Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 13:54:51 -0400 Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The deviation from circular can not be more than 0.05 mm - that's 0.0002 (unless I lost a decimal point somewhere). For a new or rebored block the limit is between none to 0.014mm. Sorry, Marshall, you did lose a decimal point. 0.05 mm ~= 0.002 0.014 mm ~= 0.00055 Nevertheless, the point about being well beyond spec is well taken. Craig
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
Craig McCluskey wrote: Sorry, Marshall, you did lose a decimal point. 0.05 mm ~= 0.002 0.014 mm ~= 0.00055 Nevertheless, the point about being well beyond spec is well taken. I was ALMOST sure I missed a decimal point, but even with that - what was measured was 3X worse than Mercedes allows! Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
Any pointers on how to procure a rebuilt engine would be appreciated. My local mercedes dealer is useless - on a good day. It is curious that the cylinder wall rim above the area of travel of the top piston ring is roughly as out of round as the area where the piston travels. It is possible that I missed a decimal point, but I doubt I'm that lucky... Unfortunately I did not find this list until long after I had purchased the car. I appreciate everyone's help and patience. Thanks -Dave Walton On 9/5/05, Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig McCluskey wrote: Sorry, Marshall, you did lose a decimal point. 0.05 mm ~= 0.002 0.014 mm ~= 0.00055 Nevertheless, the point about being well beyond spec is well taken. I was ALMOST sure I missed a decimal point, but even with that - what was measured was 3X worse than Mercedes allows! Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
dave walton wrote: Any pointers on how to procure a rebuilt engine would be appreciated. My local mercedes dealer is useless - on a good day. It is curious that the cylinder wall rim above the area of travel of the top piston ring is roughly as out of round as the area where the piston travels. It is possible that I missed a decimal point, but I doubt I'm that lucky... Unfortunately I did not find this list until long after I had purchased the car. I appreciate everyone's help and patience. Try contacting Constanine. He replaced his OM603.97 with a Mercedes supplied engine a few months ago. Not sure if it was new or rebuilt, long or short block. Constantine N. Polites [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dave M. had a price sheet, but his site no longer seems to be accessable. Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts
Pretty sure Constantine got a factory rebuilt long block. Expect the cost to be $6-$7k plus labor misc parts. Suddenly six conrods doesn't sound as expensive, if you already have the engine apart. Photos of that crate engine are here: http://www.w124performance.com/images/OM603.970_crate_engine/ Dave's site is up running but the domain name has changed. The engine price PDF at this link, but I haven't updated the prices in a while... you'll need to call Rusty for current numbers: http://www.w124performance.com/docs/mb/OM60X/OM603_rebuilt_engines.pdf :-) Dave M. -- Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 01:23:10 -0400 From: Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts. dave walton wrote: Any pointers on how to procure a rebuilt engine would be appreciated. My local mercedes dealer is useless - on a good day. It is curious that the cylinder wall rim above the area of travel of the top piston ring is roughly as out of round as the area where the piston travels. It is possible that I missed a decimal point, but I doubt I'm that lucky... Unfortunately I did not find this list until long after I had purchased the car. I appreciate everyone's help and patience. Try contacting Constanine. He replaced his OM603.97 with a Mercedes supplied engine a few months ago. Not sure if it was new or rebuilt, long or short block. Constantine N. Polites [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dave M. had a price sheet, but his site no longer seems to be accessable. Marshall
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
dave walton wrote: I'm in the process of reassembling the engine of my S350 after replacing the #1 connecting rod. The manual states a torque of 90Nm for the connecting rod bolts. I am finding that they peak at about 70-73Nm for a full turn. It just does not feel right that I should take them all the way to 90Nm. My instinct says to leave them alone after 1/2 - 3/4 turn at a steady 70Nm. Should I be measuring bolt stretch instead? I don't see anything in the manual about that, however... Any thoughts appreciated. -Dave Walton You seem to have misread or misinterpreted the specifications. The first stage tightening is 40 Nm for a used conrod and 45 Nm for a new one. Then the bolt is turned precisely 90 deg. further. I've attached the appropriate pages from the manual. PLEASE check the bolt dimensions if you've turned them more than 90 deg. - they may be stretched. Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm 03-6111aw.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
Yes, it's apart. I love the car, but hate the engine. I originally removed the head because of wicked oil burning that turned out to be caused by a blown head gasket. The #1 cylinder was not coming up as much as the others, so I pulled the engine. The #1 connecting rod is bent, but the cylinders are not ovaled much. All are within .006 of round. The #1 cylinder is indeed the most ovaled, but the original honing marks are still visible all around the cylinder wall, so I'm going to live with it and hope for the best. I just got a digital caliper and remeasured everything. The #1 rod is 0.36mmshorter than the new one. It is also slightly bent to the side and ever so slightly twisted. The opening for the bottom bearing has enlarged 0.07mmhorizontally and 0.02mm vertically. -Dave Walton On 9/4/05, Kaleb C. Striplin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You took your 3.5 apart? Did you get any ovaling of the cylinders? Was the rod bent before or did you do it as a precaution? dave walton wrote: I'm in the process of reassembling the engine of my S350 after replacing the #1 connecting rod. The manual states a torque of 90Nm for the connecting rod bolts. I am finding that they peak at about 70-73Nm for a full turn. It just does not feel right that I should take them all the way to 90Nm. My instinct says to leave them alone after 1/2 - 3/4 turn at a steady 70Nm. Should I be measuring bolt stretch instead? I don't see anything in the manual about that, however... Any thoughts appreciated. -Dave Walton ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 89 560SEL, 87 300SDL, 87 300SDL, 85 380SE, 85 300D, 83 300TD, 81 300TD, 81 240D, 81 240D, 76 450SEL, 76 240D, 76 300D, 74 240D, 69 250 Okie Benz Auto parts-email for used parts ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
Oops, my bad. Even if the bolts are in spec, I'm tossing them. I suppose I could use the 2 that were originally on the #1 rod, but that's probably bad karma or something. Thanks much for the correction Marshall. -Dave Walton On 9/4/05, Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dave walton wrote: I'm in the process of reassembling the engine of my S350 after replacing the #1 connecting rod. The manual states a torque of 90Nm for the connecting rod bolts. I am finding that they peak at about 70-73Nm for a full turn. It just does not feel right that I should take them all the way to 90Nm. My instinct says to leave them alone after 1/2 - 3/4 turn at a steady 70Nm. Should I be measuring bolt stretch instead? I don't see anything in the manual about that, however... Any thoughts appreciated. -Dave Walton You seem to have misread or misinterpreted the specifications. The first stage tightening is 40 Nm for a used conrod and 45 Nm for a new one. Then the bolt is turned precisely 90 deg. further. I've attached the appropriate pages from the manual. PLEASE check the bolt dimensions if you've turned them more than 90 deg. - they may be stretched. Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
If it's apart, I would change ALL the rods. I wouldn't call it cheap insurance , but it is insurance. The rest of the rods will bend eventually. I would also upgrade anything the factory changed on their replacement engines. I don't know what changes were made, but it is likely someone here does. Just my 02¢ Rick Knoble 1985 300 CD - Original Message - From: dave walton To: Mercedes mailing list Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 5:34 AM Subject: Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts. Yes, it's apart. I love the car, but hate the engine. I originally removed the head because of wicked oil burning that turned out to be caused by a blown head gasket. The #1 cylinder was not coming up as much as the others, so I pulled the engine. The #1 connecting rod is bent, but the cylinders are not ovaled much. All are within .006 of round. The #1 cylinder is indeed the most ovaled, but the original honing marks are still visible all around the cylinder wall, so I'm going to live with it and hope for the best. I just got a digital caliper and remeasured everything. The #1 rod is 0.36mm shorter than the new one. It is also slightly bent to the side and ever so slightly twisted. The opening for the bottom bearing has enlarged 0.07mm horizontally and 0.02mm vertically. -Dave Walton
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
I'd love to hear more details about the Mercedes rebuild procedures. It's the least they could do after dumping these piece of shit engines on us. I've lost count of the number of people I've talked out of buying a mercedes. A friend just bought a maybach despite my warnings. It's spent more time in the shop than in his driveway. No wonder their brand in on the decline in the US. I would not say replacing all the rods is cheap. Dealer price on a set with upper and lower bearings is $1400. Thanks -Dave Walton On 9/5/05, Rick Knoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's apart, I would change ALL the rods. I wouldn't call it cheap insurance , but it is insurance. The rest of the rods will bend eventually. I would also upgrade anything the factory changed on their replacement engines. I don't know what changes were made, but it is likely someone here does. Just my 02¢ Rick Knoble 1985 300 CD - Original Message - *From:* dave walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Monday, September 05, 2005 5:34 AM *Subject:* Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts. Yes, it's apart. I love the car, but hate the engine. I originally removed the head because of wicked oil burning that turned out to be caused by a blown head gasket. The #1 cylinder was not coming up as much as the others, so I pulled the engine. The #1 connecting rod is bent, but the cylinders are not ovaled much. All are within .006 of round. The #1 cylinder is indeed the most ovaled, but the original honing marks are still visible all around the cylinder wall, so I'm going to live with it and hope for the best. I just got a digital caliper and remeasured everything. The #1 rod is 0.36mm shorter than the new one. It is also slightly bent to the side and ever so slightly twisted. The opening for the bottom bearing has enlarged 0.07mm horizontally and 0.02mm vertically. -Dave Walton ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
At that price, I'd be looking at prices for a factory replacement engine. I have been an avid reader/seldom poster on these lists for some time and the general consensus on the W140 chassis diesels is that they are wonderful cars, but you have to factor in the cost of a replacement engine into the cost of ownership. Period. Too bad you didn't join the list before your purchase. It may have saved you some grief. Rick Knoble 1985 300 CD I would not say replacing all the rods is cheap. Dealer price on a set with upper and lower bearings is $1400. Thanks -Dave Walton
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
as i have said many times before, in ten years, old benz owners will be looked at the same way we looked at jaguar owners. At 11:58 AM 9/5/2005, you wrote: I'd love to hear more details about the Mercedes rebuild procedures. It's the least they could do after dumping these piece of shit engines on us. I've lost count of the number of people I've talked out of buying a mercedes. A friend just bought a maybach despite my warnings. It's spent more time in the shop than in his driveway. No wonder their brand in on the decline in the US. I would not say replacing all the rods is cheap. Dealer price on a set with upper and lower bearings is $1400. Thanks -Dave Walton On 9/5/05, Rick Knoble mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's apart, I would change ALL the rods. I wouldn't call it cheap insurance , but it is insurance. The rest of the rods will bend eventually. I would also upgrade anything the factory changed on their replacement engines. I don't know what changes were made, but it is likely someone here does. Just my 02¢ Rick Knoble 1985 300 CD - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]dave walton To: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Mercedes mailing list Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 5:34 AM Subject: Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts. Yes, it's apart. I love the car, but hate the engine. I originally removed the head because of wicked oil burning that turned out to be caused by a blown head gasket. The #1 cylinder was not coming up as much as the others, so I pulled the engine. The #1 connecting rod is bent, but the cylinders are not ovaled much. All are within .006 of round. The #1 cylinder is indeed the most ovaled, but the original honing marks are still visible all around the cylinder wall, so I'm going to live with it and hope for the best. I just got a digital caliper and remeasured everything. The #1 rod is 0.36mm shorter than the new one. It is also slightly bent to the side and ever so slightly twisted. The opening for the bottom bearing has enlarged 0.07mm horizontally and 0.02mm vertically. -Dave Walton ___ For used parts email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.nethttp://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
dave walton wrote: Yes, it's apart. I love the car, but hate the engine. I originally removed the head because of wicked oil burning that turned out to be caused by a blown head gasket. The #1 cylinder was not coming up as much as the others, so I pulled the engine. The #1 connecting rod is bent, but the cylinders are not ovaled much. All are within .006 of round. The #1 cylinder is indeed the most ovaled, but the original honing marks are still visible all around the cylinder wall, so I'm going to live with it and hope for the best. I just got a digital caliper and remeasured everything. The #1 rod is 0.36mm shorter than the new one. It is also slightly bent to the side and ever so slightly twisted. The opening for the bottom bearing has enlarged 0.07mm horizontally and 0.02mm vertically. The deviation from circular can not be more than 0.05 mm - that's 0.0002 (unless I lost a decimal point somewhere). For a new or rebored block the limit is between none to 0.014mm. Your measured deviation of 0.006 from cylindrical is about 30 times greater than the worst case Mercedes permits. When you're all done you will have HIGH oil consumption with the cylinder profile that far off. I've attached the workshop sheets for cylinder wall and you already have the conrod sheet. Marshall -- Marshall Booth (who doesn't respond to unsigned questions) der Dieseling Doktor [EMAIL PROTECTED] '87 300TD 181Kmi,'87 190D 2.5 199Kmi, '84 190D 2.2 227Kmi, '85 190D 2.0 159Kmi, '87 190D 2.5 turbo 234kmi Diesel Technical Advisor MBCA, member GWSection http://www.dhc.net/~pmhack/mercedes/mbooth1.htm 01-9202aw.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document
Re: [MBZ] Tightening Connecting Rod bolts.
You took your 3.5 apart? Did you get any ovaling of the cylinders? Was the rod bent before or did you do it as a precaution? dave walton wrote: I'm in the process of reassembling the engine of my S350 after replacing the #1 connecting rod. The manual states a torque of 90Nm for the connecting rod bolts. I am finding that they peak at about 70-73Nm for a full turn. It just does not feel right that I should take them all the way to 90Nm. My instinct says to leave them alone after 1/2 - 3/4 turn at a steady 70Nm. Should I be measuring bolt stretch instead? I don't see anything in the manual about that, however... Any thoughts appreciated. -Dave Walton ___ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://striplin.net/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_striplin.net -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 89 560SEL, 87 300SDL, 87 300SDL, 85 380SE, 85 300D, 83 300TD, 81 300TD, 81 240D, 81 240D, 76 450SEL, 76 240D, 76 300D, 74 240D, 69 250 Okie Benz Auto parts-email for used parts
