|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
350 engine swap on 91 350 SDL
Finally giving up and putting a 300 engine in the 91 350 SDL I'm restoring. I would like to get a little more power from the 300 engine. I will turn the ALDA screw out some. Would it help to put the #17 head on with angled injectors? Can the timing be changed a little without causing anything nasty to happen? Any other suggestions would be appreciated. I adjusted the turbo up on my 90 350 to 15 psi years ago without any problems and am planning to do the same here. Would it help to put the 350 turbo on? I've got all kinds of spare parts to play with, just need some input from you fellas that have changed these out before. Thanks
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FWIW "superturbodiesel" is a forum site all about performance tuning MB diesels.
__________________
'77 240D, 504H, OM617.952, etc. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I don't have the money or inclination to into complicated or expensive modifications. According to MB specs the 300 engine has 28 less ft-lbs torque than the 350 and a little more HP. I expect that when MB found out they had problems (which they wouldn't admit being good Germans) with the 350 engine they detuned it to keep it running. Just need a little more power, not a fire breathing dragon-my wife's Acura RSX serves that purpose if I get nostalgic about my youth.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I would use the the 3.5 head, turbo and injection pump on the 3.0 block. ALDA removal helped my 300SDL.
__________________
Present 1987 300SDL 1991 300SL 1990 560SEL 2001 ML320 Past 1969 200D 1979-82 1983 300SD 1984-85 1972 250C 1982-02 1995 S350 2011 1997 S320 2012 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I did this swap a few months back, and I elected to keep the 3.0 pump and turbo on the motor when I installed it. I used the head from the 3.5 because it was a newer #20 or 21 head.
The main reason for my decision was that the 3.0 has a redline that's about 1,000rpm higher than the 3.5, so I wanted to use the 3.0's injection pump. I think the 3.0 would be a real dog if you lost the top 1,000rpm. I also kept the 3.0 transmission because the shift points were correct for the 3.0 engine. I've read comments from people who have kept the 3.5 transmission and they say that it works, but feels just a bit off, apparently. I find this rather surprising; I'd think it would be a direct swap, but I'm just repeating what I had read. The 3.5 that I removed ran pretty well but it was going through a TON of oil. I've driven a number of 3.0 cars and two 3.5's. The increased low end torque is very noticeable off the line in the 3.5, but once the car is moving I really don't see many differences. While I was doing the swap, I deleted the EGR and did a number of other maintenance items. It's a nice car to drive and I'd do it again- it really wasn't that hard. The car is sitting in the driveway right now awaiting a new crank seal- I replaced pretty much every seal but forgot this one. Sure enough, it started spraying oil last week. Oh well. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
A cheap mod would be propane injection for extra power when needed.
__________________
1999 w140, quit voting to old, and to old to fight, a god damned veteran |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I would guess any power difference is negligible. The reason why I switched heads was for reliability. And the 3.0 I put in the car had been sitting on a pallet for 10 or more years so I wanted to refresh all the gaskets- it was the perfect time to switch the head and put a new chain on.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not sure why you need any more power than it has now. Turning the ALDA screw isn't going to do much at all.
A 603 under any circumstance running correctly has plenty of power. Shouldn't be an issue.
__________________
Only diesels in this driveway. 2005 E320 CDI 243k Black/Black 2008 Chevy 3500HD Duramax 340k 2004 Chevy 2500HD Duramax 220k |
Bookmarks |
|
|