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
  #1  
Old 07-13-2006, 09:24 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 228
280se 3.5 manual transmission?

I am looking for a 4 speed manual transmission for the 3.5L (m116 V8) 280se. Clearly (from calling around and looking online) these transmissions were a rarity. Does anyone know where I might be able to find one? Thanks!!

__________________
1999 C43 AMG ~~~ 744 on black, mostly stock
1991 190e 2.6 ~~~ m117 5.6 project car
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-14-2006, 01:45 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,726
They made only about 130 of them worldwide in the 111 coupe. You are more likely to find one from a 107 body, i.e. 350SL, and more likely to find that in Europe, perhaps an abandoned rust bucket. There was also a few of them in the 109 chassis, i.e. 300SEL 3.5. What you are looking for is a G7627A.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-15-2006, 12:00 AM
cth350's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 4,354
There are two 4-speeds that bolt up to that motor according to some prior threads here. One style is a top loader (single bar connecting to the shifter), the other is a side loader, with three levers on the side.

If you need the side loader, drop me an email, I have a spare. -CTH
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-15-2006, 12:23 AM
Tony H's Avatar
Tony
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Bandon, Oregon
Posts: 1,546
Are you converting a auto car to manual or replacing a defective original trans?
I'm just getting my 3.5 man trans back from Mercedes Werkstatt where it's been for 9 mos being rebuilt. Some parts for these take a while to get.
__________________
Tony H
W111 280SE 3.5 Coupe
Manual transmission

Past cars:
Porsche 914 2.0
'64 Jaguar XKE Roadster
'57 Oval Window VW
'71 Toyota Hilux Pickup Truck-Dad bought new
'73 Toyota Celica GT
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:09 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 228
actually, I plan on using the transmission w/ a 5.6L m117 motor and putting it into my 190e
__________________
1999 C43 AMG ~~~ 744 on black, mostly stock
1991 190e 2.6 ~~~ m117 5.6 project car
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-15-2006, 08:43 AM
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Falls Church, VA
Posts: 5,318
Hmm ...

Believe me, I am all in favor of stuff like this, but you might consider a combination that Mercedes actually offered. I think that the flywheel will be your biggest problem because you will need to find one that fits the crank hub and that the starter can engage. Before you start, you should also make sure that the crank hub can take a pilot bushing. Since the 5.6 was never offered with a manual trans, MB may have not performed this extra machining.
__________________
Chuck Taylor
Falls Church VA
'66 200, '66 230SL, '96 SL500. Sold: '81 380SL, '86 300E, '72 250C, '95 C220, 3 '84 280SL's '90 420SEL, '72 280SE, '73 280C, '78 280SE, '70 280SL, '77 450SL, '85 380SL, '87 560SL, '85 380SL, '72 350SL, '96 S500 Coupe
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-15-2006, 08:45 AM
cth350's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 4,354
Ah, the short answer is that you need a bellhousing. the alloy and cast iron motors have different rear diameters. A 3.5 ready 4-speed will set you back about 1,000$.

Why would you want to stuff all that into a 190E. Even if you had a 190e 16-valve, it's still a W201 chassis car. Small, compact and kinda homely. Add a big motor and it will be nose heavy and drive poorly, if at all.

If you have to do a motor swap, either start with a more cool car like a W107 car or an older cooler sedan.

-CTH
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:47 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by cth350
Ah, the short answer is that you need a bellhousing. the alloy and cast iron motors have different rear diameters. A 3.5 ready 4-speed will set you back about 1,000$.

Why would you want to stuff all that into a 190E. Even if you had a 190e 16-valve, it's still a W201 chassis car. Small, compact and kinda homely. Add a big motor and it will be nose heavy and drive poorly, if at all.

If you have to do a motor swap, either start with a more cool car like a W107 car or an older cooler sedan.

-CTH
so you are saying that the trans from an m116 will not bolt up to an m117? I was under the impression after talking to an MB tech that the 2 motors shared the same physical (exterior) dimensions. Is the bolt pattern just different?

as for putting it into a w201, I guess I don't really have an explanation other than liking the car and having an interest in doing things that haven't been done. The R107 is a great car in its own way, but that is not really what I am after with this project. IMHO, with tasteful body modifications (see AMG's styling) it isn't homely, and the size really doesn't bother me. Its certainly no classic MB (and likely will never be save the Evo I/II), but cool in my eyes nonetheless. I do plan on starting a w115 project (see cooler sedan ) but that will be a little bit down the road.....and I'll need to get a hold of a good R129 SL600 drivetrain first

The engine weight was definitely a concern for me, but I have been told on numerous occaisons (sorry, haven't actually compared the two motors on a scale or anything, so I am relying on others' input) that the alloy m117 block is actually a few kg lighter than the m103 block.....whether the difference in distribution of mass will degrade handling remains to be seen. I daily drive a C43 however, and it handles incredibly well (better than any other 4-dr sedan I have driven) with no hint of nose-heaviness. Considering the similarities in size and chassis design between the w201 and w202, I would say that a good comparison can be made. I believe that the m113 block is slightly lighter than the m117 (if my memory serves me correctly), but it still shows that a big V8 can be thrown into a little sedan without sacrificing handling. Also, AMG did build a few 6.0L quad-cam m117 powered w201s (marketed as the "mallet").....I will assume they built it to handle as well as go straight. Anyways, just some thoughts about the feasibility of my project....please, feel free to comment, as I need all the help that I can get

Anyhow, thanks guys for all the help/feedback....I really appreciate it, and your vast knowledge is a huge asset to my project
__________________
1999 C43 AMG ~~~ 744 on black, mostly stock
1991 190e 2.6 ~~~ m117 5.6 project car

Last edited by FLYNAVY; 07-15-2006 at 01:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:49 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by ctaylor738
Believe me, I am all in favor of stuff like this, but you might consider a combination that Mercedes actually offered. I think that the flywheel will be your biggest problem because you will need to find one that fits the crank hub and that the starter can engage. Before you start, you should also make sure that the crank hub can take a pilot bushing. Since the 5.6 was never offered with a manual trans, MB may have not performed this extra machining.
yes, I am already planning on getting a custom flyweel made for this....unless by some crazy luck the m116 flywheel actually works w/ the m117 (unlikely). My original plan was to use a BMW e39 M5 6-spd trans, so I would say that this will at least require a little less work and possibly be a little less expensive
__________________
1999 C43 AMG ~~~ 744 on black, mostly stock
1991 190e 2.6 ~~~ m117 5.6 project car
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-15-2006, 02:35 PM
cth350's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 4,354
It's not a 116 vs 117 issue. It's iron vs alloy. There were two generations of M116/117 v8 motors. The cast iron blocks were bored to 3.5l and 4.5l respectively. The light alloy blocks were first released with 3.8l & 5.0l displacement, and then 4.2l & 5.6l. Not sure why they kept the same motor designation for both generations of the family, they're sure different in many respects.

A common modification is to find a suitable series Tremec and adapt the bellhousing. Adapter plates for the flywheel have been done before too.

-CTH
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-15-2006, 02:44 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 228
so maybe this is a dumb question, but I'm still not quite sure what you mean about the difference between the 2 families. Are the cast iron blocks different externally from the alloy blocks? (I assume you meant that there are both cast as well as alloy 117 and 116 blocks)

also, do you happen to know which Tremec box would be suitable, or have any more info about this? Obviously that would be the cheapest route, since those transmissions are pretty common in the States. Thanks for the help
__________________
1999 C43 AMG ~~~ 744 on black, mostly stock
1991 190e 2.6 ~~~ m117 5.6 project car
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-15-2006, 04:58 PM
Tomguy's Avatar
Vintage Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: near Scranton, PA
Posts: 5,407
The m116 and m117 blocks are identical externally except the m117 is 30mm taller than the m116 for a longer stroke. A 3.5 manual transmission would fit on a 4.5 no problem.

However, when MB changed the blocks on the m116 and m117's from cast iron to aluminum, they made the bellhousings MUCH smaller. An m116 aluminum-block engine has a noticably smaller bellhousing. Basically, for what it would cost for a 3.5's 4-speed manual and then what you'd need to adapt it to your aluminum-block engine, you can get a new, cheaper 5-speed tranny that isn't so rare and have the modifications done for that instead.
__________________
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
  #13  
Old 10-22-2021, 12:35 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Dallas
Posts: 32
I've had my 71 European 28o see 3.5 for 17 years. It's a 4 speed manual. It's risen in value several multiples but I knew that would happen and am still jacked I own and drive this car. Have no interest in selling. Maybe I'd reconsider if it hit 150ish. Maybe. I love it that much.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-22-2021, 02:55 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Modesto CA
Posts: 4,077
Although the last post on this thread that addressed the matter of bell housings and bolt patterns of M116/117 blocks was 15 years ago, it may still serve all of us to correct some of the assertions that have been made over the years.

1) M116 and M117 blocks have been cast in both iron and aluminum.
2) For purposes of discussing transmission attachment, the bell housing bolt pattern on all four variations (iron M116, alum. M116, iron M117, alum. M117) are the same, with one difference: the top two bolts of the aluminum versions are moved laterally 10mm.
3) When the 450SL 5.0 was put into production with an aluminum M117 it was equipped with a 722.006, not a 722.3. That 722.0 transmission was fitted to the aluminum block with an intermediate plate just as it was to the iron block. The intermediate plate was machined with slotted top holes, and provisions for plate-to-block dowels for the aluminum block. It was, in fact, a universal intermediate plate usable with either iron or aluminum blocks.
4) Any bell housing/transmission package that was bolted to a 3.5 M116 will bolt to any other M116/117 engine when equipped with an intermediate plate.
5) An intermediate plate that was originally supplied with an iron block engine can be modified for use with an aluminum block engine.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-23-2021, 01:03 PM
Tony H's Avatar
Tony
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Bandon, Oregon
Posts: 1,546
I have my T5 5spd conversion pretty much ready to go except for the clutch release bearing which I plan on using a hydraulic bearing. With the 3.27 rear axle 60mph rpms will be under 2K and tighter 1-4 gear spacing.

__________________
Tony H
W111 280SE 3.5 Coupe
Manual transmission

Past cars:
Porsche 914 2.0
'64 Jaguar XKE Roadster
'57 Oval Window VW
'71 Toyota Hilux Pickup Truck-Dad bought new
'73 Toyota Celica GT
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 04:38 PM.


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