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
  #16  
Old 08-01-2011, 09:38 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by winmutt View Post
The turbo has to work a lot harder to push the same PSI.
spin a lot faster


The work to achieve the same PSI is unchanged.

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-01-2011, 09:39 PM
scottmcphee's Avatar
1987 w124 300D
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 1,539
It's so cool having a manual boost controller spliced into the wastegate line of my 603, and of course, a boost gauge inside the car. If I am going to be doing mountain passes, it takes all of about 30 seconds to set top boost to whatever I please. Somebody said if you can get enough fuel into the cylinders the turbo is good for 3 bar boost.

Where I live, 2300 feet altitude, boost is dialed to show 1 bar (14.5 psi) at top push.

The boost gauge is actually an absolute air pressure gauge taken at the manifold. When the car is not running, it typically shows about -0.1 bar. And it changes with the high/low weather systems moving through from about -0.08 to -0.12 bar. Kinda like a barometer I can tell if the weather is changing before I leave the garage each morning.

So as you can see, I need 1.5 psi boost just to achieve what sea level brethren get with their normally aspirated diesels.
__________________
Cheers!
Scott McPhee

1987 300D
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-01-2011, 09:43 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjh View Post

That's a very interesting idea Brian. I'm going to spend some time with it.

Thanks again.
I'd like to see you try it..........but, I fear that the cooling system won't be up to the task for rated power levels. You'd need everything in brand new condition (fan clutch, radiator, water pump) and I'd still be wary.

As an aside, I've been having some temperature issues with the 617 over the last few years. It seems that it likes to climb up to 97C. under most operating conditions. It might even touch 100C. at lower rpms. However, once the a/c is utilized, it immediately drops back to its typical 90C. and stays there. Tells me that the additional airflow from the electric fan really makes the difference (and the fan clutch is toast).

Consider this approach (full time electric fan) if you go in this direction.

Anytime.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-01-2011, 09:46 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottmcphee View Post
It's so cool having a manual boost controller spliced into the wastegate line of my 603, and of course, a boost gauge inside the car. If I am going to be doing mountain passes, it takes all of about 30 seconds to set top boost to whatever I please. Somebody said if you can get enough fuel into the cylinders the turbo is good for 3 bar boost.

Where I live, 2300 feet altitude, boost is dialed to show 1 bar (14.5 psi) at top push.
Perfection!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-01-2011, 10:06 PM
sjh sjh is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Carlton View Post
spin a lot faster


The work to achieve the same PSI is unchanged.
The thermodynamicist speaks!
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-01-2011, 10:12 PM
sjh sjh is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Carlton View Post
I'd like to see you try it..........but, I fear that the cooling system won't be up to the task for rated power levels. You'd need everything in brand new condition (fan clutch, radiator, water pump)
Engine seems to be in excellent condition, 170K, I've got it dialed in pretty tight.

Runs at 80 C but will easily rise to 85 with modest load and under extreme load has not gone past 90 C (maybe 93 C).

But I'll take all the input I can get and just let it percolate.

Nice to see that Scott is using a similar approach and adjusting in the car.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-02-2011, 12:35 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Out in the Boonies of Hot, Dry, Dusty, Windy Nevada
Posts: 9,673
As Sixto said in post#7, I would advise a 617. I don`t have a 60X engine or driven one, so can`t compare one to a 617.

My experience with a 85 Cali 300D that is still in it`s stock configuration, is a gutless wonder at the higher altitudes. my 240 would probably run circles around it.

Had it in vail, Colorado a few yrs ago, and that is over 9000ft. It had no acceleration, zippo, nada. the trap oxidizer had been replaced, so it wasn`t plugged up. but it does choke down the performance.

The next year we were there, but we changed everything the way an 83 is, and it was a totally different car. now at the higher elevations, I really do not see any lag in it`s get up and go.

I have driven had my 240D To Carson City,Nv. on Hyw 50 going over Echo summitt. that gets up to over 7000ft, and she pulls it not too bad for being naturally exasperated. I am in 3rd gear though.

The NA engines will get you there, just a little slower. this way you get to enjoy the scenery.

Charlie
__________________
there were three HP ratings on the OM616...

1) Not much power
2) Even less power
3) Not nearly enough power!! 240D w/auto

Anyone that thinks a 240D is slow drives too fast.

80 240D Naturally Exasperated, 4-Spd 388k DD 150mph spedo 3:58 Diff

We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-02-2011, 01:59 AM
sjh sjh is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by charmalu View Post
As Sixto said in post#7, I would advise a 617. I don`t have a 60X engine or driven one, so can`t compare one to a 617.

Charlie
I had a 300D NA in Boulder 12 years ago. Don't wish to repeat.

So '87 300D compared to '90 300D.

Both 5 cyl turbos.

The '87 has 25% more displacement and the cast-iron head.

Just looking at the engines aren't they very similar besides the two points I mention?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-02-2011, 02:08 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Eastern TN
Posts: 20,841
The 87 300D has a 6 cylinder aluminum head engine. The same engine family as the 90 2.5 with one more cylinder. 3.0 is 20% displacement increase over 2.5.

Sixto
87 300D

Last edited by sixto; 08-02-2011 at 02:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-02-2011, 02:13 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Out in the Boonies of Hot, Dry, Dusty, Windy Nevada
Posts: 9,673
85 300D and 300SD was the last year for the cast iron head.

Charlie
__________________
there were three HP ratings on the OM616...

1) Not much power
2) Even less power
3) Not nearly enough power!! 240D w/auto

Anyone that thinks a 240D is slow drives too fast.

80 240D Naturally Exasperated, 4-Spd 388k DD 150mph spedo 3:58 Diff

We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-02-2011, 02:23 AM
Jeremy5848's Avatar
Registered Biodiesel User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sonoma Wine Country
Posts: 8,402
I don't recall any problems driving the '85 300D-T over the Sierra on I-80 (about 7000 feet max) and that was on winter diesel and before I replaced the trap cat with a test pipe. It did require quite a bit of 3rd gear work and we spent a lot of time in the right lane. If I could keep the speed up to 65-70 MPH the car went along pretty well but then we'd have to slow for a truck and bog down doing 50-55 in 3rd. The OM606NA engine in the '96 E300D has the same problem. I've never been at 9000+ feet with any of my diesels so I can't comment on those limitations. The '87 300D Turbo has never been allowed out of the San Francisco Bay Area, but now that it has a new head I'll have to make a trip uphill and see how it does.

Jeremy
__________________

"Buster" in the '95

Our all-Diesel family
1996 E300D (W210) . .338,000 miles Wife's car
2005 E320 CDI . . 113,000 miles My car
Santa Rosa population 176,762 (2022)
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . 627,762
"Oh lord won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz."
-- Janis Joplin, October 1, 1970
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-02-2011, 02:50 AM
sjh sjh is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
The 87 300D has a 6 cylinder aluminum head engine. The same engine family as the 90 2.5 with one more cylinder. 3.0 is 20% displacement increase over 2.5.

Sixto
87 300D
I use to be able to add, subtract, multiply and divide. How sad.

But the head info I did not know. And, probably more importantly the '87 is 6 cylinder. I did not realize that. Never driven a 6 cylinder MB diesel. Is there a big difference?

Thanks.

Last edited by sjh; 08-02-2011 at 03:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-02-2011, 02:53 AM
sjh sjh is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy5848 View Post
I don't recall any problems driving the '85 300D-T over the Sierra on I-80 (about 7000 feet max) and that was on winter diesel and before I replaced the trap cat with a test pipe. It did require quite a bit of 3rd gear work and we spent a lot of time in the right lane. If I could keep the speed up to 65-70 MPH the car went along pretty well but then we'd have to slow for a truck and bog down doing 50-55 in 3rd. The OM606NA engine in the '96 E300D has the same problem. I've never been at 9000+ feet with any of my diesels so I can't comment on those limitations. The '87 300D Turbo has never been allowed out of the San Francisco Bay Area, but now that it has a new head I'll have to make a trip uphill and see how it does.

Jeremy
Well Jeremy we are practically neighbors and I did drive up 50 to Tahoe and then came back on 80. I had entirely forgotten (when will those drugs get out of my body!).

I was quite satisfied with the car on that trip. I will consider the adjustable boost though if I move.

Thanks everyone for your input.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-02-2011, 11:04 AM
winmutt's Avatar
85 300D 4spd+tow+h4
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Atl Gawga
Posts: 9,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by tangofox007 View Post
That is likely due to the diminished cooling capacity associated with decreased air density.
More likely its the increased intake temperature from the turbo.
__________________
http://superturbodiesel.com/images/sig.04.10.jpg
1995 E420 Schwarz
1995 E300 Weiss
#1987 300D Sturmmachine
#1991 300D Nearly Perfect
#1994 E320 Cabriolet
#1995 E320 Touring
#1985 300D Sedan
OBK #42
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-02-2011, 11:12 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by winmutt View Post
More likely its the increased intake temperature from the turbo.
So...the pressure drops and the temperature rises?

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 09:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page