'69 230 w/m110 build/swap

[Coasttocoast]

So far the head checks out in good shape, guides need to be replaced and only needs a little milling. Planning on reusing the valves, any reason to upgrade/change?

I have read a few posts from 3-4 years ago where beehive springs and titanium retainers were available for sale, after a few emails without responses it seems those suppliers are history. Anyone know of any available?

No word yet on the status of the block, but shipped out the crank to the mainland for welding up the rod journels and increasing the stroke.

[Coasttocoast]

I was having a little trouble getting a reply email from Dbilas, so I was reluctant to ship out the cams. But they replied today, so I shipped them off to Germany.

I built a nice wood box to keep them secure for the half world trip

[Coasttocoast]

Thinking out loud about new rod length and custom piston design. The stock stroke is 78.8mm. My new stroke will be 86mm, difference of 7.2mm. This means that the stock rod would push further toward the head by half, or 3.6mm.

The stock piston is a mammoth piece, compared to today's engineered light weight designs. It's typical to see virtually no distance between the top of the pin and the bottom ring. On the stock piston the distance from the top of the pin to the bottom of the bottom ring measures 7.9mm, so in a custom piston by increasing the stroke alone it would shorten this distance by 3.6mm so it would now be 4.3.

I have found a rod made for a Suzuki M16/18 engine, by Molnar and K1, that is a H beam designed forged 4340 rod with 3/8" ARP 2000 bolts and with a 1.772mm dia BE (big end) and a 136mm length. People have used these rods in turbo'd Suzuki engines making up to 175 HP per cylinder. I'm shooting for 47 HP per cylinder.

This Suzuki engine has a square bore and stroke of 83mm, FYI.

The stock rod is 132mm long. If I used this Suzuki rod that is 4mm longer it would further reduce the pin to bottom ring distance by 4mm leaving .3mm.

The distance from the top of the stock piston to the top ring is 8.4mm, this is also wider than many new stock pistons. So the custom piston designer would have .3mm distance on the bottom with 8.4mm distance on the top (total of 8.7mm) in which to center the ring packs on new pistons. Totally reasonable, but would probably be close to the maximum length wanted in a rod.

The stock rods are above average width on the BE at 27.8mm, with the bearing being 21.95 wide. If I was not welding up and regrinding the crank I would be stuck with custom rods to meet this width. Most American V8 engines have a 25.4mm BE width. The Suzuki rods are 23.77mm wide with the bearing being 18.13mm.

There is a tremendous savings in weight by upgrading the rods and pistons. The stock piston, rod (780g), pin, bearing and rings weigh 1488 grams.



My new combination should weigh piston (est 355g), rod (447g), pin (est 100g), rings (est 21g) 930 grams total est. So a good third less. This also means more weight can come off of the crankshaft counterweights, further reducing the overall mass of the rotating assembly.

[Coasttocoast]

Since I'm enjoying driving the car while the new engine is being built up I need to upgrade some of the creature comforts.

First up is the radio. I'm sure in 1969 a Blaupunkt AM radio with a mono speaker in the dash was fine. But what to install without mucking up the classic look.

So I opted for a slightly newer Becker Europa stereo.



Also looking into stealth USB connectivity.

[Coasttocoast]

What to do about speakers? I've seen some putting two small speakers in the mono dash speaker location. While obviously doable, it's not enough separation for stereo sound.

As this car is completely stock and original, I am very very reluctant to just start cutting in speaker locations wily nily.

I plan on a complete re-upholstery of the interior after the engine swap and painting. I plan on keeping the remodel of the car to stay true to the original with minor upgrades.

But until I come up with an interior plan I purchased these early 80's self contained speakers. I actually had a pair of these when new back in the day, I liked them then, hope I can enjoy them again!

[Coasttocoast]

The Molnar rods I ordered have arrived. I tried to get ACL bearings from them also but they are on a worldwide back order. So I ordered King Racing Bearings instead.

The new rods are a little more compact, especially on the width of the BE, looks like its going to help a lot on eliminating interference from the longer stroke. Crank still in Ohio getting massaged.

[Frank Reiner]

Originally Posted by Coasttocoast

I have found a rod made for a Suzuki M16/18 engine, by Molnar and K1, that is a H beam designed forged 4340 rod with 3/8" ARP 2000 bolts and with a 1.772mm dia BE (big end) and a 136mm length. People have used these rods in turbo'd Suzuki engines making up to 175 HP per cylinder. I'm shooting for 47 HP per cylinder.

Have you thought through, and calculated the change in stresses on the crankpin attendant upon a reduction of crankpin diameter from 48mm to 42mm, while at the same time increasing the stroke, and by welding at that?!

[Coasttocoast]

Originally Posted by Frank Reiner

Have you thought through, and calculated the change in stresses on the crankpin attendant upon a reduction of crankpin diameter from 48mm to 42mm, while at the same time increasing the stroke, and by welding at that?!

Frank, thanks for chiming in.

"Thought through" can have lots of variations. If you were to ask this of an experienced engine builder the answer might have meaning. But since your asking me, and I am not, my answer has little meaning😬

But I'll give you my best reasoning.

The Suzuki engine that this rod was designed for has a square bore and stroke of 83mm and the reason these rods are made is that people turbo these engines to the point of making up to 175hp per cylinder with them. So the BE dia is proven. The Suzuki BE rod dia is actually 45mm, so only a 3mm difference from the Mercedes.

Speaking in round numbers, I'm increasing the stroke by (78.8 to 86) 7.2mm. Which moves the center by half or 3.6mm. By decreasing the size of the rod journal by 3mm I limit the amount of welding build up required.

It seems most of the forum posts about welded cranks is negative, yet many crank shops have one or more crank welding machines. This would seem very cost prohibitive if welded crank technology didn't work?

I've started thinking about adding a little nitrous to the mix too. Not much, maybe a 100 shot. 350hp in a 3000lb car would be sweet!

Do you know of any failures to prompt your question?

Thanks in advance.

[Frank Reiner]

Originally Posted by Coasttocoast

The Suzuki BE rod dia is actually 45mm, so only a 3mm difference from the Mercedes.

45mm is the housing bore of the connecting rod.
The Suzuki crankpin is 42mm, the MB 48.
The crankpin crossectional area is reduced by 24%.

[Coasttocoast]

Originally Posted by Frank Reiner

45mm is the housing bore of the connecting rod.
The Suzuki crankpin is 42mm, the MB 48.
The crankpin crossectional area is reduced by 24%.

Frank, my bad. Should have looked at my notes first.

The circumference of the Mercedes journal is 151mm, the Suzuki is 132mm so a reduction of 12.58%

Here is a fairly accurate scaled sketch of the increase of stroke in relation to the decrease in journal size with a quarter for reference



As far as the build up by welding you can see very little weld is required for the longer stroke and smaller dia rod journal.

And yes, a little larger dia journal would be better, but this helps minimize/eliminate interference between the block and the rod. Everything is a compromise.

HKS sells a bolt on turbo kit for the Suzuki engine that bumps up the HP to about 200 with about 6psi of boost. This is without upgrading the internals. But like I mentioned earlier, people are upgrading to these Molnar and K1 rods and boosting into the mid teens and getting up to and beyond 260hp. Some combos even more. So the journal size works with my hp goals in the Suzuki engine with close to the same size piston 83mm vs 86mm.

So will this combination of mine run for 200k like it was stock, maybe not. Will it last 60k? Maybe.

But it's not built yet. More trials ahead I'm sure.

Thanks for your interest and comments!

[ollo]

Been enjoying your build thread. The interior of your's looks great and shows how well the MerTex interiors age. My 1st Mercedes back in early 80's, was a Euro 73 280 sedan that was low mileage (70,000) with a beautiful blue leather interior that would surely look sad by now!

The car came with engine and suspension problems but, at the time, I had done multiple rebuilds of American V8 and 6 cyl engines plus a few Volvo 4 cyl. All working with a local machine shop and doing dis-assembly and re-assembly myself. This was my 1st twin overhead cam engine but aside from fabricating a pin extractor, and having only Haynes with no internet forums to guide me, there were no difficulties.

P.O. of the car I found was a retired army colonel who had the car serviced in AZ, but that was just lube, oil/filter. After retirement, he just kept driving with oil/filter changes as the only maintenance. Records didn't show any valve adj. ever.

Car's bad miss was from a burned exhaust valve on #6 and all the other valves were tight. Suspension problem was a broken rear shock. So, all it needed was a valve job and shocks. The stock M110 had plenty of power compared to my father in law's 69 240D! We loved the car, and drove it for many years. I still have its tool kit complete with 1 bent wrench for valve adjustments. Don

[Coasttocoast]

Originally Posted by ollo

Been enjoying your build thread. The interior of your's looks great and shows how well the MerTex interiors age. My 1st Mercedes back in early 80's, was a Euro 73 280 sedan that was low mileage (70,000) with a beautiful blue leather interior that would surely look sad by now!

The car came with engine and suspension problems but, at the time, I had done multiple rebuilds of American V8 and 6 cyl engines plus a few Volvo 4 cyl. All working with a local machine shop and doing dis-assembly and re-assembly myself. This was my 1st twin overhead cam engine but aside from fabricating a pin extractor, and having only Haynes with no internet forums to guide me, there were no difficulties.

P.O. of the car I found was a retired army colonel who had the car serviced in AZ, but that was just lube, oil/filter. After retirement, he just kept driving with oil/filter changes as the only maintenance. Records didn't show any valve adj. ever.

Car's bad miss was from a burned exhaust valve on #6 and all the other valves were tight. Suspension problem was a broken rear shock. So, all it needed was a valve job and shocks. The stock M110 had plenty of power compared to my father in law's 69 240D! We loved the car, and drove it for many years. I still have its tool kit complete with 1 bent wrench for valve adjustments. Don

Great story and I'm glad your enjoying my journey. I'm still gathering parts and waiting on machine shops. I did receive an email from Dbilas that my cams are done and shipping today.

I have been preoccupied with my other project that is in the finishing/vetting stage, my Factory Five Racing 818. In the last month I've put it on the dyno, competed in an SCCA event and last night showed it by being a part of the Honolulu Hot Import Nights show. Great fun and glad I'm now mostly in the enjoyment phase now with that car.

I performed 99% of the work on this car myself. From start to finish including mechanical, electrical, fiberglass modifications, bodywork, painting, upholstery, etc. The only work performed by others was the actual welding of my custom SS header, up-pipe, exhaust, installation of the winshield, and the footwell carpet and custom floor mats.

Sunny Fae, one of the HIN traveling models (Seattle) was gracious enough to model for us.

[plantingourpennies]

Coast-

Just wanted to echo Ollo's comments-I'm eagerly following this thread, especially the engine rebuild portion.

I'm currently trying to decide if it's worth restoring my grandmother's 72 w114/m110; seeing your progress could put me over the line!

Thanks,
PoP

[Coasttocoast]

Originally Posted by plantingourpennies

Coast-

Just wanted to echo Ollo's comments-I'm eagerly following this thread, especially the engine rebuild portion.

I'm currently trying to decide if it's worth restoring my grandmother's 72 w114/m110; seeing your progress could put me over the line!

Thanks,
PoP

Thanks for your interest in my project!

Progress is slow as it takes so long to organize and ship specialty parts. I did receive the camshafts back from DBilas this past week. The crankshafts should be done and back from Ohio in a couple of weeks. Then I can get the parts to the machine shop to organize ordering custom pistons.

FYI, I gave DBilas the planned specs on my engine and before they asked any additional questions they had already reground the cams. The specs that they picked are;

Inlet and exhaust :
288° / 108° / 11,1mm lift

Duration: : 288
Peak timing: : 108
Valve lift: : 11,1
Valve timing: : 36/72 - 72/36
Valve clearence: : 10/20

I asked about rpm range and vacuum and they replied;

- rpm range : 1500-6500rpm
- good vacuum and idle for daily use of the car.

The specs for the standard upgrade DBilas cams for the M110 are;

Duration: : 270/280
Peak timing: : 112
Valve lift: : 11,0/10,5
Valve timing: : 23/67 - 72/28
Valve clearence: : 10/25

I'm loving driving the car around as is and get asked about it almost every time, defiantly a cool project if your up to it!

[Coasttocoast]

Due to the amount of effort and time, machine shops non performance, and the realization that even if I could get to 280HP out of the M110 engine it wouldn't meet my definition of a Hot Rod, which was my primary goal, I have given up on this engine for my build and purchased a 48,000 mile Chevy LQ4 6.0 Vortech V-8.

As I can't change the title for this thread I have started a new thread to post the continuation of my build progress. I know, I hate it when you spend the time reading a thread hoping to get answers and see how the story ends only to have the poster give up or never post again.

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/vintage-mercedes/378762-69-230-build-w-lq4-swap.html#post3609858

I really love this car, I drive it everyday, and getting too anxious to get the power plant out of the way so I can get to paint and body work.