Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help




Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes ShopForum > Technical Information and Support > Tech Help

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-29-2003, 07:07 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 38
2.3-16 changes after 1987? Curious.

Did the horsepower increase, and what other changes took place in the 2.3-16 after '87. I know they weren't imported, and were supplemented or replaced by the 2.5 engine, but am curious how much the 2.3 was improved, if at all. Would a later motor retrofit to a 1986? If so, what mods if any?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-29-2003, 08:58 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Tucker, Ga USA
Posts: 12,153
Most of the changes had to do with durability! & of course the 2.3 was turned into a 2.5. Larger oil pump, double row timing chain, & better cams were some of the changes.
Not much that can be retro-fitted w/o spending big $$$$.
__________________
MERCEDES Benz Master Guild Technician (6 TIMES)
ASE Master Technician
Mercedes Benz Star Technician (2 times)
44 years foreign automotive repair
27 Years M.B. Shop foreman (dealer)
MB technical information Specialist (15 years)
190E 2.3 16V ITS SCCA race car (sold)
1986 190E 2.3 16V 2.5 (sold)
Retired Moderator
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-29-2003, 09:13 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 38
Is that to say that the 2.3-16 wasn't improved for 1988 and was eventually replaced by the 2.5-16 which was an improvement? Will a 1988 2.3-16 motor bolt into a 1986 2.3-16 five speed and hookup electronically, electrically, etc.?
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-31-2003, 11:37 AM
UK 2.3-16v
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Up to 86 had >> straight LSD
Post 86 had >> ASD with LSD

From 88 was 2.5 - reinforced block, in-house cylinder head, different internals, duplex timing chain, different injection widgets,

Ride height adjustable suspension was optional (as per the standard Evo models.)

Just lots of little tweaks really.

Mate of mine has a 2.5-16v and whilst its undeniably nice, its no faster than the 2.3-16v (not on the road anyway) and it lost a lot of the 2.3-16v rawness of character
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-31-2003, 11:39 AM
UK 2.3-16v
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by kirk1
Is that to say that the 2.3-16 wasn't improved for 1988 and was eventually replaced by the 2.5-16 which was an improvement? Will a 1988 2.3-16 motor bolt into a 1986 2.3-16 five speed and hookup electronically, electrically, etc.?
Thanks.
Do a part number check on the ignition and injection systems - the 16v were a bit parts bin specials, and different chassis number ranges had different bits.

The biggest difference will probably be the Fuel Distribution unit, SLS pump, and CIS-E module.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-31-2003, 01:03 PM
2phast's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 613
I am curious, what is the difference between these two diff's?

Up to 86 had >> straight LSD
Post 86 had >> ASD with LSD
__________________
1993 500E
http://2phast.com/500e/500e-sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-31-2003, 01:15 PM
UK 2.3-16v
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
LSD is just an LSD - 8 clutches per side. Preset tension - no control other than the things heating up.

The ASD diffs use pressure from the SLS system to fiddle about with the locking point of the diff. I think this only works below 17mph though - anything above that and it operates like a normal LSD.

Simple!

Thought I'd explained this fully over on 190 Rev?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-31-2003, 01:40 PM
2phast's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 613
The US spec 1987 16 valve does not appear to have ASD, I have one and there is no ability to hook it up to an SLS and the only sensor input is for the ABS. The only listed difference between the 1986 and 1987 is a mid year change in 1986, starting with VIN number F222285 forward. This is what I have.

The 1992-1993 W201's had a ASD option but not connected to a SLS system, so it must be fed differently.

I also found this:

The "ASD" was used in the late eighties and early nineties as limited slip differential in some Daimler Benz cars.
I know that it was fitted to the "E 34" – W 124.031/M 104.980 3.4 as well as to the Coupés and Cabrios running with the 3.4 Litre inline engine.

This system was limited up to speeds of 35 km/h {22 miles}. At higher speeds it runns as al limited slip differential with fixed lock ratio.
The "ASD" system is using a Differential with ring cylinder and multiple disk clutch, oil reservoir, oil pump, hydraulic unit with accumulator and single solenoid valve, wheel sensors and controller. Pivots or if both drive wheels turn 2 km/h faster than the front wheels, then the ASD is activated. The hydraulic unit is headed for and a pressure of 30 bar affects the ring cylinders of the half axle. The bevel pinions are pulled outward and close the differential. At higher speeds, in the sliding run or when braking the multiple disk clutches work like a limited slip differential with fixed lock ratio. Up to 35 km/22 miles the lock ratio is between 35 – 100%
__________________
1993 500E
http://2phast.com/500e/500e-sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-01-2003, 12:08 PM
UK 2.3-16v
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thats about right for a UK 2.3-16v post 86 - all the 87 onward cars I've seen have ASD. With all the 86 cars (I've owned 2) having LSD only
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-01-2003, 10:39 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally posted by UK 2.3-16v
Up to 86 had >> straight LSD
Post 86 had >> ASD with LSD

From 88 was 2.5 - reinforced block, in-house cylinder head, different internals, duplex timing chain, different injection widgets,

Ride height adjustable suspension was optional (as per the standard Evo models.)

Just lots of little tweaks really.

Mate of mine has a 2.5-16v and whilst its undeniably nice, its no faster than the 2.3-16v (not on the road anyway) and it lost a lot of the 2.3-16v rawness of character
Am I wasting my time dreaming of owning a 2.5-16 EVO l or EVO ll. It's the "rawness of character" of my 2.3 16v that excites me, and I thought a 2.5 EVO would give me an even greater fix. Please, tell me it's so!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-01-2003, 10:51 PM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
Kirk1, You might want to read this article snippet about the 2.5-16, the EVO and EVO II engines.

190Revolution.net
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2011 Pelican Parts - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page