![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Clarification requested : 617 motor - DI?
Could someone let me know if I'm correct in saying that the 617 motor uses Direct Injection? If not, which type? Thanks.
__________________
1989 300E 144K |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
It's indirectly injected, into prechambers.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Also, a lot of us prefer the injection into pre-chambers. Mercedes did it to keep noise down. It has the added affects of preventing a nailing injector from burning a hole in a piston. Also, I think it reduces polymerization under some whacky WVO situations.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, it's great, it's rugged, all that. Direct injection is slightly more efficient, though.
__________________
1982 300CD Petrol/Black Leather |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I was asking so that the answer might aid the research I've been doing on the effects of WVO on these engines. I'm asumming that DI sprays the pattern directly into the CC, correct? While IDI sprays the pattern into the prechamber, which relays it into the CC. If this is true, it would explain the claim of DI being more efficient, for there is one less variable involved. Thank you, guys.
__________________
1989 300E 144K |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
...and in that case, what does TDI stand for?
__________________
1989 300E 144K |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
yeah, and also, DI has a better power curve.
Quote:
I do like the piston burn protection and ... "quiet" combustion? anyway. John |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|