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-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Vintage Mercedes Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 12-09-2009, 09:42 PM
GGR GGR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,068
Hummm..... I checked on EPC and this is what I found:
- the 3.5 and 4.5, both with solid lifters, share the same reference for the cam towers;
- the 4.5 and 5.0 with hydraulic lifters also share some of the same references for the cam towers;

As a result, if the solid lifetrs set up of a 4.5 fits a 4.5 originally fitted with hydraulic lifters, then the 3.5 set up should fit the 5.0 engine....

And though, the cam towers of the 5.0 really look more bulky than the 3.5 ones. This was confirmed when I tried to fit my early 3.5 cam covers on the 5.0: they were hitting the top of the fittings of the oil pipes, not by much, but enough for them not to fit (note these are very early cam covers with the oil cap screwing into them like on earlier 6 cylinders engines. The later 4.5 cam covers would have fitted I'm pretty sure).

Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-09-2009, 10:21 PM
PanzerSD's Avatar
Schießenstern
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saskatchewan Canada
Posts: 2,351
Cams that were originally set up with Hydraulic MUST MUST MUST go with hydraulic lifters, and there is some variance with a groove in the rear cam tower.

No groove on cam, must have a groove in bearing and visa versa.
There are Woodruff key sets that adjust camshaft advance ONLY on Drivers side camshaft.

I would say that Valve train is transferable between engine variances ONLY in it's entirety, and that includes the metal adjuster shims that sit on top of the valves.

Read every little bit of info you can and run the procedure over and over in your head till it's all you can think about, then you might feel prepared enough to swap cams and mix'n'match.
__________________
RIP: 80 300SD
RIP: 79 450SEL
2002 E430 4matic (212,000km)
2002 ML500 'sport'

____________________________
FACEBOOK:
PANZER450
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-10-2009, 11:33 AM
4x4_Welder's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Poulsbo, WA
Posts: 504
Any OHC engine is going to throw oil all over the place without valve covers.
I was working at a Chrysler dealership years back, and another tech tried starting a Cirrus without the front cam cover on. The spray of oil coated the underside of the hood, his toolbox, and the wall almost up to the ceiling. From then on, the going joke was to try Dave's oil pressure/flow test.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-10-2009, 10:45 PM
Tomguy's Avatar
Vintage Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: near Scranton, PA
Posts: 5,407
My engine was a mix & match until I settled on 47/48 3.5 cams (with matching 3.5 heads) onto my 4.5.
My experience is this was the best on my 4.5. The issue I have with putting these on the 5.0:
1) The 5.0 has bigger valves, thus wouldn't need the exhaust valve to open as early as on a 3.5 / 4.5. I do not know if this was made later - although on US spec cars, it probably was kept late for emissions to the point of robbing power.
2) The 5.0 has more displacement so the intake may stay open longer including into part of the compression stroke, which the 3.5 profile may not do as much of.

I think you need to actually have the duration #'s. Personally, if I were going for pure power and money was no object, I'd convert to solid lifters and have a shop custom-fab a set of cams from the 5.0 grind that opens the exhaust sooner, closes it later, and that should be possible when converting to manual vs hydraulic studs due to less of a lobe edge being needed.

Of course, not putting on better valve springs when doing this would be ridiculously foolish as the valve springs on there by default probably cannot handle a more drastic profile.

__________________
Current:
2021 Charger Scat Pack Widebody "Sinabee"
2018 Durango R/T

Previous:
1972 280SE 4.5
2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited "Hefe", 1992 Jeep Cherokee Laredo "Jeepy", 2006 Charger R/T "Hemi"
1999 Chrysler 300M - RIP @ 221k
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 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page