33 hours of driving...non stops dirving , i should be able to cut a few hundred LBS from the benz(fron seats alone must weight 80 lbs each plus shaving the hood trunk and doors). and that should help us.
but i think a coilover with a 1100 pound spring may work...or fail
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropneumatic">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropneumatic</a><!-- m -->
ForcedInduction
09-14-2008, 10:50 AM
#4
Self Leveling Suspension.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropneumatic">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropneumatic</a><!-- m -->
Greaseking
09-17-2008, 12:14 AM #8Dude, baffle the holy hell out of the tank and build it as low profile as possible. Also there are some "additives" you can use to help the burn characteristics of the VO.
tantank79 You're seriously going to Cannonball an SDL?!yes me and 30 other cars are in the line up. i plan to build a fuel tank in the car(making the tank a part of the car w/o flex). if i can build a 100+ gal tank plus the stock tank i think i can make mercedes the first diesel to win the cannonball!(and first WVO entry!)
... please trust me... i have Alex Roys ok on my plans!
cannonballSDL
09-17-2008, 07:45 PM #9tantank79 You're seriously going to Cannonball an SDL?!yes me and 30 other cars are in the line up. i plan to build a fuel tank in the car(making the tank a part of the car w/o flex). if i can build a 100+ gal tank plus the stock tank i think i can make mercedes the first diesel to win the cannonball!(and first WVO entry!)
... please trust me... i have Alex Roys ok on my plans!
but back on track.
after alot of thought and many inspiring phone calls, we will be using airbags!
No not cuz they look sweet, but becouse we will be losing alot of weight in a short time(under 35 hours)
what we are plan on is being able to ajust the car well moving AKA gear venders over under drive will let us change our gear ratios well moving and air bags will keep us at a factory hight and wont make us bounce...
please we are hoping on your input! maybe a sticky?
cannonballSDL
11-01-2008, 10:05 PM #11well i think i got u beat... im having a Fglass hood trunk and door skins... i think this will shed some srs lbs...
but back on track.
after alot of thought and many inspiring phone calls, we will be using airbags!
No not cuz they look sweet, but becouse we will be losing alot of weight in a short time(under 35 hours)
what we are plan on is being able to ajust the car well moving AKA gear venders over under drive will let us change our gear ratios well moving and air bags will keep us at a factory hight and wont make us bounce...
please we are hoping on your input! maybe a sticky?
winmutt When's the race?
its not a race, its a rally.
ill work on photos, i have some sweet picsof the rebuild of the driver side sway bar mount
not fun but srsly with some (alot) of help i think we can make mercedes the winning car of this cannonball...
cannonballSDL
11-03-2008, 07:58 PM #13winmutt When's the race?
its not a race, its a rally.
ill work on photos, i have some sweet picsof the rebuild of the driver side sway bar mount
not fun but srsly with some (alot) of help i think we can make mercedes the winning car of this cannonball...
You are gonna need some power if you want to keep up
If you are gonna commit, you might as well go all out with big injectors, DVs, propane (will also help your fuel consumption), HY35... Don't expect it all to bolt-on, which if you are seriously considering airbags and gearvendors, you probably aren't worried about such things 
Also, consider upgrading to 8x16 wheels with something like 225s on them, both for the handling, longer legs, looks, and for the extra weight-carrying capacity. The wimpy tires on the 14" bundts will be trashed in no time by the weight and speed (broken bands, rattle your teeth out).
GREASY_BEAST
11-04-2008, 08:26 PM #14wow.. gearvendors... :mrgreen:
You are gonna need some power if you want to keep up If you are gonna commit, you might as well go all out with big injectors, DVs, propane (will also help your fuel consumption), HY35... Don't expect it all to bolt-on, which if you are seriously considering airbags and gearvendors, you probably aren't worried about such things
Also, consider upgrading to 8x16 wheels with something like 225s on them, both for the handling, longer legs, looks, and for the extra weight-carrying capacity. The wimpy tires on the 14" bundts will be trashed in no time by the weight and speed (broken bands, rattle your teeth out).
as far as the turbo go's, im planing to make a block style main in the next week or so, setting the turbo up front. right behind the a/w ic
Injectors... all the info i see points me to TDI or dieselgaints. is this the injectors that would be a good chose? the dodge community are heavily pushing the idea of having my stocks worked over. but i have little test and tune time and i rather use a proven part.
please help me with what i can do to improve my IP and or DV set up
as far as wheels and tires go. either a AMG rep or a custom made steely(narcar style) the steel is lighter and looks less flashy. for tires i will use Kumo's Ecsta ASX. is performs great in the wet and dry.
looks like gearvendors dosent like my little euro, lol so it looks like im going to see about a custom rear end gears.
cannonballSDL
11-10-2008, 09:00 PM #15well this event isent about power, any car with 100hp(even a 240d! :mrgreen: ) can go 80mph and thats all i really need. the goal is 80-85mph avg at 27 mpg... the problem is we will be pulling alot of weight. about the same as a small boat and trailer in the back seat!
as far as the turbo go's, im planing to make a block style main in the next week or so, setting the turbo up front. right behind the a/w ic
Injectors... all the info i see points me to TDI or dieselgaints. is this the injectors that would be a good chose? the dodge community are heavily pushing the idea of having my stocks worked over. but i have little test and tune time and i rather use a proven part.
please help me with what i can do to improve my IP and or DV set up
as far as wheels and tires go. either a AMG rep or a custom made steely(narcar style) the steel is lighter and looks less flashy. for tires i will use Kumo's Ecsta ASX. is performs great in the wet and dry.
looks like gearvendors dosent like my little euro, lol so it looks like im going to see about a custom rear end gears.
Dieselgiant injectors will do nothing for you. They are the same as stock.
GREASY_BEAST
11-11-2008, 01:27 AM #16Be careful on the rear end. If you go up, it will not have the oomph to beat the air resistance. As far as max speed goes, if you are keeping the power stock, stick with the stock rear end and just wind the revs out all day long. 90mph is like 3800 or something.. no biggy. Just make you do enough test runs to determine when you have to add oil Dieselgiant injectors will do nothing for you. They are the same as stock.
GREASY_BEAST if you are keeping the power stock,
Just make you do enough test runs to determine when you have to add oil
Dieselgiant injectors will do nothing for you. They are the same as stock.
well not stock! just trying to keep the power to MPG in ratio
well i built a little rig that will add oil if we do have a failur...
what kinda injectors would be worth looking into? canada TDI?
cannonballSDL
11-11-2008, 06:01 PM #17GREASY_BEAST if you are keeping the power stock,
Just make you do enough test runs to determine when you have to add oil
Dieselgiant injectors will do nothing for you. They are the same as stock.
well not stock! just trying to keep the power to MPG in ratio
well i built a little rig that will add oil if we do have a failur...
what kinda injectors would be worth looking into? canada TDI?
Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
get rid of the EGR, muffler, shorten your exhaust to be a side-exiting straight pipe
If you're really looking for HP a VNT and air-air intercooler would be worth the extra cash/weight. Just make sure you use a real(not K&N style) air filter replacement if you go the VNT route.
2stage injectors from a VW will get you some HP(Forced Induction has a writeup on them)
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
Simpler=Better
11-25-2008, 12:55 PM #18Remove power steering, ac, dash, interior, trunk, rear windows(replace with canvas/plexiglass), fog lights, use a smaller battery(Assuming you won't be shutting the car down after the initial start). If you have a sunroof remove the motor&stuff, and weld/glue it shut. Also dump the passenger side mirror if you can legally.
Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
get rid of the EGR, muffler, shorten your exhaust to be a side-exiting straight pipe
If you're really looking for HP a VNT and air-air intercooler would be worth the extra cash/weight. Just make sure you use a real(not K&N style) air filter replacement if you go the VNT route.
2stage injectors from a VW will get you some HP(Forced Induction has a writeup on them)
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
ForcedInduction
11-25-2008, 09:00 PM
#20
A side exit isn't really practical on these cars. The unibody frame rails stick down the whole length of the car. There isn't a place for the exhaust to get out without eating into ground clearance.
Simpler=Better Remove power steering, ac, dash, interior, trunk, rear windows(replace with canvas/plexiglass), fog lights, use a smaller battery(Assuming you won't be shutting the car down after the initial start). If you have a sunroof remove the motor&stuff, and weld/glue it shut. Also dump the passenger side mirror if you can legally.
Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
get rid of the EGR, muffler, shorten your exhaust to be a side-exiting straight pipe
If you're really looking for HP a VNT and air-air intercooler would be worth the extra cash/weight. Just make sure you use a real(not K&N style) air filter replacement if you go the VNT route.
2stage injectors from a VW will get you some HP(Forced Induction has a writeup on them)
Ahh thats my style! but remember i will be driving this car for no less then 31 hours. power steering has to stay
but i have removed the ac and thought of the rear windows. the rear windows are light and there not would swapping out, but the window motors are heavy and they are coming out. i dont like stupid VNT'S(flame suit on) so i have a HX35 that going in(will it fit?) As for the exhaust... side exiting is the way im going. im thinking a 4" down pipe to a 3" "boom tube" style exhaust... fun
Stillen custom made me a funnie looking intercooler. but it meets my needs
Air to Air FTW!but thanks for your input. i think im looking at stg 2 of the build... electronic
mmm project r2d2
cannonballSDL
12-07-2008, 01:11 AM #21Simpler=Better Remove power steering, ac, dash, interior, trunk, rear windows(replace with canvas/plexiglass), fog lights, use a smaller battery(Assuming you won't be shutting the car down after the initial start). If you have a sunroof remove the motor&stuff, and weld/glue it shut. Also dump the passenger side mirror if you can legally.
Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
get rid of the EGR, muffler, shorten your exhaust to be a side-exiting straight pipe
If you're really looking for HP a VNT and air-air intercooler would be worth the extra cash/weight. Just make sure you use a real(not K&N style) air filter replacement if you go the VNT route.
2stage injectors from a VW will get you some HP(Forced Induction has a writeup on them)
Ahh thats my style! but remember i will be driving this car for no less then 31 hours. power steering has to stay
but i have removed the ac and thought of the rear windows. the rear windows are light and there not would swapping out, but the window motors are heavy and they are coming out. i dont like stupid VNT'S(flame suit on) so i have a HX35 that going in(will it fit?) As for the exhaust... side exiting is the way im going. im thinking a 4" down pipe to a 3" "boom tube" style exhaust... fun
Stillen custom made me a funnie looking intercooler. but it meets my needs
Air to Air FTW!but thanks for your input. i think im looking at stg 2 of the build... electronic
mmm project r2d2
cannonballSDL i have a HX35 that going in(will it fit
If you like waiting for the turbo to respond, yes.
ForcedInduction
12-07-2008, 03:42 AM
#22
cannonballSDL i have a HX35 that going in(will it fit
If you like waiting for the turbo to respond, yes.
would a hx35 fit on the stock mani? i have a W140 turbo diesel mani would that fit my in my SDL? it looks like it could make some space
cannonballSDL
12-07-2008, 01:08 PM #23this is going to sound odd... but i want lag. i want a turbo that i can depend on to give me a top end well stawing low on crusing speeds would a hx35 fit on the stock mani? i have a W140 turbo diesel mani would that fit my in my SDL? it looks like it could make some space
cannonballSDL i want a turbo that i can depend on to give me a top end well stawing low on crusing speeds
Why can't a VNT do that?
ForcedInduction
12-07-2008, 03:00 PM
#24
cannonballSDL i want a turbo that i can depend on to give me a top end well stawing low on crusing speeds
Why can't a VNT do that?
cannonballSDL
12-08-2008, 07:53 PM #25VNT's are somthing i dont know. i need to use parts i have tested and i can trust. its the same reson i stay away from suprchargers and FWD... there just not my style(flame suit)
![[Image: fwd_sucks.jpg]](http://shared.martis.info/fun/fwd_sucks.jpg)
cannonballSDL
12-08-2008, 08:22 PM #27haha very true. i thining to do the turbo rebuild and instal id with in the next 2 weeks! you guys made it sound like before i have to play with the IP before and up in the boost... what should i be looking ot for? more fuel or timmeing?
cannonballSDL you guys made it sound like before i have to play with the IP before and up in the boost... what should i be looking ot for? more fuel or timmeing?
You should advance the timing about 2* from stock. That will give you better torque and cooler exhaust. From Dave M's adventures, it sounds like 170hp at the crank is about all the stock OM603 pump is good for. That means an HX35 will be way overkill unless you upgrade the pump.
Installing a bigger T3 wheel (60 trim or T04) might be the better option. Lag won't be much worse than stock and it will still flow all the air you engine could need.
ForcedInduction
12-08-2008, 10:03 PM
#28
cannonballSDL you guys made it sound like before i have to play with the IP before and up in the boost... what should i be looking ot for? more fuel or timmeing?
You should advance the timing about 2* from stock. That will give you better torque and cooler exhaust. From Dave M's adventures, it sounds like 170hp at the crank is about all the stock OM603 pump is good for. That means an HX35 will be way overkill unless you upgrade the pump.
Installing a bigger T3 wheel (60 trim or T04) might be the better option. Lag won't be much worse than stock and it will still flow all the air you engine could need.
maybe its time for a sticky... i think i will have alot of info flowing into a thread...
cannonballSDL
12-09-2008, 09:20 PM #29170 ohhh noes! well looks like i will have to do something... time for some more searching... ill post later with more questions!
maybe its time for a sticky... i think i will have alot of info flowing into a thread...
![[Image: mon-ma700mm_w.jpg]](http://static.summitracing.com/global/images/prod/large/mon-ma700mm_w.jpg)
BING! looking like air is the east and cheap way to go! a steal for a pair under 70 dollars.
cannonballSDL
01-25-2009, 04:10 AM #30
BING! looking like air is the east and cheap way to go! a steal for a pair under 70 dollars.
(01-25-2009, 04:10 AM)cannonballSDL
BING! looking like air is the east and cheap way to go! a steal for a pair under 70 dollars.
GREASY_BEAST
01-25-2009, 09:23 AM #31Wow! Maybe the SLS has met it's match.
(01-25-2009, 04:10 AM)cannonballSDL
BING! looking like air is the east and cheap way to go! a steal for a pair under 70 dollars.
1987 300D Sturmmachine
1991 300D Nearly Perfect
1985 300D Weekend/Camping/Dog car
1974 L508D Motoroam Monarch "NightMare"
OBK #42
INTERESTING. I will be very interested to hear how this goes. My old wagon, Bitsy, needs accumulators and an engine. I'd like to stick a turbo in but doing that and keeping SLS is tricky at best.
1987 300D Sturmmachine
1991 300D Nearly Perfect
1985 300D Weekend/Camping/Dog car
1974 L508D Motoroam Monarch "NightMare"
OBK #42
cannonballSDL
01-30-2009, 09:55 PM #33no problem. im just tryin to find out the full hight of these bad larrys are before i buy them... ill have info ASAP
the reason I ask is given the same requirements, I would probably use a full size diesel truck, either a 7.3 ford powerstroke, or a non VP44 cummins. Both can be easily faster than an SDL, can carry the weight you require, will burn VO just fine, and can be modified way way up for more power and handling.
Im just curios what led you to make the SDL your choice, not that I dont think its a great idea and a fun project.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
this may be an odd question at a late date, but why did you choose an SDL for this?
the reason I ask is given the same requirements, I would probably use a full size diesel truck, either a 7.3 ford powerstroke, or a non VP44 cummins. Both can be easily faster than an SDL, can carry the weight you require, will burn VO just fine, and can be modified way way up for more power and handling.
Im just curios what led you to make the SDL your choice, not that I dont think its a great idea and a fun project.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
How about a cummins diesel in an old Chevy caprice wagon? that would be a hell of a highway cruiser.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
Yeah, but is ride comfort that much better? Newer trucks ride pretty well. Especially with the kind of weight we are talking about here, more weight would only improve a trucks ride, and take away from the SDL.
How about a cummins diesel in an old Chevy caprice wagon? that would be a hell of a highway cruiser.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
(04-23-2009, 05:35 PM)dropnosky How about a cummins diesel in an old Chevy caprice wagon? that would be a hell of a highway cruiser.
That would be awesome. 4BT with injectors, a governor spring, and a massive overdrive to keep it in the torque peak at 100mph+
GREASY_BEAST
05-03-2009, 01:39 PM #38(04-23-2009, 05:35 PM)dropnosky How about a cummins diesel in an old Chevy caprice wagon? that would be a hell of a highway cruiser.
That would be awesome. 4BT with injectors, a governor spring, and a massive overdrive to keep it in the torque peak at 100mph+
What are the cannonball rules about trailers?
This is an early pic of my "Distance VO trailer". I took a motorcycle trailer with a 1/2 lb bumper weight, built a double case to hold tools and parts, and dropped it over a 50 gallon boat tank. The trailer capacity is 800 lbs, and the tank and tools loaded come under about 650-700 lbs. This tank, combined with my twin trunk tanks gives the car more than a 2000 mile range, closer to 2800 miles with all 4 tanks.
This is an early pic, I ended up balancing it properly, adding a spare tire holder for the car, and painting it black. Loaded with fuel, it tows great and you hardly feel it except for a tug at the bumper.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
Heres another option possibly. I have dealt with the same consideration for VO, although my reasons are more because I hate searching for it, than for racing.
What are the cannonball rules about trailers?
This is an early pic of my "Distance VO trailer". I took a motorcycle trailer with a 1/2 lb bumper weight, built a double case to hold tools and parts, and dropped it over a 50 gallon boat tank. The trailer capacity is 800 lbs, and the tank and tools loaded come under about 650-700 lbs. This tank, combined with my twin trunk tanks gives the car more than a 2000 mile range, closer to 2800 miles with all 4 tanks.
This is an early pic, I ended up balancing it properly, adding a spare tire holder for the car, and painting it black. Loaded with fuel, it tows great and you hardly feel it except for a tug at the bumper.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
'78 300D, OM617.912: 4spd manual, TB03 at 10PSI, 26*BTDC, DV's turned, HVAC, emissions system removed, e-fan, short ram, 3" downpipe to straight exhaust, W126 Bendix brakes, MR2 Spyder seats. 2890lbs
Good idea, but my concern would be the unlicensed transportation hazardous waste.
'78 300D, OM617.912: 4spd manual, TB03 at 10PSI, 26*BTDC, DV's turned, HVAC, emissions system removed, e-fan, short ram, 3" downpipe to straight exhaust, W126 Bendix brakes, MR2 Spyder seats. 2890lbs
Basically, it was a question of meeting federal DOT requirements set forth in-
CLASS 9 MISCELLANEOUS DANGEROUS GOODS *
*Category includes Environmentally Hazardous Substances, Elevated Temperature Material, Hazardous Wastes, and Marine Pollutants.
COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS Materials whose FP is greater than 141 F but less than 200EF are still regulated domestically as combustible liquids. Materials transported domestically only, whose FPs are 100 F up to 141 F may be reclassified as combustible in accordance with 173.120(b).
A COMBUSTIBLE LIQUID which does not sustain combustion is not subject to the requirements of the HMRs. See Appendix H, Part 173 for the required tests.
I had a huge time getting anyone to care, and eventually, given that the tank does meet federal DOT safety standards, and the trailer was inspected when registered, and the total amount of fuel/inert Plant oil, MODOT effectively told me to piss off and stop bothering them. I kept getting answers like, well, is it inspected? yes? whats the problem then? What kind of tank is it? how is it strapped? why are you calling?
Of course, now that I moved to CNY, I fully expect to be shot on sight if I take the trailer out on the road, so again another round of DOT research and phone calls.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
Actually, I looked into that, even going so far as repeated calls to MODOT, (missouri DOT) at the time.
Basically, it was a question of meeting federal DOT requirements set forth in-
CLASS 9 MISCELLANEOUS DANGEROUS GOODS *
*Category includes Environmentally Hazardous Substances, Elevated Temperature Material, Hazardous Wastes, and Marine Pollutants.
COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS Materials whose FP is greater than 141 F but less than 200EF are still regulated domestically as combustible liquids. Materials transported domestically only, whose FPs are 100 F up to 141 F may be reclassified as combustible in accordance with 173.120(b).
A COMBUSTIBLE LIQUID which does not sustain combustion is not subject to the requirements of the HMRs. See Appendix H, Part 173 for the required tests.
I had a huge time getting anyone to care, and eventually, given that the tank does meet federal DOT safety standards, and the trailer was inspected when registered, and the total amount of fuel/inert Plant oil, MODOT effectively told me to piss off and stop bothering them. I kept getting answers like, well, is it inspected? yes? whats the problem then? What kind of tank is it? how is it strapped? why are you calling?
Of course, now that I moved to CNY, I fully expect to be shot on sight if I take the trailer out on the road, so again another round of DOT research and phone calls.
1974 240D 617 turbo swap, W201 5-speed, in the works project
1983 240D 616 stock, DD
1989 Chevy Astro, 617 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff, work van
(11-25-2008, 12:55 PM)Simpler=Better Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
This isn't always the case. When you have a heavy car at higher speeds (and in this case probably qualifying as under powered for the application) the last thing you want is to give up your gear ratio.
My 240D maybe makes it's 72hp and I've taken it to 80 and upwards with zero problems and not even a sense of real urgency from the engine - and the 240D has lower gears than any of the cars mentioned.
It's better to have a properly chosen gear ratio rather than tossing numbers at it and hoping that the real world results you're looking for to follow.
FYI, if you hang around at the Impala SS/Late model Chevy Caprice cop car forums, you'd find out that if you want to increase your top speed from ~140mph to about 155 with the stock engine, you would indeed change your gear ratio - from the stock 3.23 to 3.73. The motor - 5.7l LT1 - can't overcome the drag at the lower gear ratio, even with 260hp and about 350lb-ft on tap, which, frankly, good luck replicating with the 617, at least on your virgin run with so many other mods happening at once. With the lower gears the engine is closer to it's torque peak and powerband and continues accelerating to 155 mph.
I'd leave the gears alone as you seem to have quite enough on your plate as-is. If anything you might want to get a lower (numerically higher) gearset, which will give you better acceleration - ask any muscle car guy what the first modification went to for faster acceleration with the power you already have. For example, going from 3.03 to 3.55 is going to give greater acceleration but it's a great compromise ratio even if you're running a carb'd V8 as far as economy goes. With a turbodiesel I'd think you'd have to go into the 4s before you started seeing a truly noticeable dip in mpg, but the performance gain would be comparably huge.
(04-23-2009, 02:31 PM)kamel Cummins in a chevy. Comfort and power.
HERESY!!!
Now, a Duramax in a Whale-body Caprice Wagon....
From what I've heard if you want power a PS, Cummins, or Duramax will all happily deliver. But the Ford is a distant third in terms of fuel mileage. Maybe it's my dyed in the wool Chevy bias but I'm all Duramax - badass power and can be tuned for (I believe, out of the three) best economy as well. The Cummins is a supernatural, indestructible beast though. It's just hard to fit into different chassis because of the tall I6 design.
Easiest and cheapest route would be an 80's Caprice wagon, go 6.5l turbo, about 300hp...w/600lb-ft! And it bolts in wherever a SBC will.
CID Vicious
05-13-2009, 01:23 AM #42(11-25-2008, 12:55 PM)Simpler=Better Aluminum belly pan, higher ratio differential(lower acceleration, higher top speed and greater fuel economy)
This isn't always the case. When you have a heavy car at higher speeds (and in this case probably qualifying as under powered for the application) the last thing you want is to give up your gear ratio.
My 240D maybe makes it's 72hp and I've taken it to 80 and upwards with zero problems and not even a sense of real urgency from the engine - and the 240D has lower gears than any of the cars mentioned.
It's better to have a properly chosen gear ratio rather than tossing numbers at it and hoping that the real world results you're looking for to follow.
FYI, if you hang around at the Impala SS/Late model Chevy Caprice cop car forums, you'd find out that if you want to increase your top speed from ~140mph to about 155 with the stock engine, you would indeed change your gear ratio - from the stock 3.23 to 3.73. The motor - 5.7l LT1 - can't overcome the drag at the lower gear ratio, even with 260hp and about 350lb-ft on tap, which, frankly, good luck replicating with the 617, at least on your virgin run with so many other mods happening at once. With the lower gears the engine is closer to it's torque peak and powerband and continues accelerating to 155 mph.
I'd leave the gears alone as you seem to have quite enough on your plate as-is. If anything you might want to get a lower (numerically higher) gearset, which will give you better acceleration - ask any muscle car guy what the first modification went to for faster acceleration with the power you already have. For example, going from 3.03 to 3.55 is going to give greater acceleration but it's a great compromise ratio even if you're running a carb'd V8 as far as economy goes. With a turbodiesel I'd think you'd have to go into the 4s before you started seeing a truly noticeable dip in mpg, but the performance gain would be comparably huge.
(04-23-2009, 02:31 PM)kamel Cummins in a chevy. Comfort and power.
HERESY!!!
Now, a Duramax in a Whale-body Caprice Wagon....
From what I've heard if you want power a PS, Cummins, or Duramax will all happily deliver. But the Ford is a distant third in terms of fuel mileage. Maybe it's my dyed in the wool Chevy bias but I'm all Duramax - badass power and can be tuned for (I believe, out of the three) best economy as well. The Cummins is a supernatural, indestructible beast though. It's just hard to fit into different chassis because of the tall I6 design.
Easiest and cheapest route would be an 80's Caprice wagon, go 6.5l turbo, about 300hp...w/600lb-ft! And it bolts in wherever a SBC will.
What I am considering is swapping differentials between my 240 (3.46) and 300 (3.07). The 240 would get better economy from reduced 4th gear RPM and the 300 would accelerate faster. It would be a big benefit to both.
I bet a cummins would fit better if you made a custom oil pan and leaned the engine on its side like MB did with its OM60x engines.
ForcedInduction
05-13-2009, 01:36 AM
#43
Look at the C111, it had an overall 1.65 ratio and Mercedes says it took the whole 7.5+mile track to reach its 201mph top speed.
What I am considering is swapping differentials between my 240 (3.46) and 300 (3.07). The 240 would get better economy from reduced 4th gear RPM and the 300 would accelerate faster. It would be a big benefit to both.
I bet a cummins would fit better if you made a custom oil pan and leaned the engine on its side like MB did with its OM60x engines.
(05-13-2009, 01:36 AM)ForcedInduction Look at the C111, it had an overall 1.65 ratio and Mercedes says it took the whole 7.5+mile track to reach its 201mph top speed.
What I am considering is swapping differentials between my 240 (3.46) and 300 (3.07). The 240 would get better economy from reduced 4th gear RPM and the 300 would accelerate faster. It would be a big benefit to both.
I bet a cummins would fit better if you made a custom oil pan and leaned the engine on its side like MB did with its OM60x engines.
In the case of that, I'll have to say you're going to get better acceleration for the 300 at least. The 240, however, will be more of a dog than it already is. That's for sure - my cousin's 5.0l Mustang barely beat out my old 8v Jetta in a drag race (by barely I mean by a hell of a lot less than it should have) when he had the dog gears in it. (He converted it to a V8 from it's former state as True Automotive Purgatory - an NA 2.3l automatic Fox Mustang - ugh. I believe it had 2-point-somethings in it.)
Mercedes didn't choose the gear ratio arbitrarily and the 240D already gets better mileage than the 300s do, even with a slushbox. The 616 will have to work harder to make this relatively heavy car accelerate and maintain any speed, and I don't know for sure that you'll see a mileage improvement. For instance: amongst similar cars with similar displacement, C5/C6 Corvettes get outstanding mileage, with or without the six-speed. They chose a top gear ratio that would allow the motor to loaf along at about 2000 rpm on the highway and get mileage comparable to our cars, but with no less than 350 hp and lb-ft (a stock, base model C6 is making about 430hp in it's current tune). Not to mention double (or more!) displacement. Not to mention gears that begin around the same range as the 240D.
Having the car struggle below it's powerband isn't going to produce efficiency. Beetles, Civics, most fwd 4 cylinder cars are up around 4.11:1 or higher. And, as far as conventional cars go, they give the best mileage, while maintaining good acceleration for their displacement, power, and torque output. And all of these cars are far, far lighter than any W123. Which means that even though the motor has less mass to move around, the engineers still chose to use these gear ratios.
If mpg was as easy as dog gears they'd be an option on practically every car on the planet, and we'd have Joe-model Civics putting down 60+ mpg highway. If it were me I'd save the wrenching on the 240D, get another 240D pumpkin from the junkyard and swap it into the 300.
Interestingly enough there was a cheap 300D with various maladies around, and I was talking about a five speed/Small Block Chevy swap with a German guy who's worked on these cars. I just kind of let him wear himself out with his admonition that I'd have to put super-dog gears in it or "I'd destroy the engine." My cousin's 65 Nova ran a 383 (even more stroke) and 4:11s as a daily driver, three speed auto, mind you, and this guy's worried about 3.07's with a five-speed.
.
CID Vicious
05-13-2009, 03:29 PM #44(05-13-2009, 01:36 AM)ForcedInduction Look at the C111, it had an overall 1.65 ratio and Mercedes says it took the whole 7.5+mile track to reach its 201mph top speed.
What I am considering is swapping differentials between my 240 (3.46) and 300 (3.07). The 240 would get better economy from reduced 4th gear RPM and the 300 would accelerate faster. It would be a big benefit to both.
I bet a cummins would fit better if you made a custom oil pan and leaned the engine on its side like MB did with its OM60x engines.
In the case of that, I'll have to say you're going to get better acceleration for the 300 at least. The 240, however, will be more of a dog than it already is. That's for sure - my cousin's 5.0l Mustang barely beat out my old 8v Jetta in a drag race (by barely I mean by a hell of a lot less than it should have) when he had the dog gears in it. (He converted it to a V8 from it's former state as True Automotive Purgatory - an NA 2.3l automatic Fox Mustang - ugh. I believe it had 2-point-somethings in it.)
Mercedes didn't choose the gear ratio arbitrarily and the 240D already gets better mileage than the 300s do, even with a slushbox. The 616 will have to work harder to make this relatively heavy car accelerate and maintain any speed, and I don't know for sure that you'll see a mileage improvement. For instance: amongst similar cars with similar displacement, C5/C6 Corvettes get outstanding mileage, with or without the six-speed. They chose a top gear ratio that would allow the motor to loaf along at about 2000 rpm on the highway and get mileage comparable to our cars, but with no less than 350 hp and lb-ft (a stock, base model C6 is making about 430hp in it's current tune). Not to mention double (or more!) displacement. Not to mention gears that begin around the same range as the 240D.
Having the car struggle below it's powerband isn't going to produce efficiency. Beetles, Civics, most fwd 4 cylinder cars are up around 4.11:1 or higher. And, as far as conventional cars go, they give the best mileage, while maintaining good acceleration for their displacement, power, and torque output. And all of these cars are far, far lighter than any W123. Which means that even though the motor has less mass to move around, the engineers still chose to use these gear ratios.
If mpg was as easy as dog gears they'd be an option on practically every car on the planet, and we'd have Joe-model Civics putting down 60+ mpg highway. If it were me I'd save the wrenching on the 240D, get another 240D pumpkin from the junkyard and swap it into the 300.
Interestingly enough there was a cheap 300D with various maladies around, and I was talking about a five speed/Small Block Chevy swap with a German guy who's worked on these cars. I just kind of let him wear himself out with his admonition that I'd have to put super-dog gears in it or "I'd destroy the engine." My cousin's 65 Nova ran a 383 (even more stroke) and 4:11s as a daily driver, three speed auto, mind you, and this guy's worried about 3.07's with a five-speed.
.
(05-13-2009, 09:24 PM)ForcedInduction My 240D has a 617a, not the 616.
Ah - assumptions.
CID Vicious
05-13-2009, 10:29 PM #46(05-13-2009, 09:24 PM)ForcedInduction My 240D has a 617a, not the 616.
Ah - assumptions.
CID Vicious
05-14-2009, 02:36 PM #47Curious, what mileage were you seeing with the 617a/3.46 combo? I have a 240D that I'm looking to swap a 617a into, myself.
33 Guest(s)
33 Guest(s)