Yes. The last revision of the OM603 head, casting #22, has a modified
oil passage. The previous castings were mostly open to the head
gasket, and sometimes the gasket would blow out into the timing chain
cavity and #1 cylinder. The new casting moves the passage internal to
the head with a hole at
You must ban yourself.
On 12/24/05, Kaleb C. Striplin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I try to not cuss on this list too much but this car is a piece of
shit,
--
1977 240D
1972 Honda CB-500K motorcycle
http://www.airamericaradio.com/listen
The newer C class models are contradictory as well. The C240 is really
a 2.6 and the C230 is really a 1.8.Think that applies to the SLK as
well.
On 12/24/05, Jim Cathey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was a bit confused by that. My understanding is that the 300's (3.0
litre) are okay while the
ok
LT Don wrote:
You must ban yourself.
On 12/24/05, Kaleb C. Striplin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I try to not cuss on this list too much but this car is a piece of
shit,
--
1977 240D
1972 Honda CB-500K motorcycle
http://www.airamericaradio.com/listen
dave walton wrote:
There is s much to go wrong with this model you
could spend a couple grand on little PITA repairs. Not to mention the
rodbender engine, problematic head, and self-destructing head gasket.
THERE IS NO HEAD PROBLEM with OM603.97 engines (the heads were GREAT),
but 140s
ALL OM603.97 engines have problems. They were the ONLY engines in
Mercedes S class diesels imported to th US in the '90s ('90-'95). It
doesn't matter whether the desgination was 300 or 350, ALL US delivered
S class diesls had 3.5 liter OM603.97 engines in the '90s. All te
original engines had the
You could both visually inspect the cyls for signs of unusual wear
patterns, and measure piston protrusion to ensure the stroke length is
the same for each.
On 12/25/05, Kaleb C. Striplin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way of telling if the rods are bent with the head off?
Casey
Olympia,
eBay car, if anyone wants me to check it out, it is not to far from my work.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Strong-running-300SD-diesel-inexpensive_W0QQitemZ4599601326QQcategoryZ6336QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
No affiliation, ect.
Rick Knoble
1985 300 CD
Craig McCluskey wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=4599601326
Yes, but check out his feedback. Makes me leery.
Might be interesting to see if a dealer service writer would
check the history of that VIN look for an engine replacement.
McCluskey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 93 S-Class diesel (new engine?)
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 10:57:29 -0600 Rick Knoble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
eBay car, if anyone wants me to check it out, it is not to far from my
work.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem
in there, it's almost worth it as a parts car, if the
reserve is low enough. Hmmm.
O_o
+dm
--
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 10:34:02 -0700
From: Craig McCluskey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 93 S-Class diesel (new engine?)
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 10:57:29 -0600
Well I try to not cuss on this list too much but this car is a piece of
shit, it has had a salvage title:
Vehicle Snapshot
Vehicle 1993 Mercedes-Benz S Class 300SD
VIN WDBGB34E8PA104173
Body Style 4 Door Sedan
Country of Manufacture Germany
Vehicle History Checklist
Vehicle Description
I just sent a question asking if it had ever been wrecked.
Mitch Haley wrote:
Craig McCluskey wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=4599601326
Yes, but check out his feedback. Makes me leery.
Might be interesting to see if a dealer service writer would
check the history
--
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 10:34:02 -0700
From: Craig McCluskey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 93 S-Class diesel (new engine?)
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 10:57:29 -0600 Rick Knoble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
eBay car, if anyone wants me to check it out, it is not to far from my
work.
http
I was a bit confused by that. My understanding is that the 300's (3.0
litre) are okay while the 350's (3.5 litre) are problematic. This car
is listed as a 300-Series, but is described as having the 3.5 liter
engine. I am still not clear on the issue.
Did the 93 300SD have a 3.5 litre engine that
All MB S class diesels from 1991 (W126) and all W140's had the rod
bender engine even if the badge says 300SD. This applies to North
America only.
On 12/24/05, dave walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was a bit confused by that. My understanding is that the 300's (3.0
litre) are okay while the
Are the 300SD rodbenders 3.0 or 3.5 litre?
Thanks
-Dave Walton
94 S350, 99 E300
On 12/24/05, Desert Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All MB S class diesels from 1991 (W126) and all W140's had the rod
bender engine even if the badge says 300SD. This applies to North
America only.
On 12/24/05,
91 on up all S class used the rod bender 350 engine.
On 12/24/05, dave walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are the 300SD rodbenders 3.0 or 3.5 litre?
Thanks
-Dave Walton
94 S350, 99 E300
On 12/24/05, Desert Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All MB S class diesels from 1991 (W126) and all W140's
Going by the sellers feedback, I have no doubt it was totalled due to
the wreck.
Jim Cathey wrote:
Well I try to not cuss on this list too much but this car is a piece of
shit, it has had a salvage title:
This doesn't necessarily mean too much, given how sloppy States
can be with their
19 matches
Mail list logo
