The Mercedes hydraulic system is great, and I can understand wanting to
make it work again. I'm just trying to say that a regular spring
suspension is perfectly fine, and works great on the majority of stock
vehicles that use them. A 300TD with sedan springs is horrible, but it's
probably easier to raise the spring rate or install the correct springs
than to replace the engine and reinstall all of the hydraulics. I have
stiffened the springs on several cars by removing some spring and
replacing it with a solid spacer- with great success. There are also a
bunch of companies (like lesjoforsab.com and hrsprings.com) that would
certainly sell you the correct springs, and probably provide advice on
choosing a spring rate.
What do Volvos have to do with this? I'm a huge fan of the Volvo
700/900/90 series wagons (1985-1998). The 80s models aren't as
comfortable and refined as a W123- but do handle better because of a
stiffer suspension, rack and pinion steering, and about 600lbs less
weight. I'd love to replace my '87 740 Turbo with a 300TD (especially an
87 300TD), but it couldn't begin to do what I do with my 740 Turbo. The
cooling system, transmission, and suspension on the Volvo are much
simpler and heavier duty. Just a few weeks ago I towed my 22 foot 3500lb
sailboat up a steep windy mountain road to go sailing on an alpine lake
that's at 7000 feet elevation. I've also taken it camping several times
in Baja, driving for days offroad on sand and rock while loaded with
1000lbs of gear and I've never had to do anything to the suspension
other than stiffen the rear springs and add a locking differential.
Somehow the Volvo has held up fine to this abuse for years and years,
but I should eventually replace it with a 3/4 ton 4wd diesel pickup of
some sort which is actually designed for this sort of use.
Tyler
Curt Raymond wrote:
Tyler,
We're not just parroting what Marshall said, we're giving you real world
experience about a car you've apparently never been in... Why screw around
trying to bodge something that works really really well? What Andrew is trying
to do is go BACK to what his car had before some other bodger bodged it which I
think is admirable.
For the record I've ridden in Volvo wagons, the older boxy (pre '91?) body
style, they DO NOT compare to a 123 wagon.
-Curt
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:13:22 -0700
From: tyler <casi...@usermail.com>
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Great car but it needs a motor
To: Mercedes Discussion List <mercedes@okiebenz.com>
Message-ID: <4acfb582.2050...@usermail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Well, were they done properly? There's no inherent reason why a wagon
wouldn't handle fine with a regular rear suspension. I'd be willing to
bet that most of these conversions use stock sedan springs/shocks from a
junkyard, which aren't stiff enough for a wagon. If I were going to do
the swap I would cut the sedan springs down and add an aluminum spacer
to get the correct ride height and spring rate, and get rear shocks that
are valved properly for the increased rear weight (Bilstein will revalve
their shocks cheaply). This would certainly be a lot cheaper and easier
than replacing an engine- and would allow one to customize the spring
and shock rate for the way they use their wagon. There's also a good
chance that an aftermarket spring company somewhere makes the correct
springs for this conversion.
Other options that would work well are nivomat self contained leveling
shocks, and air bags in the springs.
I'm annoyed that people on here mostly parrot what Marshall said without
understanding the context.
Tyler
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
