I like the idea of a mercedes transmission in a mercedes. Ill be looking at maybe 380 ft lbs in the long run. It there any to beef the 6 speed up? And how would you go about dealing with the electronics?

__________________
87 w124 om603

Im beginning to think the 716.620 in europe only. Some of the slks are m111 but with 5 speeds.

__________________
87 w124 om603

It isn't a "Mercedes" transmission to start with. It's Getrag. You could get a custom flywheel and cryo treat the gears for longevity.

The S2K has seen 700+ hp and the RX8 415~ whp. The 124 is only a couple hundred more lbs than the RX8.

On a dyno or on the street and how long did those boxes last? I've seen well driven RX8's go at much less than that. You never did quote the torque numbers on either either. I could care less about horsepower. 700hp at 10 grand is only 350ftlbs of torque. That's right at the outerlimit of a MB 6 speed as it stands. I do know that high horsepower RX8 guys commonly go to the much stronger RX7 box. I'm not sure the torque numbers on the Honda box, but it's light, and Honda's don't exactly produce torque. If you happen to know any of the M104's that are high revving, low torque, high strung little things, you let me know.

__________________
1993 190E 2.6 Sportline

The early 104 actually is? 196 lb/ft peak at around 4600 isn't exactly torque-y for an I6, 3.0L. Even the M3s have a longer stroke. It's not like the MB engines were built for torque from the onset.

The RX8 had 304lb/ft at the wheels peak. The S2K probably is around 350-360 at the wheels. Still quite a lot actually??? That's more than a 2002 Camaro SS!

Those transmissions are fine, is all I'm saying. Especially for a street car with driveshaft donuts, a dual-mass flywheel, and sprung clutch. Drifters, jackasses, and professionals will break anything with enough effort. If you want decent gear ratios, you can spend $3'500 for a V160, or get one of those. I think the newer 'Z' cars don't have a removable bellhousing, or that would be another option. Obviously, the BMW 6-speed is another good option, but potentially expensive. Seeing how people get with money when it comes to tuning, the $500-600 for the cheap 6 speeds is already too rich.

The point I'm making is that those numbers are still within the range (on the outside, but still there) of the Merc 6 speed. So all that work to adapt would be pointless?

You're correct the Nissan box is not a removable bellhousing, but you're going to have to make an adapter plate anyway, either from a removable M104 auto housing or to the block itself.

The V160 imo is way over-priced. For that price you can get a Viper T56 with a bunch of work done to it or either nissan or toyota box in whatever ratio and gear engagement setup you wish. However I'm suggesting those boxes, because I plan on exceeding the amount of torque and power that the MB 6speed, a dual mass fly, or any of the lil' roadster boxes.

__________________
1993 190E 2.6 Sportline

The point is the MB trans shifter mechanism is garbage, and there isn't really anything that can be done about it. It's got luke-warm gear ratios. It was made for low end luxury cars. Why limit yourself to one box, that's rare as all hell, and sucks to begin with, and itself is overpriced? Odds are the driveshaft and shifter need modifying anyway, so that makes the ridiculous setup of those boxes more trouble than they're worth. The whole point of an inline transmission is to avoid rods and cables!

Lots of 6-speeds are out there. Most likely, just picking up that T56 is going to come with Mustang, Camaro, or maybe Viper gears, 2 of which are basically useless except for holding at low RPMs on the freeway. Even the Tremec website shows all configurations have direct 4th.

What do the computers do or respond with you take away the auto transmission?

Lolwut?

It depends on the engine, transmission, and chassis.

__________________
1993 190E 2.6 Sportline

I'd love to say that it is going well, but the fact is, I've arrived at the conclusion that the M104/6sp is not the right combo for my car.

The big problem is that I want more power than I can reasonably and economically extract from a naturally aspirated M104, and turbocharging the engine is not really an option with this gearbox unless I want to end up with a pile of useless metal.

So, on that basis I've decided to sell up the bits before I spend any more and seek an alternate powerplant and drivetrain option.

There is no doubt this conversion is doable and would work well. I'm sure the shifter mechanism I was putting together would address the issues AustinCE was alluding for not a great deal of cost and I'm kind of tempted to just finish that part off anyway.

bahaimus, are you selling the bits locally?

email me pls.

__________________
WARNING : Objects in mirror are Dumber than they appear
1972 C107 350SLC Lurch
1987 R107 560SL Stella
1986 W126 560SEL Schultz gone...
1993 C124 300CE-24 Gretel
OZBENZ - Australian Mercedes-Benz Forums

Alright. So, I haven't sold my Merc engine and gearbox (and I probably didn't really try that hard either). So I think I'm going to use them still.

I need a way to make this engine transmit it's power to the gearbox. They bolt together bellhousing wise, but they were never made to come together as a unit. So I'm not really aware of any off the shelf flywheel and clutch assembly combos that work properly. Plus I'd like a lightweight flywheel and clutch assembly as well.

First off, clutches. Both of the following clutches would be overkill for my intended naturally aspirated engine and probably won't be so flash for driving on the street (which would be limited anyway), especially with a light flywheel . However, they are very cheap even though they might need relining of the clutch discs and the plates and pressure plate might need work. They both have 26 splines, but might not be the right diameter for the input shaft as well.

But, they're light and they're smaller diameter which is a consideration for the flywheel (below)

Twin Plate





Triple Plate




Secondly, flywheel. I'm thinking of keeping the existing automatic flex plate with ring gear (It's steel/iron, but is full of holes and probably not too heavy) and making an aluminium flywheel.

Any reason I couldn't make the flywheel myself and then get someone to balance it?

The bonus of using one of the above clutches, is that I wouldn't require a steel friction insert, as these both have a bottom friction plate. And secondly, I could make a flywheel small enough that it would actually fit on my lathe at home.

I also need to make allowance for a support bearing for the gearbox input shaft in the flywheel itself as the gearbox is short nose. Like below.




Am I not considering something?

a twin or triple plate clutch like that would probebly be the death of the gearbox from the shock torque loading that much clamp can put through,

can you get a clutch disc setup with a sprung center? maby just go for a single plate with a heavy clamp pressure plate, and sprung center disc and make the flywheel out of mild steel, also with the m104 if you make the flywheel too light you will get engine resonance/vibration through the car,

Huh? Vibration throughout The rev range? I-6's don't have that problem if they're balanced. They will get between one and 3 critical points where at a specific RPM they will "sing". But if you know them accelerating though the powerband and passing them as quickly as possible makes them less of an issue. I don't see how having a flywheel too light would exaggerate the issue. Having a heavier flywheel will resist vibration but also exaggerate the issue should the flywheel also reach a harmonic point. Lighter flywheels will not 'absorb' vibration, but they will also not place as much stress on the drive train and crank should they begin to vibrate.

__________________
1993 190E 2.6 Sportline