3.0L Mercedes TURBO DIESEL into 1994 YJ - Page 3

Ross · 08-13-2009, 03:55 PM

I ran that thing for years and I will tell you it was great for what it was. I have years of experience with that motor. When you hit the gas it slowly takes off and then goes once the turbo hits. It will take a lot of clutch to get over any obstacle. You have no power until you hit about 15 mph. If you find the HP rating for that car it will show it as XX/XX without the turbo and with the turbo. There is a decent difference between the two numbers and it is very apparent when you drive it. You will either have to drive fast or keep the rpms up to get ANY power or keep the engine at higher rpms. If you have a stick you better get ready to replace clutches. I don't see it as a good choice for off-roading at low speeds. It takes time for that turbo to work. If you are running trials at higher speeds and you don't need power at lower speeds/rpms you will be fine. The 4.0 puts out a decent amount of torque and power at lower rpms, that is not how that engine performs and why it is a good choice for a jeep. It would be a terrible choice for a vet. That car was a great car to drive at higher speeds for great distances; I believe it even held records fot that. But around town and at lower speeds it had NO go.

I promise you will be very disappointed in that motor if you wheel at low speeds.

Ross · 08-13-2009, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothop

ROSS,

I own a 1982 W123 and it is quite respectable in terms of acceleration and speed. I am not sure about your experience but this motor was used in GWAGEN's around the world and they run just fine off and on-road. This is a very reliable motor that has tons of pep. There was probably something wrong with your vacuum system.

It ran great. I had a couple Mercedes diesels and this was a race car compared to the other. Once you get rolling it was fine, but those first few mphs were slow. It is the wrong motor in any vehicle where you need power and torque as soon as you hit the gas. If you can wieght for a couple of seconds you will have the power but uless you want to hit an obstcale at speed or rev your motor and paly with the clutch it is the wrong motor.

**levergun** · 08-13-2009, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by omarambo101

Holy ****, I thought that was just a typing error, and you were just putting a 4bt into a Jeep, the 6bt is going to be sweet. I can't wait to see the build.

I estimate after tuning the Bosch VE pump and a few other minor mods I will be in the 600ft. lb. no sweat- at about 1800-1900 RPMs. Also moving the governor so I can hit 3K. I love cummins. Thread will be started soon...... The thing I love most about the 6BT is the awesome low end torque. You can practically dump the clutch in first gear with the engine IDLING and it'll chirp the rear tires. Hit the throttle and it'll just spin them- Awesome lower end- and when the turbo hits at about 1200 hang on. It PULLS!!!! I have buddies that pull 14,000lb. trailers on the freeway all day. The only disadvantage is weight. It weighs in @ 1100lbs. But- I figure thats not to much more than a Jeep w/ a big v/8 huge winch and a plow. To make up for that I'm getting custom springs made and also reinforcing everything.

Ross · 08-13-2009, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levergun

I estimate after tuning the Bosch VE pump and a few other minor mods I will be in the 600ft. lb. no sweat- at about 1800-1900 RPMs. Also moving the governor so I can hit 3K. I love cummins. Thread will be started soon...... The thing I love most about the 6BT is the awesome low end torque. You can practically dump the clutch in first gear with the engine IDLING and it'll chirp the rear tires. Hit the throttle and it'll just spin them- Awesome lower end- and when the turbo hits at about 1200 hang on. It PULLS!!!! I have buddies that pull 14,000lb. trailers on the freeway all day. The only disadvantage is weight. It weighs in @ 1100lbs. But- I figure thats not to much more than a Jeep w/ a big v/8 huge winch and a plow. To make up for that I'm getting custom springs made and also reinforcing everything.

That is something to get excited about!

hulkgreen · 08-13-2009, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alvy

This sounds like a very do-able swap that seems way more economical than some other diesel swaps. Do you have any info yet on an adapter plate to mate the Dakota bell to the engine or will it be custom? I may be wrong but I think an updated version of the Mercedes 5 cylinder diesel still used now in the Sprinter Vans? This sounds cool, I'm subscribing.

Sorry the Dakota bell is a DIRECT bolt to the ax-15 .... no adapter needed !!!

**JFranko** · 08-13-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levergun

I estimate after tuning the Bosch VE pump and a few other minor mods I will be in the 600ft. lb. no sweat- at about 1800-1900 RPMs. Also moving the governor so I can hit 3K. I love cummins. Thread will be started soon...... The thing I love most about the 6BT is the awesome low end torque. You can practically dump the clutch in first gear with the engine IDLING and it'll chirp the rear tires. Hit the throttle and it'll just spin them- Awesome lower end- and when the turbo hits at about 1200 hang on. It PULLS!!!! I have buddies that pull 14,000lb. trailers on the freeway all day. The only disadvantage is weight. It weighs in @ 1100lbs. But- I figure thats not to much more than a Jeep w/ a big v/8 huge winch and a plow. To make up for that I'm getting custom springs made and also reinforcing everything.

I thought the 6BT was rated around 400hp and 600ft/lbs of torque stock, so you may be able to squeeze more power out of it. Not that you would need to.

73Dart · 08-13-2009, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by omarambo101

I thought the 6BT was rated around 400hp and 600ft/lbs of torque stock, so you may be able to squeeze more power out of it. Not that you would need to.

89-94 169 hp and 400 tq, 94-98 160 hp auto 215 manual both 400 tq, 98-03 180 auto 215 manual (i think) and 450 tq, 00-03 hp 300 hp 550 tq only avaible with 6 speed manual, 03-09 started at 305 hp and 550 tq and is now at 400 hp 650 tq for the pickup and 305hp and 550 tq for the chassie cabs. I know the 89-98 numbers are right I might be off on the later models.

73Dart · 08-13-2009, 08:37 PM

Are you having to build an adapter to mount the dakota tranny to the merc and what are you doing for a flywheel?

**JFranko** · 08-13-2009, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73Dart

89-94 169 hp and 400 tq, 94-98 160 hp auto 215 manual both 400 tq, 98-03 180 auto 215 manual (i think) and 450 tq, 00-03 hp 300 hp 550 tq only avaible with 6 speed manual, 03-09 started at 305 hp and 550 tq and is now at 400 hp 650 tq for the pickup and 305hp and 550 tq for the chassie cabs. I know the 89-98 numbers are right I might be off on the later models.

Makes sense, I only know the newer numbers off the top of my head.

Incursorio · 08-14-2009, 04:38 AM

Just a thought -- why not try to find 300D 6cyl engine out of W124 models? Or even 300TD? First one is rated at 113 HP and I know for sure it can deliver certain 400.000 without any kind of service except for oil / diesel filters..

Back in 1993. we bought this one as brand new..

Still one of my favorite cars up to this date..

EDIT: just seen the title.. TURBO DIESEL

Anyways; W124 300TD (station wagon) still seems as better option

**dodger889** · 08-14-2009, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levergun

I'M gonna make a build thread sooner of later.......The motor mounts/ crossmember is in- tranny+ tcase are in- I need to finish the 12" stretch I'm also doins and put the Dana 60/70's under it but it starts right now.

Why stretch it ? To me you might as well just used the tub and modified the front clip on another shortened frame. Which would have been easier to have built and setup for your axle in the front. With the strength to handle the torque, HP,and weight of the engine. Seems to trying to work back-wards to me. But good luck with you project.

**levergun** · 08-14-2009, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dodger889

Why stretch it ? To me you might as well just used the tub and modified the front clip on another shortened frame. Which would have been easier to have built and setup for your axle in the front. With the strength to handle the torque, HP,and weight of the engine. Seems to trying to work back-wards to me. But good luck with you project.

I was originally going to used the dodge frame and shorten it but the curve of the frame was totally different. The 12" stretch is more for driveshaft length than anything else.

hulkgreen · 08-14-2009, 03:57 PM

These points are all true !! This engine takes some RPM to get moving !!!

IF you compare to the stock car it is geared with like 2.31 gear set......and takes some rpm to get going !!!!

But if it is geared in the 4.10 area with a 4 to 1 transfer case ( trust me ) the rpm is gonna come up much quicker than in a stock cars gearing !!!!!!

here is a toyota with the mercedes engine with better gearing ..... by the way it is the RED one with the 38 inch tires ...... turn up the volume to hear the turbo whine at the end of the video !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEgl5P-Ooew

BUT ..... REMEMBER ....... I AM DOING THIS FOR A DAILY DRIVER TO GET 28ish Miles Per Gallon !!!! And maybe run a little BIODIESEL !!!

hulkgreen · 08-14-2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73Dart

Are you having to build an adapter to mount the dakota tranny to the merc and what are you doing for a flywheel?

YES !! I am building an adapter plate from Dakota BELL to Mercedes Block !! I am reusing the stock 4.0L flywheel and " modifying " it !!! Especially to drill it to fit the Mercedes crank !!

hulkgreen · 08-14-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incursorio

Just a thought -- why not try to find 300D 6cyl engine out of W124 models? Or even 300TD? First one is rated at 113 HP and I know for sure it can deliver certain 400.000 without any kind of service except for oil / diesel filters..

Back in 1993. we bought this one as brand new..

Still one of my favorite cars up to this date..

EDIT: just seen the title.. TURBO DIESEL

Anyways; W124 300TD (station wagon) still seems as better option

YES !!! I am using a OM617.952 out of a W123 series 300D which is of course a TURBO DIESEL !!

This choice is due to much research all pointing to the 1982-1985 3.0L 5 cyl turbo diesel being a slightly better choice for LONGEVITY .....even according to the Mercedes Mechanics on the Mercedes FORUMS !!