Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-01-2005, 03:48 AM
dieselbeagel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 334
94 - 95 350 Sdl

Did MB make the 94 and 95 year model 350SDL the same specs ?

Does anyone know if there r differences between the 2 years model ?

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-01-2005, 03:55 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,793
MB offered the S350 in those years. The only differences are body details such as amber corners in the 94 and white/amber corners in the 95.

Same basic 603.970 introduced in the 90 350SD/L.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-01-2005, 03:58 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,793
Oh, in the W140 series (92-95) MB only offered the SWB S-class with a Diesel engine. Also detail differences between the 92-93 and 94-95.

The 92-93 300SD have the same 3.5l 603.97 as the 90-91 350SD/L and 94-95 S350. Same basic engine anyway. The 90-91 might have different EGR and ARV systems.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-01-2005, 04:00 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,793
My bad. The W126s have the 603.970 and the W140s have the 603.971. I think it's the same basic block.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-01-2005, 04:00 AM
dieselbeagel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 334
Is there any truth that MB ironed out the rod bending issues for the 94/95 model or r they just as prone as the 91 model in rod bending and oil burning ?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-01-2005, 05:38 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,793
It seems that 95s are susceptible to bent connecting rods, at least from what I've read in this forum. I think someone noted that the connecting rod part numbers changed several times since 1995.

The EPC says that the 603.971 connecting rod was replaced 3 times. An earlier part number is shown as original for the 603.970 so the W126 rod was replaced 4 times, with everything from the first replacement shared with the 603.971.

What does that tell you? I'm not sure. The 603.96 rod was replaced 6 times! I've never heard of a 3.0 bending rods. And guess what, your 2.5 uses the same rods as the 3.0. Since 1993 there have been 4 replacements of the 2.5/3.0 rod.

FWIW I believe the -17- head was standard issue in 1995 and MB stopped at -22- (2 or 3 iterations). 603.97s are not known to be susceptible to head cracks. Maybe it was to fix the problem with gaskets failing between the timing chain cavity and the #1 combustion chamber. That happens on 603.97s.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-01-2005, 11:56 AM
dieselbeagel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 334
Go i guess the 94/95 350 SDL is no better than its predecessors.

I have been eyeing the 95 350 SDL and had hoped to acquire it down the road. I was under the impression that the rod bending issues were resolved by the time the 94/95 models came about.

I now have been enlightened and will most probably steer away from them.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-02-2005, 09:17 AM
Geezer
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Holland, MI
Posts: 1,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieselbeagel
...I was under the impression that the rod bending issues were resolved by the time the 94/95 models came about.

I now have been enlightened and will most probably steer away from them.
Remember, the MAJORITY of engines did NOT bend rods...

You can always pay your money and take your chances.

It might rust to pieces, or be destroyed in a crash, before you lose it to a bent rod.

Food for thought.

Best Regards,
Jim
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-02-2005, 10:42 AM
t walgamuth's Avatar
dieselarchitect
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lafayette Indiana
Posts: 34,742
the rod benders

do not bend rods because the rods are weak, imho.

tom w

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
350 Sdl jeepee Tech Help 5 04-21-2005 01:20 AM
91 350 Sdl Front Amp Location ? crf250r Car Audio and Multimedia 1 10-10-2004 10:22 AM
1991 350 Sdl PrivateLabel Diesel Discussion 14 09-04-2004 12:31 PM
Is 90 or 91 350 SDL a wise buy? hensmark Diesel Discussion 6 07-25-2004 11:21 PM
350 SDL general questions zat Diesel Discussion 9 07-14-2002 05:50 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page