Just curious if it's been done and how hard it would be.

__________________
1993 300E 2.8 185k miles
2006 Mustang Convertible 4.0 Eaton Supercharged

I would recommend against it. ....but if I HAD to do a domestic swap I would do a ford since they are a lot narrower....and because they put them in Cobras!

Tom W

__________________
[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.

I have a W108 sbc.

617 into W108?

There was a guy that came to RBM one day with a purple prostreet blown big block in a 108.
He laid a strip the entire length of the service garage.

That's quite the sleeper! Nice job! I'm not thinking of doing this any time soon if at all, just curious if it's reasonably easy and cost effective. When the engine in my 300E dies some day (I hope in the very distant future) I'm thinking it would probably be much cheaper than rebuilding or replacing the Merc engine.

__________________
1993 300E 2.8 185k miles
2006 Mustang Convertible 4.0 Eaton Supercharged

Wasn't there a guy on here putting a 3.8 turbo v6 out of a Grand National Buick in a 124 Body? If someone did a conversion for whatever reason this would seem like a excellent choice considering the 87 GN T-V6 powered the quickest american production car for 87 (and a bit quicker than the 92-94 500e) plus it was quiet , tame , reliable and had good gas mileage.

4.3 Vortec is a good choice for such a swap, cheap, powerful and easy to fit.

Cost effective??? It may seem so at first. Then you run into all sorts of issues trying to make things work as well as MB had intended. That's when it starts to get costly, time consuming.

I would repair the original MB engine or seek out a good used one. Chances of resale would be much better.

Speaking of resale... anyone want a sleeper W108?

Yeah right! Maybe the GNX... Stock GN V6 turbo,, not even close.

__________________
Current Stable:
01 ML55 AMG
92 500E (a few mods)
87 300E (lots of mods)
00 Chevy 3500HD Diesel Box Truck
68 18' Donzi Marine
06 GT i-Drive7 1.0 Mountain Bike (with GPS!)

PREVIOUSLY OWNED:83 300SD, 87 420SEL, 88 420SEL, 90 420SEL, 86 560SEL, 86 190E 2.3-16V AMG, 94 E320

I see you own a 500e so you really rather not have that fact pushed on you but Yes a GNX was powered by the V6 Turbo and was quicker than the 500e. Not sure where your getting the info on the 500e. Here is a link to Car & Driver 86 Gn . http://d0n3d.tripod.com/intercooled.htm . You can search out the GNX also. Not trying to get into a peeing contest though just stating it would be a more interesting conversion than a SBC IMHO.
"The acceleration performance of the GNX outpaced the factory's power claims: 0-60 mph (97 km/h) took just 4.7 s with a 13.4 s/104 mph (167 km/h) quarter-mile. According to contemporary sources, these numbers made the GNX the fastest production sedan ever built. This claim is somewhat controversial—the car had two doors but its interior volume and structure made it a sedan rather than a coupe, and just 547 examples were built. GNX #001 is currently owned by Buick and sometimes makes appearances at car shows around the US. Although many quicker cars have been built, including a number of quicker modern sedans, its performance was truly impressive for the time. A contemporary Porsche 930 hit (97 km/h) in 5.0 seconds and ran the quarter mile in 13.6 seconds, roughly equivalent to the GNX, which cost much less and could out-accelerate the naturally-aspirated 911 of the day. Ironically, many believe that these performance numbers were the reason the GNX was axed. GM didn't want one of its own cars outperforming its flagship, the Corvette, and pulled the plug on the Buick program. The muscle cars of the 1960s had the power to beat the GNX, but the tires of the time could not transform this into speed, not to mention the numerous techniques employed in the GNX allowed the car to transfer all the power to the ground, such as a ladder bar that ran from the mid-section of the car to the rear axle, so as to increase traction. This is also the reason why a GNX will actually lift the rear end up when the car is about to launch heavily. The GNX never made much of a road-track competitor to cars like the 911, but it could certainly hold its own on a drag strip."

That was also the era when the turbocharged buicks were contesting the indianapolis 500. The tail end of the golden era there.

What they are doing now with spec chassis and spec engines is a pale imitation of the colorful Indy of my youth.


The sixties and seventies.

Tom W

__________________
[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.

I tend to trust the Car and Driver stats more than I would trust the GM stats.



It says it ran a 13.9@98MPh.


It says the 0-60 time is 4.9 seconds...

__________________
-Justin

91 560 SEC AMG - other dogs dd
01 Honda S2000 - dogs dd
07 MB ML320 CDI - dd
16 Lexus IS250 - wifes dd

it's automatic.

Here is a E500E time slip from a trusted source, Dave M.





Showing the 13.8 Time.

__________________
-Justin

91 560 SEC AMG - other dogs dd
01 Honda S2000 - dogs dd
07 MB ML320 CDI - dd
16 Lexus IS250 - wifes dd

it's automatic.

Ok so these are the GN's times according to C&D and Motor trend had them at 13.8 in the same article, correct? Now are you saying you are using this as to same data for GNX? Just google the buick v6 turbo 1986 or 87 and remember there is a T type a Grand National and a GNX. I won't even get into posting time slips or links to peoples "stock" cars running this or that. Look it up and you will find all types of Buicks that are claimed to "stock" running 12s with good tires and 100+ octane gas. Would you believe it? Popular Mech did a test August 1997 the one they used with 140,000 miles on it ran a 13.80 and 12.52 with the boost cranked from 15 to 22 and 100+ gas. Ours did a 12.90 with a crank of the boost a high flow CC , a hot wired fuel pump K&N air cleaner and 100+ gas Less than 300.00 and a few hours time to install . Again , the GNX was quicker than the 500e and my point was that if someone WAS to do a conversion this would be a interesting Alt. to the same old SBC conversion people put into just about everything. Feel free to point me to the 92 - 94 500e stats you find showing it performed quicker than either the GN or the GNX. I am more than interested in them.

A quote from the link "This is the 1987 Buick Grand National. It was the final year for the GN but Buick didn't go quiet into the night. They put out a whopping 20,193 GNs that year. A few changes were made over the 86 version. Once again Motor Trend and other magazines gave the GN the title of fastest U.S. production car, as it ran 13.8 seconds @ 100 mph in the quarter mile, in show-room form. *photo shown here is of a good friend of mine; Bill Moller's 87 GN*"