|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
94 - 95 350 Sdl
Did MB make the 94 and 95 year model 350SDL the same specs ?
Does anyone know if there r differences between the 2 years model ? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
MB offered the S350 in those years. The only differences are body details such as amber corners in the 94 and white/amber corners in the 95.
Same basic 603.970 introduced in the 90 350SD/L. Sixto 95 S420 87 300SDL |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Oh, in the W140 series (92-95) MB only offered the SWB S-class with a Diesel engine. Also detail differences between the 92-93 and 94-95.
The 92-93 300SD have the same 3.5l 603.97 as the 90-91 350SD/L and 94-95 S350. Same basic engine anyway. The 90-91 might have different EGR and ARV systems. Sixto 95 S420 87 300SDL |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
My bad. The W126s have the 603.970 and the W140s have the 603.971. I think it's the same basic block.
Sixto 95 S420 87 300SDL |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Is there any truth that MB ironed out the rod bending issues for the 94/95 model or r they just as prone as the 91 model in rod bending and oil burning ?
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
It seems that 95s are susceptible to bent connecting rods, at least from what I've read in this forum. I think someone noted that the connecting rod part numbers changed several times since 1995.
The EPC says that the 603.971 connecting rod was replaced 3 times. An earlier part number is shown as original for the 603.970 so the W126 rod was replaced 4 times, with everything from the first replacement shared with the 603.971. What does that tell you? I'm not sure. The 603.96 rod was replaced 6 times! I've never heard of a 3.0 bending rods. And guess what, your 2.5 uses the same rods as the 3.0. Since 1993 there have been 4 replacements of the 2.5/3.0 rod. FWIW I believe the -17- head was standard issue in 1995 and MB stopped at -22- (2 or 3 iterations). 603.97s are not known to be susceptible to head cracks. Maybe it was to fix the problem with gaskets failing between the timing chain cavity and the #1 combustion chamber. That happens on 603.97s. Sixto 95 S420 87 300SDL |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Go i guess the 94/95 350 SDL is no better than its predecessors.
I have been eyeing the 95 350 SDL and had hoped to acquire it down the road. I was under the impression that the rod bending issues were resolved by the time the 94/95 models came about. I now have been enlightened and will most probably steer away from them. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You can always pay your money and take your chances. It might rust to pieces, or be destroyed in a crash, before you lose it to a bent rod. Food for thought. Best Regards, Jim |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
the rod benders
do not bend rods because the rods are weak, imho.
tom w
__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC] ..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
350 Sdl | jeepee | Tech Help | 5 | 04-21-2005 12:20 AM |
91 350 Sdl Front Amp Location ? | crf250r | Car Audio and Multimedia | 1 | 10-10-2004 09:22 AM |
1991 350 Sdl | PrivateLabel | Diesel Discussion | 14 | 09-04-2004 11:31 AM |
Is 90 or 91 350 SDL a wise buy? | hensmark | Diesel Discussion | 6 | 07-25-2004 10:21 PM |
350 SDL general questions | zat | Diesel Discussion | 9 | 07-14-2002 04:50 PM |