Engine Rebuild on 6.3

[gerryvz]

Originally Posted by Dan Smith

As usual, I'm going off subject now. GERRY, I used the new secret weapon today. First successful attept on dry pavement. Did it from a rolling start. Trigger point is 2500 RPMs, what a jolt. Never have I watched the speedo move in this fashion.

The 6.3 won't take the 500E . And I'll be racing in air-conditioned comfort (or with my seat heaters on, if necessary). The 500E has four-valves per cylinder, twin cams per head, variable valve timing, electronically controlled ignition, ABS, and dual airbags for extra safety.

The results of a 6.3 with too much nitrous-oxide injected:



Cheers
Gerry

[Tomguy]

Gerry: I'll take that as a yes! Did that also cause engine detonation, or did those pieces missing NOT hit anything by some stroke of luck?

[Dan Smith]

Gerry, to the shock of all, including myself, I agree. The E500 is light years ahead of the 6.3, but that's one of the 6.3s main attractions. Anything we try is very difficult. I'm not sure the Hornet, the subject with the "secret weapon" can even take the Bullet. Why? Spongy shifts. I can now tell the problem and it's a rebuilt tranny. Possibly after market clutches??? With luck this can be adjusted out by bringing the modulator to full snappy. What I do think, by feel only, is that once the shift to fourth hits, the Hornet is the quicker of the two. Time slips will tell. The Woodburn dragstrip might open early this year. Keep an eye on that raceway's web site.
PING will never get my mods. Various secret fuel loads make it impossible. Plus, no sane person will go through the trouble I do. Then there is the EFI controlled air fuel ratio of 12 to 1 under full power. On the downside, the Hornet currently weighs in at 4350 pounds, weighed it just today. 50 or so of those pounds are my skid plate assembly. Extra copper wire for the battery plus the odd stuff in the boot.
What would happen if we used 9 to 1 stock forged pistons? Add huge horsepower. Still the problem in the first 60 feet of traction. Problems, proplems, interesting stuff, right?

[gerryvz]

The 500E is 3,850 pounds.

My car is still at MBI, waiting to get picked up by the truck next Wednesday. So if you can go down and say good bye to it. I was very happy to sell it to a proper collector who will drive it. All of the so-called "enthusiasts" in the M-100 who wouldn't know a good 6.3 if it hit them in the forehead, took a pass on it. The guy who now has the title in his hands, got a very good deal for a car that will serve him well and reliably. It will get a fresh coat of 906 paint later this spring, and it will prove to be one of the nicest unrestored 6.3s out there. But it will probably never attend an M-100 meet.

Gerry

[Dan Smith]

Tom Guy, yes, the "Top Secret Weapon", is NOS. Risk, OK there is risk but making me drive at a limit of 55 presents even more risk. We have an EFI system on only this 6.3. All of our others run with the stock mechanical fuel injection system. I'd never even try this on a stock system.
Our safe quards involve trigger points and an auto off with the accelerator. We illiminate the gas / NOS fumes with a discharge bleeder valve. Constant pressue shows on a digital moniter in the cab perfectly mounted. If this 6.3 was concourse judged, only the lack of the stock mechanical fuel injection system, might be noticed as long as the trunck / boot key failed to work, which could be arranged. Then, we have the ability to mix various high octane fuels. This makes PING impossible. Lastly, when triggered, the air fuel ratio changes from our programmed 13 to 1, to an instant 12 to 1. Very rich, fuel cools, that's not a joke.
Why do all this to a 6.3 you just asked, right? I don't know, it's just something that is hard to do. No one would believe the stuff we still have coming. I've never even read of things I know can be setup. Ran them by Mike Burback, of Burback Motors, just today. The 6.3 has drawbacks but some very unusual things can be done because of them.

[Tomguy]

Dan: You don't need to tell me about the fun side of tinkering with stuff "For fun." I'll probably wind up doing stuff like that with my 4.5 - like putting 3.5 heads and pistons in it to give it the higher compression ratio. Doing that would give me a tremendous power boost. Risk of detonation? Sure, but if you knew the bodily condition of my 4.5, you'd take the risk too. Hell, you're doing it with a 6.3 that probably has one hell of a great body and all. I'll be doing it to a driver that's served well. She's begging to be modded. Sure, the 4.5 is no slouch, but it's no 6.3. I want my 4.5 to be able to beat a stock 6.3 that's well-maintained. I know I can "Just" pop a 560 in mine and be done with it - lighter front end, too - but what's the fun in that? Mercedes already did the work for me!

[gerryvz]

The problem with these cars is that their handling isnt up to the speeds that we're talking about here. You do 100-110 MPH in a 108 or 109 car, and you're gripping the steering wheel tightly trying to make sure you keep it in your lane.

I think a 560 motor would be a really cool retrofit into a 108 or 109 car though!!

You can drive a 560SEL or SEC, or a 500E, at 150 MPH with a single finger while holding a conversation with a woman next to you, and she'll think you're doing 80 MPH....

Cheers,
Gerry

[Tomguy]

Gerry: I don't know what was wrong with your 6.3, but my 4.5, shot rubber abound (but new subframes), holds the road incredibly well at any speed it can achieve (without risking engine over-revving)!

The mechanic selling the 500E I'm looking at is in the midst of converting a 3.5 Coupe (driver condition) to a 5.0L M117 engine. He did the engine and tranny already, and was about ready to fire it up when I was there - it's probably done by now. He offered me $1k for a tradein on my 4.5 JUST because he wants the rear diff (that's all) - he wants to replace the shorter gear so it isnt screaming on the highway.He told me he'd take the diff out and junk it - he'd probably think differently when he saw the seats and door panels dont have a tear on them at all, but I don't know for sure. The guy doesn't seem like the kind who parts our vehicles on eBay. I also asked him to find out what the owner wants for the old engine and tranny - apparently the 4-speed in the 3.5 has the same 4th gear as my 3rd (1:1) but the other gears are closer together. I would think that'd help me off the line better AND increase my efficiency at the same time. I want the engine for its heads only though. The yellow injectors look cooler I think, but they are the same flow rates from what I understand as the 4.5's, so I wouldnt need those. And 3.5s, according to his 2 books, will have the same cams my 4.5 currently has in it. But I might want the pistons, too...

[gerryvz]

Originally Posted by Tomguy

Gerry: I don't know what was wrong with your 6.3, but my 4.5, shot rubber abound (but new subframes), holds the road incredibly well at any speed it can achieve (without risking engine over-revving)!

Are you joking? My 6.3 was better than 95% of most 6.3s out there, mechanically. It had a brand-new air suspension installed a few years back. I know how a properly set up 6.3 drives, because I owned one for 6 years!

You simply can't compare the handling of a 40-year old car with a (relatively) modern car, particularly one that was custom-tuned by Porsche !! There is absolutely no comparison in how the cars handle. It's two orders of magnitude different.

Sure, the 6.3 was state of the art for its time, but the level of control, turn-in crispness, body lean, sure-footedness, balance (remember that the 6.3 has a huge lump in the nose that it wasn't designed to have; the 500E with the battery in the trunk and 2 passengers was engineered for a perfect 50-50 balance); and handling characteristics under duress of the 500E are just completely superior in every way, shape and form.

If you push a 6.3 to the limit, either the lump in the nose, or the swing-axles in the back, are going to bite you in the ass. To properly drive a 6.3 at the limit, you HAVE to know what you are doing.

A 500E at the limit is eminently controllable. With the ASR on, there's 100% nothing to it -- anyone could handle it. With the ASR off, it's a completely different car that has some wonderful drift characteristics, which are accentuated by the 50-50 balance that the car was engineered with...

6.3s (and other 108s/109s) are great and all, but they are 1940s technology. The 500E is essentially 1970s/1980s technology, tweaked by Porsche. I believe Porsche and Lotus to have the most knowledge about vehicle handling of any car companies in the world.

Cheers,
Gerry

[Tomguy]

Gerry: I know the 500 handles a LOT better at speed, but you make it sound like the 108/109's can't hold the road at speed (or at least that's the impression I was getting). Sure, if you gun it at 80 around a sharp corner, your ass end is gonna kick out a bit. That's a characteristic I kinda like, though. I enjoy the oversteer you get and how you can make the car turn by using the gas pedal. You can take corners a LOT sharper if you do it just right. Of course, it's a bit dangerous, but it's fun!

[Hatterasguy]

How would a W211 E55 compare to the older ones? I know they are extremly fast in a straight line and have awsome brakes.

[Aaron]

C'mon Gerry, don't be so hard on the M-100 cars (or owners). I'm not going to debate the fact that the 500E handles better, is more reliable, etc..

Obviously. It's modern!

We own M-100s for a reason. We don't care about the fact that the guy next to us at the stoplight in a 500E can dismiss us on acceleration and handling. We like the cars because of what they are. Just about every car company nowadays makes something that's ridiculously fast right out of the box, so what's the fun in that? I personally have zero desire to have a modern fast Merc or BMW or Audi or what have you. They have no soul compared to the classic Q-ship M-100 that was built by a company known mainly for it's rather under-engined bread and butter sedans. I love the fact that my 6.9 looks like a run of the mill 280S but will still run with (and terrorize) many modern "sports" sedans. Remember that term: "sports sedan". That's exactly what the 500E is. The 6.3 and 6.9 were luxury sedans, albeit capable of astonishingly high speeds.

So I would advise you just to be a little cautious about turning people off of owning (or restoring) an M-100 in need. Sure, it's going to be expensive, sure you can have something modern for far less money in the long run that will outperform an M-100, but that's not the point. And I wouldn't consider 80% of the M-100 cars out there to be "running parts cars", the guys in the M-100 group (me included) lavish a lot of time and money on our cars and out of all the car clubs I am associated with (Jaguar Drivers Club, MBCA, MG Club, Triumph Club, PCA, M-100 Group) I have to say that the nicest, most enthusiastic guys are in the M-100 group. I always enjoy every M-100 meet, regardless of whether or not I have to drive a long distance to get there. I like hearing about other guys' adventures with their cars, about tinkering till 1am, about getting their 6.3 home after their wipers quit, about ANYTHING having to do with M-100 cars. And the difference between the 500E owner and the M-100 owner is just that. The 500E owner drops his rolling Pentium 4 off at the dealer for service while some adventurous types (mainly those with old cars) try to figure it out themselves first (something a competent DIYer can actually do with an M-100) before having to rely on someone else. And if it comes down to that......well so be it. We wouldn't do the things we do if we didn't love the cars.

Forget modern cars. Believe me, I'd trade my S420 for another M-100 any day! Offers? Didn't think so.

[gerryvz]

I won't choose to respond to the previous post other than saying the following: it is a free country, and we are entitled to express our opinions.

My opinions come from strong knowledge and experience, having owned 2 6.3s (a running rust-free car and a parts car) and daily-driving a 6.9 for four years. I also hosted the 2001 M-100 Meet, and served as editor of the M-100 Group newsletter for a period of time. I was a charter member of the International Association of M-100 Owners (www.m-100.info). I was also arguably for 5-6 years one of the most vocal and visible supporters of things M-100.

I know of what I speak. I have seen dozens of people get over their heads with M-100 purchases, and I hate to see this happen. It's mainly the cars that suffer in the long run, as evidenced in my "M-100 Life Cycle" presentation http://homepage.mac.com/gerryvz/M-100_0.9.pdf.

I'm sorry if my opinions offend you. And I don't appreciate your "advice" (implied threat?) in the first line of your fourth paragraph.

Cheers,
Gerry

[Aaron]

Gerry,

Please don't take my last post as an implied threat, as I didn't intend for it to come across that way.

However, you aren't the only one on this board who has owned or worked on M-100s. I've had two 6.9s and one 6.3 and even went so far as to track down and buy my last 6.9 back from the gentleman I originally sold it to because I wanted the car back.

I've twirled wrenches on all variants of M-100, from 6.3 to 600 and never would I disagree that people can get in over their heads if they're not careful on the initial purchase, but in reading your posts it seems to me that you're comparing owning one of these cars to having some ultra exotic machine of which literally none are left in existence. Like I said, they are expensive, they do need to be properly maintained and yes there are a handfull of cars out there that are no more than running parts cars, but when you look at it in the big picture, most any old car could fall into that category, whether it be a Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Ferrari, etc...Just have a peek on eBay, you know what I mean.

Either way, I don't wish for any flames to develop here but I certainly wouldn't call the majority of M-100 Mercs that are owned by enthusiasts "running parts cars". Neil Dubey has a 6.3 in his posession that he is asking $125,000 for. THAT'S probably the best 6.3 in existence. So if you compare every other 6.3 out there to that car (which is in no way practical), yeah I agree, they're all running parts cars, because they don't have 14,000 original miles and were practically kept in someone's living room their entire existence.

Are you saying that you'd rather see cars that are considered to be in "very good" condition be broken for spares to support the four or five TRULY mint M-100s out there? I don't think guys like John Sutter, Stu Hammel, Paul Bodycomb, Gary Ensor and myself included would like to hear that about our cars.

My own 6.9 heads to the paint shop next week for a $12,000+ respray. I don't care to think that my car is a running parts car. If I thought it was, it would be in the crusher by now.

[tosbt]

Gerry, sounds like you have a case of "burn out". These things are toys, even my 109 4.5 is a toy and for me romantic to drive although it does not measure up to many cars of the same age. Move on to something that will give you joy of ownership like you once had with the 6.3. Maybe a bi-plane, yes that's the bisket perhaps a Stearman or a.........................