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
  #61  
Old 11-28-2014, 05:55 PM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
Are you sure it's not a #14 head? If the injectors are good, why not use them? IIRC the nozzles are the same and that's where the magic happens. There's nothing inclined about the injectors themselves. If it's a later head, it'll take a very keen eye to know if the head was clearanced for early prechambers rather than the other way around. I imagine the prechambers were clearanced because it's a heck of a chore work in the prechamber pockets.

Manifold and turbo studs can be removed. Lots of penetrant, heat and a couple of nuts

Sixto
MB-less
I sure hope it was just the pre chambers that were screwed with. Because I can get a good set of inclined injectors, prechambers, and lock rings.
Attached Thumbnails
OM603 3.0L to 3.5L cylinder head interchangeable?-picsart_1417215608943.jpg  
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-28-2014, 06:02 PM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Wait, I'm sorry. Does the head decide if you have "inclined injection" or the prechambers and injectors? In other words, will I have inclined injection using this late head but having the old style prechamber setup?
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-28-2014, 10:44 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,327
Prechambers determine firing angle. Injectors fire straight. I'm pretty sure the prechamber pocket in the head isn't different between #14 and later castings other than accommodating the shoulder of the prechamber.

Sixto
MB-less
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-28-2014, 11:15 PM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
Prechambers determine firing angle. Injectors fire straight. I'm pretty sure the prechamber pocket in the head isn't different between #14 and later castings other than accommodating the shoulder of the prechamber.

Sixto
MB-less
the inclined injectors must be an advantage somehow. is there a noticeable difference in power or fuel mileage? smoother idle?
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-28-2014, 11:44 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,327
According to http://www.startekinfo.com/StarTek/outside/12264/Program/Engine/602_603/07.1-0010.pdf,

* Improved cold start
* More favourable air/fuel blending as a result of shorter glow plug in combination with recess and concave in the ball pin
* Particle reduction and improvement in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide.


I hear inclined injection bends rods

Sixto
MB-less
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-28-2014, 11:53 PM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
According to http://www.startekinfo.com/StarTek/outside/12264/Program/Engine/602_603/07.1-0010.pdf,

* Improved cold start
* More favourable air/fuel blending as a result of shorter glow plug in combination with recess and concave in the ball pin
* Particle reduction and improvement in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide.


I hear inclined injection bends rods

Sixto
MB-less
are you serious about bending rods?!?! there is some really cool info in that document! if you were me, would you try to find the later prechambers or would you be perfectly happy with the older prechambers and good injectors? i do want to get that 3.5L IP for MOAR LOW RPM TORQUE
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-28-2014, 11:58 PM
compu_85's Avatar
Waiting for his Model 3..
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springfield VA
Posts: 5,174
Here's more info on the changes for the 3.5:

http://eva2.homeip.net/mb91/1990-1991_turbodiesels.pdf

The angled injection worked so well the 350s didn't need a catalyst, whereas the 300 did.

-J
__________________
1991 350SDL. 230,000 miles (new motor @ 150,000).

2013 Fiat 500E. 20,000 miles, 80 miles at a time.
2012 Passat TDI. 95,000 miles. More space, power, and fuel economy than the Benz
2004 Touareg V10 TDI. 150,000 miles. One of 450.
1999 Jetta TDI. 310,000 miles.
1992 Jetta ECOdiesel. 156,000 miles. 1 of 48. Sold.
1991 Jetta ECOdiesel. 430,000 miles. 1 of 700. Sold to VeeDubTDI, totaled in front of our house
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-29-2014, 12:05 AM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by compu_85 View Post
Here's more info on the changes for the 3.5:

http://eva2.homeip.net/mb91/1990-1991_turbodiesels.pdf

The angled injection worked so well the 350s didn't need a catalyst, whereas the 300 did.

-J
do you think the steeper cam profile in the 3.5's IP helped at all?
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-29-2014, 12:06 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,327
Fuel is fuel. I'm unconvinced the 3.5 IP can deliver more fuel at low rpm in a way that will produce more torque in a 3.0. The fuel demands of a 3.0 at 4800rpm vs a 3.5 at 4300rpm suggests a 3.0 IP is more than capable. Both IPs have the same 5.5(?)mm elements so one can't outflow the other beyond the higher rpm capability of the 3.0 IP. Back off the full load stop of your 3.0 IP then consider whether a 3.5 IP is necessary.

Sixto
MB-less
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-29-2014, 12:21 AM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
Fuel is fuel. I'm unconvinced the 3.5 IP can deliver more fuel at low rpm in a way that will produce more torque in a 3.0. The fuel demands of a 3.0 at 4800rpm vs a 3.5 at 4300rpm suggests a 3.0 IP is more than capable. Both IPs have the same 5.5(?)mm elements so one can't outflow the other beyond the higher rpm capability of the 3.0 IP. Back off the full load stop of your 3.0 IP then consider whether a 3.5 IP is necessary.

Sixto
MB-less
i think it was gsxr that played around with the 3.5 IP on his 3.0 block. there are a couple of people that have and reported it really got out of the hole quicker. max rpm limit is a few hundred rpm less but they said they couldn't feel any difference up top in the rpm range. the elements are the same between the two but the 3.5 does use a different cam for a more aggressive and quicker delivery. i think it would be really interesting to try it as i really like all that torque off the line. don't care too much about holding it at the rev limiter for power unless i have a superpump that makes s ton of power and even then, i'd love to pull past some ricers at 3k
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11-29-2014, 12:48 AM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 20,327
Hmm... I wasn't aware gsxr ever had a 3.5 IP in his garage let alone his car. Leaving rev range on the table is very un-gsxr-like How is a steeper IP cam profile different from advancing IP timing? Has anyone shared dyno results of 3.5 vs 3.0 IP on a 3.0? It might be time to move this sidebar to the Diesel Performance forum.

Sixto
MB-less
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-29-2014, 12:54 AM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
OM603 semi-super pump testing, fitted with Bosch 6.0mm elements

i am VERY interested in using the 3.5L pump myself. read through and tell me what you think. not as many 3.5 pumps as the 3.0 pumps so not many care to play with them.
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-29-2014, 01:08 AM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
view post #12 on that ^^^
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-29-2014, 11:03 AM
gsxr's Avatar
Unbanned...?
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
Hmm... I wasn't aware gsxr ever had a 3.5 IP in his garage let alone his car. Leaving rev range on the table is very un-gsxr-like How is a steeper IP cam profile different from advancing IP timing? Has anyone shared dyno results of 3.5 vs 3.0 IP on a 3.0? It might be time to move this sidebar to the Diesel Performance forum.
Correct. I never tried a 3.5L pump, and leaving revs on the table would not be acceptable in my garage, lol. You can adjust the pump to fix the rev issue but I'm not sure how the different cam profile affects power. Myna did not (would not?) use the 3.5 pumps back in the day, I wonder what Goran has to say about them.

__________________
Dave M.
Boise, ID

1997 E420 - 155kmi (Bugeyes)
1994 E420 - 145kmi (Blondie)
1993 500E - 193kmi (Lollipop)
1992 400E - 189kmi (Stinky Dirty)
Check out my website photos, documents, and movies!
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-29-2014, 11:06 AM
BenzTurbo's Avatar
300cd
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsxr View Post
Correct. I never tried a 3.5L pump, and leaving revs on the table would not be acceptable in my garage, lol. You can adjust the pump to fix the rev issue but I'm not sure how the different cam profile affects power. Myna did not (would not?) use the 3.5 pumps back in the day, I wonder what Goran has to say about them.

Oops, I miss read. My bad. Then someone else must have used it in their 3.0 and had good off the line torque?
__________________
83 300CD- sanden, dual p/f condensers, 160a alternator, ect
91 300TD- 722.6, #22 head, 3.5L IP, w140 manifolds, ect
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 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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