Would the 4.5 V8 and AT fit in this chassis?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2401217724&category=6329

If not, what's the earliest sedan/coupe that the 4.5 with AT came in?

[suginami]

I believe this is a W115 chassis car, and was sold from 1968-1973.

Because it is a "220", it is a carbureted car.

Most of the W115's were diesels, though.

The gasoline powered W115's came with the 2.2 liter 4-cylinder, the M114 or M130 2.5 liter SOHC inline-six, and the M110 inline DOHC six-cylinder. All of the engines came with Solex, Zenith, or Stromberg carbs.

The W115 chassis was never sold with a V8, so my guess is that it won't fit.

The M117 4.5 liter engine was first sold in the W108 chassis in 1971-1972 as the 280 SE or 280 SEL 4.5, and continued in the 107 450 SL and W116 450 SEL from 1972-1980.

The W108 280 SE(L) 4.5's are still shamefully undervalued, and one of the best cars MB ever produced, IMHO. Perfect restored examples can be had for less than $10,000, cars in great shape can be had for between $5,000 to $7,000, and there are tons of examples that need work for $2,000.

[psfred]

Not a snowball's chance in the bad place you will ever get a V8 in there, certainly not the 4.5! Even with a complete suspension change (absolutely required!) I don't think it will fit between the front frame rails.

Earliest V8 coupe was, I think, the W113, the 2-door version of the W108/109, in 1971 with the 3.5 L M116. All other MB production versions used straight six or fours until then -- not counting the 600, which was never available as a coupe anyway.

Peter

[240 Ed]

The six cylinder seems a tight fit.(I know it is longer, but things are fairly packed on the sides too) You might get a Ford 289 in it and that might make a fine car!!! Probably the same weight too!

[Gobstopper]

How common is it to find form small blocks in Mercedes cars?
There is presently a 280SE W108 on E-bay that has a Ford 351 windsor. I email the seller and asked what transmission was in it and he replied MB. How can this be? Is it an easy mate for the ford 289/302/351W ?

[psfred]

I've heard of several -- Fords are the easiest (oil sump in the front), Chryco and GM are much less common since you have to make major body modifications to accomodate the rear oil sump.

MB has always used a die-cast plate to attach the manual tranny to the engine, so all you need is an aluminum plate the correct thickness with appropriate holes in it.

For an automatic, one would need a custom plate and a spacer for the flex plate. The MB automatic flywheel is the same as the manual flywheel execpt for no pilot bearing and six holes to clear the bolts on the flex plate!

Peter

[Clunker]

For curiosities sake, Why would you want to put a 4.5 in it anyway?

[Tomguy]

Stupid question: Why would anyone want to put a FORD engine into an MB? That's like putting a beetle engine in a viper to me!

[Gobstopper]

The car is available on E-bay as we speak.

Suppose you had a really nice 280 W108 sedan with a blown/shot engine. I guess the logic would be that you have much cheaper ongoing maintenance costs and parts availability in the future. Plus many high performance modifications are available for the Ford small block.
The downside would be all the hassle and the fact that you only get 100K good miles out of a Ford engine.

I have a perfectly good 4.5 V8 and AT from my '72 350SL (see project in signature line below) that I now must find a new home for.

Since smog check regs would probably disqualify it being put into a '74 or newer car, I was looking into what would be the earliest MB it would fit into. From what I've learned since posting the initial question, it seems that the 280SEL is probably the earliest that will take it without much problem, so I'm now keeping an eye out for one of those with a dead engine, but nice insides/exterior.

The other option I've considered is to put the drivetrain into one of my extra Triumph Spitfire chassis . . . makes my original question seem quite sensible by comparison, eh?

[Clunker]

The 4.5 engine probably weighs more than a spitfire! I think a 1967 108/109 would be the oldest though there are a couple of early 1960's 300se coupes with 6.3 litre V8's. (of course, not O.E.).

[psfred]

Won't fit into the earlier W108/W109 -- the brake booster was moved to make room in the later ones.

Too bad the usual problem with the W108/W109 is terminal rust rather than engine problems!

Another place to put it is in a 380/420 SE/SEL with a broken chain.....

Peter

[Clunker]

Where was the brake booster originally in a 108/109?

[psfred]

Far enough to the right to interfere with the left valve cover. All W108/109s after 71 have the brake booster several inches to the left of the original position, and the brake pedal assembly is not interchangeable. Everything else is the same.

Peter