My lower engine splash guard on my E420 is just about shot and I was thinking about permanently removing it. Has anyone experienced any problems running without the guard? I know some have mentioned that it will enhance the cooling, but I was wondering if there are any major down sides to this, like the alternator getting wet when it rains. I was also wondering if it was designed to enhance air flow and cooling, like some of the lower cowlings on other vehicles. Thanks.

__________________
1993 400E, 256,000 miles (totaled)
1994 E420, 200,000+ miles
1995 E420, 201,000 miles

That's the first thing I do with a car. It seems cruel to leave it on the car. It raises the engine temp, masks fluid leaks, thwarts oil changes, etc. 90+ percent of the cars on the road do fine without a belly pan.

It is there to channel airflow and protect the Belt from road debries.
It serves a function.

__________________
A Dalton

But Arthur, that airflow is so limited compared to taking it off entirely. I've done this several times - the cars consistently run 10 degrees cooler. I've even done on/off, on/off to test the temp. I don't think MB ever said it was there to cool the engine, but to manage the air temps - i.e hotter, for emissions. Add to that the nuissance of it, and the fact that it covers up fluid leaks, it's nuts on an older used car. Volvo used to do it, then just dropped it. I'm still suspicious that it's a ploy to keep customers away from changing their own oil.

Yes they do.
Factory Service manual.
But the main reason is to keep water off the belt to prevent slippage from wet roads. That is why the AC has a speed sensor on the compressor.

I almost forgot, MB dropped it too - on the 140 bodies, around 1996 I think. I had a VW service rep tell me that a factory rep admitted to him that while it served some purpose it's principal purpose was increasing service revenue. I'm not suggesting it has no purpose, it just has so many negatives on an older car, and it can't be really necessary or MB wouldn't have dropped it on the 140 body, and perhaps other models, not sure.

Yeah, I remember talking to some of the Engineers when the 124 was introduced, they were pretty proud of the "revenue-generating panel". That is a complete fabrication/BS by the way.

When the 124 was designed, the encapsulation panels were there for a reason. They keep the engine clean, provide proper airflow, allow the engine to run proper temperatures (if the engine is running hot, there's a problem), reduce engine noise, and reduce aero drag & lift.

It can be removed, you can run without it. I don't, I just don't like the filthy engine. If the engine leaks it needs repair anyway, but that's another story.

If you remove the engine panel, you will also want to remove the transmission panel as the air will eventually catch the transmission panel and pull it down, at least one forum member had this happen on a 124.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff

But you're missing the point - the question is not whether it had a purpose when the car was new but whether it can be removed on a 15 year old car. Obviously it can be. Way over 99 percent of the cars on the road over the last century have done fine without a belly pan. BTW, what do suppose changed on the 140 body - that for all those good reasons it had to have one, then suddenly it didn't need to have one. But the parallel doesn't work on the car in question. As to MB's altruism it's just a good thing they don't sell swamp land, because there'd be a lot of buyers.

On the 94 I just bought a few months ago, the sump guard/ belly pan is missing. And I want it.

(Marginally) Better fuel economy and also protects (somewhat) the oil sump/ pan. In exchange for 10F cooler temps? I'll take it. Thats what the fans are for. And the engine is designed to work at those "elevated" temps.

__________________
'O=00=O'
bmw 2002.
long live the legend

I would find out how expensive it is before I decide whether it is necessary.

I leave them on, but I'm not sure I would spend 80~90 bucks for one.

__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif

That's my theory, and think I read it somewhere long ago - that the belly pan was to raise engine temps. It makes intuitive sense - box up an engine and the temps are going to rise. 100 degree op temps may well be good for emissions, but the heat can't be good for the engine over the long term. And I've always passed emission tests with flying colors - often at one-third or one-quarter of allowable standard, and feel no ecological guilt over it.

Emissions had nothing to do with the belly pan...
The M103-12V world market cars had no cat, air pumps, nothing... only a closed loop crankcase vent system...

Note you own a 190SL....
On this car if there are original parts missing would it lessen its value ?

__________________
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...c/GOWIDE-1.jpg
1971 280SL ROADSTER
1988 300CE TWIN TURBO WIDEBODY
1994 E320 CABRIOLET
1999 C43 AMG
2005 G55K AMG
2008 CLK63 AMG BLACK SERIES

I agree 100%

__________________
1993 400E


Mercedes Benz technician since 1982

ASE Master technician to 12/2015

I might be the only one here who actually discussed this with the powertrain Engineers when the car was designed, and the only one here who actually did engineering on the 124 chassis, ... it was kind of a clever little twist at the time that worked. Kind of like the same-era Porsche 944S4 spoiler under the tail of the car, funny things happen when you manage airflow under the car where the pressure and flow is highest.

It can be done without, I doubt it has a measurable difference at any legal speed here in the US. I just prefer to keep it for originality and to keep the engines clean, no big deal. Part of the engineering overkill that makes this era unique.

As far as sump protection, maybe from leaves. Anything that could damage the cast sump wouldn't likely be deflected by a thin plastic panel.

Dean: If you have a take-off set from your '94 E320, I'd be happy to buy it from you, PM me with details please.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff

got rid of it on my 97 e420. Seems like my engine mounts are lasting much longer now... Also makes it easier to check on the car. Unless I live up north with snow and salt, definitely disposable... also makes the car lighter...

__________________
2008 S550
2010 GLK350
1997 E420 (retired)
2005 CLK500 (retired)