Had a parts car with over 1,000,000 km (620,000 miles) on the original engine that still had the original head gasket. It was due for a rebuilt though, but still started at 15 F. Has anyone else in this forum ever seen an original Mercedes 1,000,000 km badge? Unfortunately, the guy who sold me the car kept the badge (hey, I understand...)

__________________
Denis

1979 300TD 189,000 Miles, now running WVO with a home-made 2 tank conversion
1974 230 Gasser 189,000 Miles, For Sale
1961 VW Microbus 162,000 Miles
1961 Ford Fairlane 500, 53,900 original miles
1951 Oliver Super 55 Tractor
2002 Chocolate Lab

Peter:

The block design of the four and six cylinder engines of the 60s and 70s was very smilar to the diesel engine block design. I certainly could mistake a gasser block for a deisel block without the heads on, and the cranks don't look that different, either.

Remember, Benz was a fairly small concern in those days, engineering talent was spread a bit thin. If the desgn works well, modify it a bit. You could drop a dizzy right onto the oil pump shaft of the OM 61x engines without a bit of trouble, and I'd bet there is a nice flat spot next to it for the bolt hole for the holddown!

Obviously, they cannot be interchanged, I don't believe, but they are very close.

Peter

__________________
1972 220D ?? miles
1988 300E 200,012
1987 300D Turbo killed 9/25/07, 275,000 miles
1985 Volvo 740 GLE Turobodiesel 218,000
1972 280 SE 4.5 165, 000 - It runs!

Peter,
I have reread the posts and I'm in total agreement with you. MB did it right unlike GM which totally screwed it up.

Peter

__________________
Auto Zentral Ltd.

Hello,
1978 300D with 1.65million kilometers, still on original engine that has had one new headgasket and a couple of sets of injectors, prechambers. But the rest of the car is now falling apart. I sold this car in 1988 to the present owner.
I know of one OM616 240D engine that was in a 1976 W115 taxi and is now in a 1980 W123 taxi, that block has run at least 3 million kms, never been rebuilt. Just valve adjustments and oil changes by the owner driver, now his son-in-law has taken over *The Engine*!
The sixties four and sixes were closely related to the diesels, but the block of course has a IP flange and drive on the diesels, plus the rocker shaft type valve gear in the cylinder head. All these type engines seem to last forever with routine maintainence, but around here repair shops do a lot of unneccesary work by convincing owners that the engine is burning oil or it needs a valve job.

__________________
Nachi11744

Her '82 300D has 355k on the speedo , car runs just fine .
Regular oil changes ............ hmmmm .......... due for a valve adjustment ....... thanks for the reminder

__________________
'72 240D
'76 300D
'88 300sel
'40 Chev pickup , the shop hack.
'73 Monte Carlo Landau, for "Super Chevy Sunday"

Yeah, GM took the 350 gas engine (which started life as a 283 ci, I think, rather puny engine in 1955) and put a long stroke crank and diesel heads on it. Not a salubrious combination, although I've seen some that lasted more than 200,000 miles. Normally they spun a rear main at 25,000 to 40,000 and regularly after that. They did run in continous service forever (diesel irrigation pumps, etc.)

The 350 is a pretty lightweight block, especially at that displacement (bored out a huge amount) -- the cylinder walls are so thin that you MUST use a torque plate to bore and hone them, else they are seriously out of round when the head is torqued down. Nearly every one I've ever seen apart had four shiny spots on the cylinder walls were the sides were pulled in by the head bolts. A major mistake amatuer rebuilders make is to "make the holes round" when they get the block back from the machine shop after boring and honing. It won't be unless the head or a torque plate is installed, and honing it "round" gives WAY too much piston clearance. You think people would read instructions....

GM is also famous for "nickel and diming" cars to death. The worst example was the Corvair -- saved $1.50 per car be modifying the rear control arms to remove the camber (actually travel) limit stop with the result that the rear end would "jack" terribly. This normaly resulted in rollovers, and since the cars of that age made in america had very dubious structural integrity, dead of the occupants as the roof smashed right down to the windowsills. During the late 60s and 70s, the production machinery for making the 350 was so worn out that most engines were way off spec -- lifter bores not only out of place, but crooked, crankpins ground off center by 0.030" or more, bores out of place and crooked by up to 5 degrees (just like the lifter bores), resulting in engines that had variable crank and valve timing between cylinders and variable compression between cylinders. Normally ran lumpy. Similar problems with the diesel, too!

Benz made engines to withstand hour after hour of running more or less at full throttle on the Autobahn. The result was, or course, and engine that will run 50,000 to 75,000 miles under those conditions (there are six oversize piston sets available, two "hone" sizes, bore 0.2mm, two hone "hone" sizes), and under American driving or taxi use, they simply don't wear out unless abused.

An assembled OM617 non-turbo seems to be a little heavier than an assembled Chevy 350 V8 -- should be an indication of the thickenss of the block!

Peter

__________________
1972 220D ?? miles
1988 300E 200,012
1987 300D Turbo killed 9/25/07, 275,000 miles
1985 Volvo 740 GLE Turobodiesel 218,000
1972 280 SE 4.5 165, 000 - It runs!

From "The 350 Diesel Page" HERE

The 350 Diesel is a Converted 350 Oldsmobile Gas engine Right?
Wrong! The 350 Diesel Is not a converted Gas engine..it is a completly different block..It isn't a gas engine with different heads or a gas engine sleeved, etc etc..There was no gas Oldsmobile engine sharing the same block. The Diesel block is specific to the diesel, it is a heftier, more solid block with stronger mains and a port in the valley for the injection pump adapter. The block is cast with a high nickle content. The 350 Diesel is not a converted gas block but can however be converted into a gas engine.

Wheren't there two other Diesels Oldsmobile made?
Yes, there was a 4.3 260 V8 (90 H.P) and a 4.3 262 V6 (85 H.P) in which where also not converted gas engines.

Is the 350 Diesel really a TRUE Diesel?
Do you see spark plugs? It runs on Diesel Fuel doesn't it?...Sure it looks similar to a 350 Gas engine, But why not? It had to run down the same assembly line and fit in under the same hood and bolt up the same. If I do recall correctly, the International 6.9L V8 Diesel, which Ford used in their light duty trucks was an engine that was infact based on a gas engine also made by International, (Click here to see my list of Diesels based on gas engines) was quite a good engine. YES it is a True Diesel.

Does the 350 Diesel share any of the same parts that the 350 Gas engine does?
While the valve covers, oil pan, water pump and oil pump, and exhaust manifolds are the same, the 350 Diesel has a different crank, pistons, rods, heads, rockers, cam, pushrods, valves, valve springs, and intake..not to mention vaccume pump, and the injection system.

Why Did they always Blow head gaskets and break head bolts?
The Factory head bolts where not strong enough to with stand operating conditions, stretching and eventually breaking naturally blowing the head gasket.

Why Did they blow the head gaskets shortly after they have been replaced?

Reusing old factory head bolts would cause them to stretch more, naturally blowing the head gasket..also, an irregular surface in the head or block that has been over looked would also assist future gasket problems.

-------------------
Hope this helps.

Ever so slightly off the subject, but I have an inlaw who spent his entire career at Ford, engineering engines. He said at some time in the late 70' or early 80's they bought a whole bunch of Honda engines to tear down and examine. To thier dismay, they didn't even have the ability to measure Honda's tolerances, every thing was 0-0. He said they knew right away they had alot of work to do! lol

Same with VW, there little 4cyl gassers blocks look identical to the diesels, even the new diesels and gas engines are not too far removed. I have a late 90's 2.0L short block from a jetta sitting on a rack at work and if you look at it from ten feet away you could mistake it for a twenty year old diesel. Designs that stand the test of time. It's a wunnerful thing.

__________________
One more Radar Lover gone...
1982 VW Caddy diesel 406K 1.9L AAZ
1994 E320 195K

The 350 was based off the olds 350 engine (different design from the Chevy 350s) and made an excellent block for gas drag racing use (as it was much beefier) for those interested in running an olds engine.

Sorry, you're correct it was the Olds 350.

Still, it was a DERIVED engine -- the bock was "redesigned" as a diesel, not an original and was WAY understressed (to say nothing of WAY underpowered). Same deal on the "new" Dodge Hemi -- this is a 1951 engine design tarted up with EFI. Nothing else has changed -- splayed pushrods sitting crooked on the lifters, 6" rocker arms, undersized crank, and all. Should be run to watch people over-rev it and send the pushrods out the valve cover, just like in 1958!

It was not a happy design, by any stretch of the imagination. It should have produced at least as nuch horsepower as the 617 non turbo on a displacement basis, and it didn't. Spun mains, bad rods, broken cranks (from rod bearing failures, if I remember correctly), oil pump failures, injection pump problems, severe head gasket and head bolt problems (and not enough head bolts, either!), serious head cracking problems, cold start problems, cracked blocks, etc.

Good idea, and if GM had taken a good look at European designs of similar vintage instead of taking a short cut, they could have done very well.

As I said, there are a large number of these engines in use in gensets, pumping appliations, etc, where they do just fine. I personally suspect the problem is "underengineering" to save money -- smaller bearings (narrower, as usuall GM practice, diameter is fine), lighter castings, cheaper pushrods (why not a OHC engine?), too long a stroke and too low compression, etc.

A 5 L diesel with a turbo should have made those cars fly!

Peter

__________________
1972 220D ?? miles
1988 300E 200,012
1987 300D Turbo killed 9/25/07, 275,000 miles
1985 Volvo 740 GLE Turobodiesel 218,000
1972 280 SE 4.5 165, 000 - It runs!

I had an 85 300D with 473,000 miles.. original engine, 2nd transmission. The engine ran PERFECT. Started instantly in 10F weather. Sold it a few years ago to a guy in NYC.. I wonder if it's still running around. Only downside to that car was rust.

Omegabenz has a 300CD with almost 500,000 miles on it. His odometer reading is in his signature.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

82-300TD,
Call it what you like, but a piece of junk by any other name is still a piece of junk. When MB first marketed the OM617 turbo engine, they ran ot on the track for 10,000 continuous hours at an average speed of 152 mph. Detroit probably ran their diesel on a drafting board with an accountant standing by. I'm afraid the new MBs are now being designed in the same way in Detroit. It is sad to see the end of an era. MB is producing more and more of the cheap class or what they call the C class for the wanna be Joe Lunch Buckets. They probably got the idea from the Cadillac Cimmaron.

Peter

__________________
Auto Zentral Ltd.

I had an 85 300D with 473,000 miles.. original engine, 2nd transmission

I suspect that a large percentage of the original transmission falures were actually not failures at all; in other words, unnecissary repairs and fraud.