For those who ask why not!! - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

bajaranger88 · #1 11-10-2005, 09:37 PM

Hey everyone, new to this board and mercedes motors. However not to turning wrenches and fabrication. SO....... my new project, I'm puting a 300D turbo into my 85 ranger....I also have a friend that is doing the swap into his '71 FJ40(landcruiser). I got 3 motors(ones a runner, one runs but smokes, and one is siezed and 2 good trannnies for 200.00) Stay tuned for pics and updates. The actual swap wont be happening until after the first of the year, in the mean time research on stock specs/performance/ability/etc. and of course what i can/will do to get more out of these motors. Already on the list is a front mount intercooler and probably a T3 garrett turbo, any info on these motors is greatly appreciated.

Whiskeydan · #2 11-10-2005, 10:35 PM

You don't want to use these motors. No good. Let me give you your 200 bucks back and take all this junk off your hands.

A Ranger?

compress ignite · #3 11-10-2005, 10:46 PM

I really don't want to reply to this thread with my screen name,BUT...

The 617XXX motor will put the Ranger "Down at the Nose" so violently,as to
make safe operation impossible WITHOUT major suspension re-engineering.

P.S. your friend with the Land Cruiser should look into Yanmar's 6Y series
(It's a Toyota inline 6 Diesel that Yanmar has added a 24 valve head onto)

grantdcol · #4 11-11-2005, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by compress ignite

The 617XXX motor will put the Ranger "Down at the Nose" so violently,as to
make safe operation impossible WITHOUT major suspension re-engineering.

Dude, don't be a downer! If he's smart enough to swap an old german diesel into an american compact truck, give him the benefit of the doubt on the suspension.

As for re-engineering, you obviously haven't spent any time under the front of a ranger! The most re-engineering you could possibly have is to swap for stiffer springs. The Twin-I beam is BURLY, and the 617 can't weight that much more than the V6s that came in rangers. Further, you may not know this, but 5.0L V8s are swapped into rangers all the time.

bajaranger88, I think that's an awesome idea, I have a '91 Ranger 4x4 and an '81 240 with a 3.0T. I widened my front suspension 4" per side and put it on coilovers, so it would be easy for me to adjust for a heavier engine. Right now I'm looking at the toyota 6 cylinder turbo diesel...

Post up some pics, of your truck, and of the swap!

-Colin

bajaranger88 · #5 11-24-2005, 10:29 PM

Well i got a deal on a newr ranger, so this is getting postponed for a while and the motor will be going into an exploder...will keep you updated.

t walgamuth · #6 11-24-2005, 10:46 PM

i appreciate a can do attitude, but the 617 turbo motor is going to be a lot heavier than the v6 or the v8. and an automatic is heavier than the stick too.

tom w

bajaranger88 · #7 11-28-2005, 11:50 PM

yeah well theres something to be said for simplicity. Ford suspension is EASY to motify/improve on.I will start by putting in full size coil springs(which i have in my current ranger, then go from there depending on where it sits.Basic stuff.....also i will not be puting in an automatic, using the detachable bellhousing from an early tranny(which i have) and make an adapter plate to go to a T5 from a Ford Turbo Coupe(lowest first gear), then swap tail housings to mate it to the transfer case. Probably some drive line length changes...Not to mention lots of obvious/not obvious things thjat will have to be done, But TOTALLY do-able.

Elktonjohn · #8 11-29-2005, 12:16 AM

An old friend of mine, with a lot of help, once put a Detroit 453 into a '76 3/4 GMC, and did it correctly in every conceivable way, but no matter how much it would haul or how many looks the turbo got when screaming, muffled as it was, down the road and how just plain cool the suspension air bags worked and the Exhaust was routed and the power steering modifications worked/broke/got rigged and the Turbo 400 was modified.... the damn thing still got it's nose buried in every gravel parking lot I ever drove it into. Cool idea, good idea...2 things...and did I mention the harmonics that built up in the steering over 45mph...used to get me quite excited. I love a good project and hope you do it well and have a blast just like we did, go nuts! Me, naaahhhh. Been there, for most of that, done a whole lot of that, got a t-shirt...enough of that

nuckingfuts · #9 11-29-2005, 01:33 AM

No Offense but the ranger Ibeam is a remodel of the (not so wonderful F-150 System) I rebuilt the front end on my F-250 twice in 25,000 miles under a 5.8liter. I am not trying to be negitive but rather helpful. I am assuming that this is more of a baja vehicle rather than a rock crawler in which case you may want to stick to a higher rpm motor. If you are making a rock crawler(your friends cruiser) there are some real easy dana60 upgrades to handle the weight, then you have your second problem, the mercedes motors are not made for the throttle response you are looking for not to mention these are VERY expensive to tune. If you really want something to handle the weight of a diesel and the abuse you are planning you really want to stick to a straight axle dana44 or more. I can't see how you plan to make a suspension to handle an engine that is more than twice the weight of the stock motor. However I would love to hear your ideas on handling the weight.

Ra_ · #10 11-29-2005, 05:25 AM

A member here who goes by the name of Mercedesrover
has a Benz Diesel power plant in his Land Rover.
He can probably offer you some tips.

You should have used a more descriptive subject title,
because not everyone has the time to read every thread.

MercedesRover · #11 11-29-2005, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grantdcol

The Twin-I beam is BURLY?

Are you kidding? Nuckinfuts is right and Ford's I-beam is the biggest suspension abortion I've ever seen. You need to go with a solid axle. If not a 60 then at least a built 44.

And yes, as Ra said, I've been running a 616 in my Land Rover for almost 6 years now.

michigandon · #12 11-29-2005, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MercedesRover

Are you kidding? Nuckinfuts is right and Ford's I-beam is the biggest suspension abortion I've ever seen.

AMEN!!!

t walgamuth · #13 11-29-2005, 07:43 AM

i havent had the pleasure of owning one but my brother had one. his front tires lasted about 5k. always riding on the outside edge i think it was. it was a bad idea that was hyped til folks believed it was somehow good. the contemporary chevy front end was much superior. (and can be removed as a unit i think and bolted under most anything perhaps on a ranger with a 617)

tom w

OMEGAMAN · #14 11-29-2005, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bajaranger88

yeah well theres something to be said for simplicity. Ford suspension is EASY to motify/improve on.I will start by putting in full size coil springs(which i have in my current ranger, then go from there depending on where it sits.Basic stuff.....also i will not be puting in an automatic, using the detachable bellhousing from an early tranny(which i have) and make an adapter plate to go to a T5 from a Ford Turbo Coupe(lowest first gear), then swap tail housings to mate it to the transfer case. Probably some drive line length changes...Not to mention lots of obvious/not obvious things thjat will have to be done, But TOTALLY do-able.

Do you still have the stock 3.73 axles in it. On my 93 explorer I find 1st gear is too high but dont want to go a lower ratio axle and sacrifice highway speed is that why your going to the T5? what ratio in first will that give you?

nuckingfuts · #15 11-29-2005, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MercedesRover

And yes, as Ra said, I've been running a 616 in my Land Rover for almost 6 years now.

I've got a friend that is planning a diesel swap on his YJ, dana 60s spring over,3/4 ton axles to handle the weight. I am wondering what tranny you were able to get bolted onto the 616 (auto is not an option). I've found a 78 300d in the junk yard here with a good motor and torched tranny.