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 05-22-2002, 10:23 AM
Nscarpi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
79 300D non turbo vs 81 and up 300D turbo

I had an 84 300DT until last week when a 19 year old with no insurance pulled in front of my wife. Now I have a parts car. I was looking around at different local 300D's and I test drove a 79 with no turbo. I was amazed at the performance it had. It went right off the line, it could have passed for a gas engine. My 300DT was a real dog off the line. I thought I checked everything, the trans was starting in 1st. It seemed to run great after 10-15 MPH. I only tried 1 other 300DT (82) it was a dog also. Was there something wrong with the one I had and the other DT I drove? Or are they worse off the line then the older non-turboed 300's?
Thanks

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-22-2002, 10:58 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 5,440
A turbo doesn't have much more off the line than a non turbo until the turbo boost is enough to increase the HP of the engine. On the 5 clyinder this is maximum at about 2500 RPM. But after 2500 RPM the turbo should run away from the non turbo. This is even more noticeable at high altitudes.

P E H
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-22-2002, 11:54 AM
Robert W. Roe's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Lehigh Valley PA
Posts: 1,330
Actually a lot of people have said that the non-turbo's have more low rpm "oomph" than the turbo's. I felt that way about my 1977 300D. It was actually much quicker off the line than either of my SD's. I know the SD is a bit heavier, and has a different tranny, but I've noticed this on a TDt I drove once too. I never messed with my EGR, so this might be part of it, maybe.
__________________
Bob Roe
Lehigh Valley PA USA
1973 Olds 88, 1972 MB 280SE, 1978 Datsun 280Z, 1971 Ford T-Bird, 1972 Olds 88, 1983 Nissan Sentra, 1985 Sentra, 1973 230.6, 1990 Acura Integra, 1991 Volvo 940GLE wagon, 1983 300SD, 1984 300SD, 1995 Subaru Legacy L wagon, 2002 Mountaineer, 1991 300TE wagon, 2008 Murano, 2007 R320CDI 4Matic 52K, some Hyundai, 2008 BMW 535xi wagon, all gone... currently
2007 Honda Odyssey Touring, 2014 E350 4matic
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-22-2002, 12:06 PM
Fimum Fit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
As far as the 300TD (station wagon W123 cars) are concerned:

the non-turboes had a 3.45 to 1 final drive, whereas the turboes had a 3.07. Anybody who's been reading "Hot Rod" regularly since 1956 (I wonder what my heirs will get for that collection of magazines?) knows that with equal displacement and weight, the former will outjump the latter off the line even if the latter has a big advantage in top end power.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-22-2002, 04:38 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 18,355
I live in Denver.(The Mile HIgh City) I have a 1977 300d. I test drove an early 80's 300dt a few weeks ago. It was WAY FASTER off the line than my non-turbo. I thought there would not be much of a difference until the turbo kicked in but there was. Don't know how to account for it apart from the effect of the turbo at altitude even at low rpm's.

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 02:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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