A second option I had thought of is checking if a supercharger system from a C230k using the early M62 Eaton could be adapted to a E320 I6.
I have heard that there are similarities in the two motors configurations.

My thought was if Benz made both the 4 and 6 cylinder blocks alike as far a bracket bolt pattern, and possibly crank balancer. THis might be possible? I have a complete C230k engine not in use,in my garage.

Has anyone done any checking into this possibility?

NOTE: My first option is in the post about a rear mount turbo size.

well that s/c is too small for the m104 I6 and will only give low end pull and prolly no hp gain! and this is at best what u might get from it.

__________________
Jay,
-----------------
-1995 Blue W202 C36 AMG (M) SOLD ;(
-1995 Black W140 S500 (Lady)
-1992 Black W124 E300 (Dima) (Ex-Mosselman
Twin turbo Kit).
-1988 Black W124 300 E 4-Matic.(Nadeen)
-1983 Brown W126 500SEL.(Old Lady)(Sold)
-1981 Gold W123 280CE.(Dareen)(Sold)
http://www.youtube.com/user/jayrasheed

The early kompressor 230 used an Eaton M62 which is commonly rated for a 3.0-4.0 l motor. It is the same size used on early GM 3.8,& Nissan Xterra 3.3, as well as several others of over 3.0 l. Even a BBK kit for a Ford OHV 4.0.
Benz actually switched to the smaller M45 on later C230 models which worked better on the smaller 4 cyl.
I have personally done several Eaton based supercharger systems. My main concern would be the possible use of the dual belt C230K crank pulley on a 320. The 320 single pulley would not spin the blower enough. If that would work and the blower bracket from the 230 on the 320, I think the system is very possible. I need to do some homework on if the pre supercharged 230 crank pulley is or was the same as a 320 unit, it's remotely possible.

I have (pipe) dreams of installing an Eaton M90 on an M116 (which happens to be exactly the same displacement that that they were designed for) but the belt is going to be a significant challenge. I will say that they are cheap, simple, plentiful, and rebuilding them is not terribly difficult.

I'm working on the plans for mounting the unit to the intake; I have an EDIS trigger wheel and pulley that I hope to weld onto a spare crank pulley (hopefully, reasonably straight and balanced)

If you consider doing this, doing homework is important. There are several models out there, and the very newest ones were generally the best. The nosepieces are long and short, and the intake is straight (actually, curved to the right a little) on some, and curved to the left on others. the number after the M generally is the number of cubic inches per revolution, and the bearings have RPM limits ,and overdriving them
beyond their original intent increases heat exponentially, which will certainly cause knock.

__________________
86 560SL
With homebrew first gear start!
85 380SL
Daily Driver Project

http://juliepalooza.8m.com/sl/mercedes.htm

my bad then, i prolly had the 45 in my mind.

__________________
Jay,
-----------------
-1995 Blue W202 C36 AMG (M) SOLD ;(
-1995 Black W140 S500 (Lady)
-1992 Black W124 E300 (Dima) (Ex-Mosselman
Twin turbo Kit).
-1988 Black W124 300 E 4-Matic.(Nadeen)
-1983 Brown W126 500SEL.(Old Lady)(Sold)
-1981 Gold W123 280CE.(Dareen)(Sold)
http://www.youtube.com/user/jayrasheed

First off remember that Eaton blowers are like a roots blower in reguard to rotor shaft. They have a slight twist, but they are nothing like a KennyBell/Autorotor/Opcon which has a screw type rotor. The Eatons lobed rotor does not produce a smooth flow when spinning slow. I tried a large Eaton on a small motor before, not good. Many people try to use a M90 on everything because you can pick one up for under $100. on Ebay from an old Tbird. Most times those units are trashed and non rebuildable. People also try M90 units after trying to calculate pulley size in conjunction with their motor's small crank pulley. Simple, a larger unit does not need to spin as fast as a small unit. A small unit however has to spin very fast which generates more heat, and possibly cooks the unit if unserviced. NOTE; EVERTHING needs service!!
Benz 230k models using the M62 almost always need a new nose bearing on the pulley. These are the early 99-01 models with the big electro-magnetic clutch. If yours sounds like a bag of marbles, go on Ebay and for $29. there is a guy selling them. I actually keep an extra onhand. I run a 3" custom pully with no clutch on mine so bearings do not last as long. They seem to only be good for about 55kmi.

Be careful when mounting an Eaton, remember that it's not the weight of the unit that is your main concern. It's the force of the drive belt pulling the unit. And did you say WELD to a crank pulley Balancer? Be careful as you already know on the balance, and check first that the metals are ok to weld. We did a pulley once, spent hours on it. After the weld, the metal was brittle as SH-T. We thought it was plain steel, Nope!


I'm only planing on 5-6 psi. I already found out that the timing cover seal/ repair bearing on the market is the same for the 230 and 320, that's very good to hear. I need to find out , I believe that both motors are internal balance? If the ofsets on both balancer/ pulleys are the same, I should be able to use the 230k unit on the 320. I hope

I used one of these early on. The problem is to reach 5-6lbs of boost you have to spin the thing really hard. I had a 2 1/4" pulley on it. This put it at almost 3-1 ratio. I blew the rear bearings out of one of them. With the stock setup on a 4 cylinder it only made 7lbs. Same ratios on the 6cyl and you are going to be maybe 3lbs.

The M116/117 crank pulley has a long barrel and then all the (old-school V-belt) pulleys, and I intend to weld the pulley and EDIS trigger on this barrel. Since the back of it was already welded at the factory, I think it will be OK (with TIG and not MIG). There are places that can balance a pulley that I may investigate. Welding on the balancer is a no-go, it's cast and contains rubber.

There is a lot of information on the Internet about the calculations it takes to figure out what compression to expect and what RPM it's going to take to get it, given the engine displacement and diameters of the upper and lower pulleys. In my case, I am going for about 6 PSI (which, without an intercooler, is reasonable and will provide some kick).

Running the rotors (2:1 inside the blower) near the limits is not a good idea. These are supported at the rear with needle bearings that are lubricated at the factory and there is no way to externally lubricate them.

__________________
86 560SL
With homebrew first gear start!
85 380SL
Daily Driver Project

http://juliepalooza.8m.com/sl/mercedes.htm

The stock C230k has nearly a 3.65" pulley on the blower, and puts out approx. 6-7 psi. I custom made a 3" pulley and get approx 10psi. You can not be using this same blower, because there is simply no way to get a 2 1/4" pulley on that snout, but I never like to say never, you might have done it. I would love to see a pick of it over the snout needle bearing, and with the shaft coupler you must have fabricated. There was one guy who made a 2.75" pulley I remember who had to do alot of fuel system work. I remember he stated that once you break 11psi that the fuel system can not keep up, and his 2.75" pulley broke that mark. Off hand I do not remember the C230 crank pulley diameter. If I'm able to utilize this C230 M62 unit, even with the same size crank pulley as the stock 230k with my 3" pulley, without doing the math I'd simply have to get 5psi out of it.

I do not have any of it any more but what I did was take an alternator pulley and machine it to accept the bearing and a c-clip. Then I took clutch drive apart and removed the spline and welded a flat washer to it. Then I tapped and drilled and bolted the two pieces together. So sufficed to say there was no clutch. Basically the pulley was probably around a 1/2" bigger in diameter than the bearing. I am pretty sure it was 2 1/4 but maybe 2.5". I never saw more than 6lbs of boost. I run a whipple 1.6l blower with a 2.75" pulley to make just under 12lbs. This is all with the stock m104 crank pulley of course.
I always wanted to adapt the m111 crank pulley. I think it would work just fine.
I would check the epc for a common dampener for the two engines on a non-supercharger app. I know they both use the same flywheel but dampening may be different.

Can you point me to that ebay item?

I have a 1999 CLK 230 Kompressor (euro) that sounds like a bag of marbles lol

Thats the drive restriction, just not enough pulley. What you did to make a supercharger pulley sounds alot like what I did. But,I taped three hardened allen bolts to the face of my solid 3" pulley. I found the shaft coupler needs to float a little and not be bolted to the pulley firm. I also welded a thick washer to my stock splined center part. I finished by grinding out three round holes to accept the heads of the allen bolts.

I have not found a common damper, I think that I'll take a 320 unit off and match it up to the 230k to see if it looks possible. If the supercharger bracket does not line up I can always add a 1/2" aluminum plate to adapt.
I figured a E300 turbo diesel intercooler would work perfect, aftermarkets are plenty cheap too. If a 230k intercooler fits I already have one.

Hi,
The seller currently does not have any listed, and just sold three on seperate auctions. I have already sent a message to ask if there were more. The item number was 280534499680. I recomend that you do not email asking the same. Wait until I receive a response and I will leave a message on this post. If multiple people start asking, the price is sure to go up. Maybe I can arrange a bulk purchase if more people are interested. I would not expect any discount, just getting the bearing for that price is good enough.