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
  #31  
Old 08-28-2008, 03:16 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 700
I follow F1 sometimes. As I remeber and even currently, the V configureation will allow the center of gravity to be lower. I think Renault was using 72 degrees a couple of years back.
The V-6's were turbo charged and I think 1.6L. They also ran 3L V-8 normally asperated or v-12s. Then they did away with the turbos. I think Honda McLaren winning constantly was the reason. Honda and Ferrrari went with V-12's and Williams/Renault went with a V-10. The V-10 was camless and pnuematically actuated. Honda still won, but Ferrari had a good run. When Nigel Mansell change from Ferrari to Williams/Renault they finally put some resourses behind that team and won the Championship.
To my understanding, they decreased the displacement from 3.0L to 1.6L for the normally asperated engines. So the engineers made up for the loss of HP, by spinning the engine faster.
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-28-2008, 05:36 PM
E150GT's Avatar
I'm a chicken
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
Posts: 1,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcedInduction View Post
Cast in cylinder liners, upper cam bearings are integrated with the valve cover, a V-design to fit into more models, it is designed around meeting 07-09 emissions standards, oil spray jets are non-replaceable (Bend one and you replace the block), it uses 4-headbolts per cylinder (instead of 6), it needs balance shafts to run smooth and it has a poorly designed air filter system.
are we talking diesel engines here or gas ones like the engine in the ML320?
__________________
1984 300SD Orient Red/ Palomino
1989 560SEC
2016 Mazda 6 6 speed manual
1995 Ford F-150 reg cab 4.9 5speed manual
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-28-2008, 05:38 PM
E150GT's Avatar
I'm a chicken
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
Posts: 1,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by michakaveli View Post
I would imagine that a v-type configuration is better for producing horsepower rather than torque. Inline's are good platforms for torque-ier type applications?

I recalled reading this somewhere, but what do I know
This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.
__________________
1984 300SD Orient Red/ Palomino
1989 560SEC
2016 Mazda 6 6 speed manual
1995 Ford F-150 reg cab 4.9 5speed manual
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-28-2008, 06:20 PM
ForcedInduction
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by E150GT View Post
This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.
A 4.9L engine is bigger than 4.2L.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-28-2008, 11:02 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tymbrymi View Post
I think so... There are times when I think the 5-speed in the CDI is a little mushy... very rare though. Once you get used to it you get pretty good at making it work as you'd like. The sport/comfort modes make a noticeable difference.
Have you gotten the fluid changed?
__________________
2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 LTZ
2007 Tiara 3200

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
-Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-29-2008, 12:16 AM
Ara T.'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 2,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by E150GT View Post
This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.
The inline engines usually have a biiiig crank, which tends to = better low end torque. Nevertheless it is kind of pointless to compare a truck engine and an MB V8, they aren't made for the same purposes.

F1 cars use V's I would assume because of weight distribution. V's can be easily tucked back as far as possible because they're much shorter.
__________________
1985 CA 300D Turbo , 213K mi
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-29-2008, 01:00 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by michakaveli View Post
I would imagine that a v-type configuration is better for producing horsepower rather than torque. Inline's are good platforms for torque-ier type applications?

I recalled reading this somewhere, but what do I know
Well, the new 3.0L Bluetec V6 has both more hp and more torque than the older 3.2L I6. I don't think it really matters to hp and torque whether the engine is inline or V-shaped. You can extract a lot of performance from either design. V's are easier to fit under the hood because they're not as long and that's probably their main advantage. They might also be safer in front collisions but I'm not sure.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
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




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:17 PM.


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