Team,

Finally I decided to pull the engine out and check it once.

It will make it easier for me to work on the fuel system. I know its drastic, but I could not spend a lot of time bent under the bonnet.

Had to invest in a engine crane and stand...

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

When you get the engine back in, let me know and I can send you a picture of that tool that you were asking for (115 289 30 23 00). I found one on ebay a few years ago and bought it on a whim.

__________________
1968 220D, w115, /8, OM615, Automatic transmission.
My 1987 300TD wagon was sold and my 2003 W210 E320 wagon was totaled (sheds tear).

Team,

Sorry for updating you after a long time.
So far I have...

1. Torn down the complete engine including rings and bearings etc to bare block.
2. Checked and cleaned all parts and changed anything that was worn.
3. Used new gasket set and refreshed the engine.
4. Painted most parts, blued most bolts/nuts and made some cosmetic improvements...
5. Checked the diaphragm on the injector pump and filled it with fresh oil.
6. I started it as shown in the pics on the engine stand.

The next step is to clean the engine bay and "refresh" it too and drop the engine.

Now, started the engine on the stand and its a runaway now!!! does not want to idle less than max rpm!

From STALLING to MAX revving... any NEW suggestions?

Thanks, HEAPS.

PS: Pics for viewing pleasure . Also, I did make a video of the complete process of "Refreshing" the engine and once edited will upload.

Attached Thumbnails

       

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

Its the orange paint!

Just kidding.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

Metallic Burnt Copper!

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

Is this one of the cars with the pneumatic governor on the IP? If so, you need the intake manifold in place with the butterfly valve and the pneumatic line to the IP for it to work properly. I only bring it up because in your pictures there's no intake manifold.

__________________
Current stable:
1995 E320 149K (Nancy)
1983 500SL 120K (SLoL)

Black Sheep:
1985 524TD 167K (TotalDumpster™)

Gone but not forgotten:
1986 300SDL (RIP)
1991 350SD
1991 560SEL
1990 560SEL
1986 500SEL Euro (Rusted to nothing at 47K!)

I believe so. the IP has a port to fix a vacuum line to the intake manifold (hard black plastic type).
And you are correct. I haven't put the intake manifold to start the engine.
Will do later today and update you all.

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

Update: Ok, I put the intake manifold and connected all the hoses, except air filter. Now the engine starts has white smoke and shuts off....

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

There is a solid clue here. When the engine had the intake manifold off. It ran pretty much wide open. Also was capable of running longer So I would think there was no lack of fuel or an air issue in the fuel.

I do wonder if the controlled or controlling flap by vacuum could smother the engine out though when hooked up. Again I do not know this set up. Is it possible to block this flap from totally deploying? In an attempt to troubleshoot?


It almost sounds like it has something to do with perhaps what was hooked up to the injection pump or what that actually controls in the injection pump. The time frame still allows about the same amount of time for the system vacuum to build up.


I hope this is just common sense and might get a member really familiar with those injection pumps and how they function thinking. Also white smoke is unburnt fuel another clue that the engine is being smothered off perhaps?

Thanks, barry12345 and all other forum members who have given me important info.
Today I retimed the IP, but could not accurately get the 1 sec drip after trying for two hours... (either it pours or drips slowly - finally gave up to pretty close), adjusted the throttle linkages, flap opening etc., and also changed the back housing of the governor (where the vacuum from the throttle is screwed to).
Now the engine starts and runs! did not run it more than a minute since it's on the engine stand and there is no radiator.
Now I have started cleaning the engine bay and the transmission to get the car going...

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

I am not positive. The first element used to time the engine should have shut totally off at some point when attempting to set the timing. There is a possibility of some wear between the piston and bore of that element. If it would not.

It may not matter overall at higher element speeds when the engine is running. Although if the car is good in general. You might keep your eyes open for an injection pump in tighter condition. No rush to do so.

Eventually that element may not make pop off pressure. There is no reason to suspect the other elements would be in much better condition.

As I mentioned at the start. I am not positive. Maybe that amount of element bypass leakage is allowable on those earlier injection pumps. The engine runs after all.

We have a member who once worked on these injection pumps. Perhaps he will read your post and clarify what is reasonable. Older cars having wear unfortunatly is always a possibility. Sometimes it matters and other times not as much.

Glad to hear you got it running .

Thanks Barry12345, you may be correct with the injection pump. It was on the car and there was another one in bad shape in the boot when I purchased the car... So I assume it was parked 11 years ago due to pump issues.

Obviously, now it runs on the stand. Once I figure out the transmission model, I need to order some o rings that are leaking so that I can fix and put everything back in the car.

Cleaned the engine bay and its ready for action!

Attached Thumbnails

   

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

Now that engine bay is really clean.

After sitting as long as that engine did. Eleven years is a fair stretch. Just some usage should further improve it. I found the driving experience between the older 114/115 and the 123 types somewhat different.

My perception was in favor of the earlier models in some ways. To me at least. Not as much feeling like being on a softer couch.

Another again just personal perception was the lighter engines and transmissions seem to favor these chassis designs better. At least from the handling perspective.

A lot to do with this is perhaps just the way I drive. As you get more weight forward they seem to respond to that as a heavier car to me. Yes I know they are heavier but the change observed by me is more than I would expect.

This is nothing new in reality when it came to their products. My 1962 gas fintail was very front tire sensitive. I never experimented with the 114s or 123s. That fintail would under steer until I found the right tires for it.

Although I have to include I probably drove in a far more aggressive way more than fifty years ago. All things considered I think I would like heavier sway or stabilizer bars in the 123s. When it has the five cylinder turbo and automatic transmission.

I doubt any heavier version of the front sway bar is available. Perhaps the back one from a 123 station wagon would help a little. I have heard it is stronger. To me the front one is the primary issue though. You do not seem to lose traction with reduced load transfer on the front ends when cornering.

I probably will add stronger shock absorbers to the 1984 300d when I get around to really going through it. It is a pretty good example with an indicated 160K miles. Many things seem to indicate it may even be true.

At the same time in all fairness I have never returned an old 123 5 cylinder turbo back to its like new condition suspension wise. Plus they are thirty plus years old now. I just have a feeling that some of their earlier chassis versions handled better at least to me.

Why I prefer the 240d with a manual transmission in the 123 chassis . When on the surface it seems illogical is also an opinion shared by others. If there is a total combined reason it still eludes me.

Gentlemen,

I am reviving this old thread to give it a closure...

Thank you for all the advice over the years.

This week, I gave up and wanted to sell the car, so put the engine back in and plumbed all the electrical, coolant and fuel lines. Same issue, starts and dies.

Then I started getting all the left over parts of the car together to pass it on to a new owner and I noticed that had another banjo bolt with spring and ball inside it, that looks like the one that is on the IP.

I decided to swap it for the one on the IP and did.

Then the sucker started and idled as if nothing has happened!!!

I pulled the engine out 3 years ago, refreshed it, and put all new perishable items and gaskets for no reason... All along it was this banjo bolt!!!

Pic attached.

Thank you for all the advice to date. One good thing is, I can now remove an engine, rebuilt it and put it back in the car! This experience is priceless.

But, there is a new issue. The trasmisson does not pull... The max i can do is 30MPH @ a lot of RPM...

Attached Thumbnails

       

__________________
1974 MB W115 240D

I used to stress checking for fuel pressure. Until I sounded like a broken record even to myself. Almost nobody would check it. Even though it was a part of servicing these engine in Mercedes literature.


The kick down switch for the automatic might be shorted or stuck. Just the simplest possibility I can think of.