OM617 swap into Ford Ranger, what would it take?
 

I've been thinking about putting a diesel in a small pickup for a wile and now that I found a cheap Ranger with a blown engine on Craigslist I might just be able to do it. My biggest concern is whether the new engine would fit in the truck with out shifting the transmission back. Also, how much electronic stuff is required to support these old Mercedes engines? Could I get away with using a switch for the glow plugs and another for the fan and call it good or would I have to pull all the electronics out of the Mercedes and put them in the truck?

Thanks for the help.

My first suggestion is for you to read my build thread. Or if you REALLY want details, read the LONG version on BangShift. I've done approximately the swap you're considering but in an S-10. My truck is ONLY used for LAnd Speed Racing so my swap is a bit more involved (in some ways) that a vehicle used for street use might need.

There are really NO electronics involved with an OM617. The stop system requires vacuum which you can generate several ways including the stock pump or you can do it with a simple pull cable. I had a specific need so I have a fairly involved system using compressed air - a safety requirement at the track.

I kept the Bosch alternator and starter (not much choice on the starter) but had both rebuilt at my local shop - so far so good.

The length of the engine will be the main issue. The mounts are dead simple - just a 90* thru bolt on each side. I set the engine angle and welded up part of the S-10 crossmember with part of the Mercedes trans crossmember to make the rear mount. Again, works OK so far. I had to modify my firewall quite a bit but I'm not sure on the Ranger. If you have a measurement from the firewall to the core support of a Ranger I can measure mine and give you a better idea of the available space. I'd run out and measure mine but it's still on the trailer from the last meet and it's raining cats and dogs at the moment.

You'll need to be realistic. You need a facility and metal fabrication tools (cutting, grinding, and welding equipment). To the best of my knowledge there is no kit for this so you'll have to make everything. Find out if the Ranger is set up for a front or rear sump oil pan - the 617 has it's deepest sump in the front and the S-10 has a rear sump so THAT was a stinker! I had to modify my lower oil pan extensively and will probably do another one to see if I can make more steering clearance. LOTS of cutting and fitting but maybe it's an easier fit in a Ranger.

The exhaust is pretty simple - just a pipe out of the engine bay. The first section of the Mercedes pipe will make the exhaust work easier.

Any radiator for a 5.0/Ranger swap should handle the cooling. Diesels are not generally hard to cool.

You should have a local driveshaft shop and they can connect whatever you have out of the trans to whatever you have into the diff. Jags That Run makes an adaptor plate from the M-B trans output flange to a Dana U-joint so that comes in handy if you go with a Mercedes trans.

Anyhow, it's a great project and I wish you luck if you decide to take it on.

Dan

The venerable 617 has been swapped into many different vehicles - Jeep, Toyota pickup, S10, Studebaker Pickup and lots more. I put one in a MB Roadster.

I'd suggest doing a search and reading through the various build threads to see at a detailed level what's involved.

Process-wise it's a simple two-step process

Make it fit - fab the engine/transmission mounts, deal with any chassis clearance issues, make sure everything lines up. Biggest issues here are steering gear and suspension components as they're difficult to change and involve safety and reliability.

Hook it up - go system by system making it work. There are lots of systems and lots of engineering and fabrication for each - fuel, cooling, vacuum, gauges, exhaust, suspension, linkages, glow, shutdown, intake, A/C, electrical, climate, and so forth...

You'll have a choice of transmissions as adapters are available if desired.

The good news is that there are no electronics to deal with. The 617 will be one of the very few engines still running after an EMP event.

You should definitely have facilities, tools, expertise, patience, engineering, money and time in ample supply. It can be done....the question is should it be done and should you be the one to do it. Only you can answer that question.

If you do, start a build thread, detail the process, take lots of pictures and you'll be surprised at the support and help you'll find along the way. Sometimes there are some really simple answers to what seem like intractable problems...and sometimes there are some really intractable problems.

I'd definitely do mine again!

...did I mention take lots of pictures.

Oh, and remember the first rule of swaps - the last 20% of the project takes 80% of the time...and the corollary: the last 20% takes 80% of the money.

I'm going to hazard a guess that your biggest issue is going to be related to the sump position and the length of the engine. You should be able to take some measurements off the engine and go to a junk yard and find a Ranger with a pulled engine and take detailed measurements off the bay/tunnel. You can fab a new sump, but to my knowledge there is no currently known way to move the oil pump, so you're stuck with a front sump configuration.

Great thanks for the info! I started reading your build log Dan, it should be very helpful. I was thinking of using the Ranger's transmission so that the truck would still be 4wd and I wouldn't have to mess with the length of the driveshafts. I have machining experience and my buddy is a machinist so making an adapter shouldn't be to hard. If you guys could tell me the basic dimensions of these diesel engines that'd be awesome. I'll try and get some measurements of how much room there is in the Ranger. I had thought that I was just missing things and that's why this project didn't seem out of my league but after reading about it totally sounds like I could get this done.

I had a pretty good set of dimensions, but those disappeared about 100k miles ago when I finished my swap.

It would be helpful if you filled out your profile - for example, where are you located? If you happened to be close to San Diego, I've got a "junk" engine you could use/have for measurements and mockup - it's essentially complete, but I'd eventually need to keep stuff like IP, turbo, sump, VP, etc. as spares.

You could also use images as a basis. Take a known measurement like valve cover length or damper diameter and take measurements off the computer screen.

I have a spare engine too.

Good idea on using a picture, I'll give that a shot

Would you mind measuring the basic dimensions for me?

I have a spare on a stand, too. If you get down toward Myrtle Beach you're in my neighborhood so you can stop in - PM me if that will work. Do we have anyone in MA with a spare?

I'll see if I can get some measurements.

As far as the Ranger trans - I don't know if there are any commercially-made adaptors for that but there might be. You can try Brentsen's - they make a bunch of oddball adaptors (Google 'em). The 617 is a bit tricky because the 617 uses an intermediate plate between the back of the block and the bellhousing (it's in my thread) so the actual bolt pattern at the rear of the block is a small 4 bolt (IIRC, pretty sure that's right). I had a heck of a time bolting the engine to the stand with that weird rear bolt pattern - and the guys say it's questionable to bolt the engine to a stand from the intermediate plate. BTW - take a look at my newest engine stand adaptor that bolts the engine sideways on the stand - it makes the engine a TON easier to work on.

You asked about the glowplug system in your OP. I'm just running a Ford starter solenoid and a handmade harness - use #12 or bigger wire. I hold the button down for a slow count of 10 and it fires right up. The timer would be fancy but it's NOT necessary. Be sure you get the solenoid rated for continuous duty, like for a snow plow. I got mine at CarQuest and I'm sure other stores might have them. A stock replacement solenoid (like, for a Ford PU) will NOT hold up in that application.

Glad the thread is useful to you. The thread on BangShift is sort of the main one and has details that may be missing from the one on here. Feel welcome to lurk if interested - you won't be the only one!

Dan

I'm happy with my swap into my Toyota. Solid low end power for idling over big rocks in 4 way low, and ability to cruise at 70 on the freeway without straining. A little slow to accelerate but does fine once going. Enough power for towing without being scary. Amazing MPG for a vehicle that will do all this. My build thread is around here somewhere.

This should give you some encouragement...

http://jason.pepas.com/photos/om617-...ord-ranger.jpg

1994 Ford Ranger

Just a picture...no build thread, no other details.

Diesel Conversion
 

I did a similar swap. I put a Cummins 4BT into a 2000 Dodge Dakota 4x4 Crew Cab. The details are here:

4BT into a 00 Dakota 4wd

and here's a youtube video of it starting/idling:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeWeJOXowOc

My build thread:

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/diesel-discussion/341932-my-official-om617-toyota-pickup-repower-thread.html

Driving my swap around town:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eggByFXpVNE&feature=youtu.be

Some questions on the proposed swap and I'll add some info to the Ranger pic above.

What year Ranger did you find?

What engine and trans are in it now?

Have you looked on the web site The Ranger Station or 4BT Swaps?

The Ranger above had the upper portion ( in black ) cut away to place the rad in the support.

Have a look at a 2.3 turbo motor from a T bird, this will give you some sense as to turbo and exhaust clearances ( if the target motor has a turbo )

The Ranger retained some parts through it's entire build from 83 to the end in 12.

Major differences are:

83 to 88 had square glass headlights.

89-90 ( 91 ? ) used plastic headlights / grille from the Explorer

92-97 had rounded fenders , doors that closed into the top of the roof rather than under a rain gutter.

98 - 12 used the 92 doors but the cab and wheelbase grew a few inches in length, front fenders and core support are different than past years.

83 to 97 used twin I beam front suspension with coil springs, you need a lot of room for the front differential to go up and down. Even the 2 WD needs space directly below the oil pan as the beams cross there. 2 and 4 wheel frames are likely interchangeable, I've used a 2 WD radius arm cross member on a 4 without issue.

98 to 12 used a arm front suspension. 2 WD got coil springs , 4 WD for torsion bars, both got rack and pinion steering. The frames are not interchangeable between 2 and 4 WD.

Somewhere in the mid 90's Ranger frames started to rust badly starting with the left rail where the fuel tank is. They also rust off rear spring shackles and frame tails.

There is probably more but that will get you started.

I know the engine is too tall with the stock oil pan to fit under the hood in 80's/early 90's Rangers, there is one running around Ottawa with a custom front grill and hood riser for clearance. I have not been able to witness the job up close, but it is evident from the outside some work had to be done and I met a mechanic who worked on it and verified it was a 617 motor.
You might find adapters for the engine and trans at acme in CA, they offer a lot of different ones.

Dan, thanks for the offer but I won't be driving that far south anytime soon. I'll just pick up a rusty 300d from around here.
Making an adapter shouldn't be a problem because I've got a machinist friend who made an adapter to hook a Ford eco boost engine and a couple of brushless motors to a Corvette transmission and he's going to be helping me make this thing. The bolt pattern was only giving you problems putting the engine on a stand not putting in on the transmission right?

OM617YOTA, that's awesome! That's exactly what I want.

Mach4 are you using the stock transmission?

Daw_two, that's sick! I'm probably going to stick with the Mercedes engine because they're alot eaier to get around here.

97SL320, truck's from 1999 and is 4wd 5spd manual.
I haven't lost looked at either cite much.
I forgot that my friends parents have a 300d turbo so I'll just measure that.

Clacker, cool thats what i was thinking of doing if I can't make the engine fit, I'm glad it works

Yes...almost. I swapped the tailcone and yoke from the 380SL transmission to the 300Ds transmission so I could keep the electronic speedo and match the driveshaft yoke/flex disc (the 380s is larger presumably to handle more torque from the more powerful engine). They both have 722.3x transmissions, but the bell housing and starter are different as well a the gear ratios.

In 99 there were 2 engines used in 4 WD trucks. A 3.0 Vulcan V6 ( also found in front drive apps ) and a 4.0 that sort of traces it's roots back to the 2.9 / 2.8 / 2.6. The 3.0 and 4.0 use different bell housing patterns so the adapter will be different.

The manual trans is a Mazda M5OD , this was first used in 88. The bell housings are not removable however they were also used behind the 2.3 / 2.5 Lima Pinto motor ( not sure about the completely different later 2.5 ) They "might" have been used behind the 2.9 but I've only seen the aluminum pan Toyokogo and steel pan Mitsubishi 5 speeds.

There was also a HD version of the M5OD used in full sized inline 6 and V8 trucks but I don't know if the transfer case pattern is the same as Ranger or not.

I used the Getrag 4 speed from a 240D so of course it bolts right up to the intermediate plate (same as a 240D). When you make your adaptor it probably will be easier to use the intermediate plate and go toward the trans from there - but that's a guess.

I'm surprised that the Ranger in Canada has it's engine so tall in the saddle. My S-10, which was made for a rear sump engine, handles the front sump pretty well and as you can see it all sits under the stock hood. Maybe some careful cutting and fitting will get that sump down low enough to make a cleaner installation. But like I said, I've never done a Ranger.

Darn - I was hoping to meet you!

Dan

That ranger must have the front pan on top of its cross member.

Measurements and pics. Hopefully you can read the tape - I tried to position it so you could not only have the measurements but also see where stuff sticks out, etc.

1) Width across the front - about 25.5".

2) Width across the rear - about 23.5".

3 Height at the tallest point (sump to cam cover) - about 27". The air cleaner will add height if you use the stock unit.

4) Intermediate plate that we discussed.

Two more pics - I'll make a second entry.

Dan

Last 2 pics. The forum will only take 5 at a time.

1) The oil pan as discussed. Note the front sump which bolts on and is quite heavy gage steel. The deep point at the rear is a part of what is generally called the "upper pan" and is cast aluminum - it bolts to the block.

2) Total engine length - about 31" from water pump nose to the rear of the intermediate plate.

The OM617 is actually quite compact for a Diesel, especially given how stout it is. Hopefully these will get you headed in the right direction.

Dan

Sorry I meant to ask if you used the trucks transmission or not, thanks for the info

I don't know what engine's in this truck but i'm going to look at it Friday. Haven't read through all of this yet but aparently the bell housing on the automatic is removable but it's to small for the Mercedes flywheel. Benz om617 - The Ranger Station Forums Hopefully there's a bit more room in the manual transmission


Thanks for the pics Dan! Could you measure the diameter of the flywheel for me?

I've got a confession, I've done almost no work on cars so I don't know the names of all the parts between the crankshaft and the drive shaft. Everything I know is just extrapolations of what I've seen on the small engines I've worked on and pictures. So correct me if I'm wrong but does it go engine, flywheel, thing to attach engine to the input of the clutch (possibly bolted to the flywheel? More likely splined shaft), clutch, transmission. All the stuff between the transmission and the engine is in a housing that's called a bell housing. Yes/No? Based on that logic and the picture and Dan's second to last picture the Mercedes flywheel being larger then what the Ranger's bell housing was designed for shouldn't be an issue because either the Mercedes flywheel doesn't go farther then the intermediate plate (can't quite tell from the picture) and so there's no conflict or I could mill it a little thinner (only the starter rides on it right?). Also, why am I even worrying about this? If I'm making an adapter to put the engine and transmission together then the flywheel will be back far enough from the bell housing and they won't interfere and there's no issue. I think that thread I linked at the beginning of this post is just making me doubt my ideas and there's no issue. That's crazy i wrote all this, I guess i just had to work through it all in my head. Please correct me where I'm wrong!

It goes like this: crankshaft, flywheel, clutch disk, pressure plate (this is bolted to the flywheel). The clutch disk has a splined shaft that slips onto the transmission input shaft.

Where in MA are you? I'm in Chelmsford, where Rt. 3 and 495 intersect, about 15 minutes south of Nashua, NH.

Here is a picture and a link that might help:

http://www.2jsautomotive.com/wp-cont.../10/clutch.jpg

This link has a good explanation and helpful diagrams:

Clutch Tech Part One: The Pressure Plate, Get a Grip!

I would definitely read it!

The flywheel is approx. 12" measured across the ring gear (that's what the starter engages with). Just a point of clarity - the flywheel shown in my pics is actually for an automatic. In most cars this would be a fairly light gage plate (like, maybe 1/8" thick) but Mercedes wants this much mass to smooth out the pulses of a Diesel engine. If you look closely at the pic you'll see that a smaller plate is bolted to the center of the flywheel - this is an adaptor for the torque converter to bolt to.

Note that in the drawing in Moly's last post, the flywheel bolts to the crankshaft and the pressure plate bolts to the flywheel. The clutch disc is splined to the transmission input shaft so the only way the engine gets hooked to the trans is when the pressure plate is allowed to push against the flywheel which results in the clutch disc getting squeezed between the two. The pressure plate is spring loaded toward the flywheel so it wants to do the squeezing and only releases when you push the clutch pedal down which compresses the spring. Hope that helps.

I have a suggestion: before tackling a swap like this I'd suggest you find someone who is doing an engine removal and installation and volunteer to be an unpaid hired hand. It'll help a lot if you have an idea of how stuff fits together, what standard practices are, etc. A place to start is to go to a local car show and start asking if anyone is doing an engine swap and could use a hand. Chances are you'll find someone who would be happy to have some help and who would be happy to teach. I can tell you from personal experience it's fun to pass on your knowledge!

This is NOT a simple swap and there's a high possibility for the Ranger to end up on Craigslist as an unfinished project unless you PLAN for that not to happen. The more hands-on you can get the better. You've made a great start by reaching out to this community - we'll really try to keep you on the right path (of course, there will be differing opinions as to what the "right path" is....). We all want to see you succeed!

Dan

lol, I'm debating doing an engine swap in my 300SD to an OM603... it would be my second 617 engine pull. I wouldn't turn down help and would also be happy to help with any projects he has.

This is REALLY solid advice! You're going to learn a lot during this adventure!

Can you weld? That'll help a lot with motor mounts and such.

Welding (even as badly as I do it) is indeed VERY helpful. Given that I'm NOT the world's best weldor (I have vision issues that mean that I can't do a lot better) I sometimes tack stuff together and take the project over to a local shop that will TIG weld stuff for a fair price. My point - do what you can but don't be proud!

I forgot to mention that the oil pump and it's pickup are inside that lower sump so you can't alter that too much. You can make it a bit smaller as shown in my build thread but it pretty much has to stay there.

I'd take Molyapina up on that offer! That's experience that will translate directly to the Ranger project and he's at least within traveling distance from you.

Dan

The biggest issue is probably if the oil pan will clear the K-frame. All my old Chrysler cars have the oil pan deep at the mid-rear, whereas the OM617 drops down at the front. You don't really have the option of fabbing a custom oil pan, unless you replace the whole alum upper oil pan. Another issue is engine height. The OM617 is OHC, so if the Ranger came w/ OHC engines, "should fit". Most people use the transmission that came w/ the engine. There are custom adapter plates for certain swaps between Chevy, Ford, & Chrysler muscle cars, but rare and expensive. Then a gazillion little gotch's like interference between exhaust and steering components, ... Expect a lot of re-engineering, taking much time, and many "can't get there from here" issues. All such issues would be easier in a wider truck.

Bill - The Ranger came equipped with an OHC 4 cylinder as the base engine so it likely has a reasonably tall engine bay.

I know guys fit small block Ford V-8s in these all the time (there are kits) so there IS a bit of space in there. Later Explorers (Ranger based) had SBFs as a factory option and I once had an oil pan from one which was front sump. So MAYBE..... My Mustang uses a double sump not unlike the 617 and I don't know if that would fit in the Ranger but it might.

Now I'm curious and am going to look up the Ranger swap pan......

Yep, they (Trans-Dapt) recommend using the Explorer engine with the front sump so it sounds like the 617 sump should fit, more or less. I Am Me may have an easier time of it than I did though the 4WD may be a bit of a challenge.

Dan

Although it looks like a 617 is headed for the engine bay of your Ranger, have you thought about a Mitsubishi 2.3 TurboDiesel? The Ranger came with this engine for a few years ('83-'85?). This engine can also be found in other countries as a 2.5 (I think) intercooled version. A friend of mine got a used low mile one from Japan, and put it in his truck. I do know that finding a Ranger with this engine is rare, but the Mits truck can be found with this engine easier. They are fairly cheap (MUCH LESS than an OM617) to rebuild, as I have done it. Most rebuild parts are available everywhere. This is a very powerful engine for it's size, and moves my truck laden with many pounds of tools, very well...Rich

The Mustang "double sump is more of a front sump to clear the oil pump and a rear sump to hold most of the oil" . Yes, there is a drain plug in the front buy you only get sub 1 qt out from what I recall.

The trouble around here is that pretty much all of those trucks have rusted off the road years ago... but importing an engine would still be an option. It is a very intriguing idea, though, and might not be too much more expensive in the end, especially if it limits the amount custom work to be done.

Danger, Warning! A swap like this requires fabrication skills in addition to knowing what a factory build looks like.

You may want to consider buying the truck then getting it running by replacing the stock engine. When you get past this, find another parts Ranger and mock up the conversion in that. Once complete, it is just a matter of removing and replacing Vs a total tear down and rebuild that seems to take forever.

Taking things apart is easy, putting back together more difficult and making parts that never fit together before much more difficult. A lot of projects stall just after the take apart , engine sort of sitting under the hood but not hooked up stage.

Cummins 4BT is also a popular swap for Ford Rangers. Lots of bread trucks came equipped w/4BTs w/Ford transmissions (auto & stick). -just a thought

Cummins 4bt in a ranger? That engine will weigh 800# or more and the tranny required would be extra weight too. Not to mention it will probably stick 6" above the hood.

There is LOT of love for the 4BT out there on the Interwebs and while it's a GREAT engine I didn't consider it because:
1) They're heavy
2) Their tall, pan to valve covers
3) They run at pretty low RPM necessitating a lot of gear swapping.

I like the 617 as a swap candidate but as mentioned it IS a lot of fabrication and rather advanced parts adaptation. I cautioned about the possibility of it getting stuck in the build stage but projects like this can and do get done. I'll reiterate my call to PLAN, PLAN, PLAN! The results are very rewarding and the engine is (I think) fun to drive. Learning how to get big power out of the engine has been a ton of fun for me.

Don't forget to have fun with the project and the finished project!

Dan

another option is a TDI swap. Smaller engine, and pretty good power.

Here is a pretty comprehensive thread on converting a Ranger to a TDI, pretty good read.

TDI Ranger Build - The Ranger Station Forums

To go off on the 4BT tangent, at 800 Lb that is as much as a big block gas motor, not the best thing for a small truck front suspension of weight distribution.

They are a popular swap because they are available not necessary because they are the best engine for the task.

The 4 / 6 B engines have a steel pan that is below crankshaft level. Whipping up a dry sump is trivial and will reduce height.

The engines can rev higher. Like most industrial diesels, they are rated for 100 % duty so are turned down so they last. Automotive engines are rated for intermittent duty since once at speed power requirements drop. ( Think about a car that tows a trailer constantly or one on a road race track constantly being loaded, engine life is shortened. )

I'll add to that recommended plan - RESEARCH, RESEARCH, RESEARCH. My swap took about a year to do and most of the effort was in researching (and re-doing) Now that the research is done and the problems and issues sorted out, the physical swap could be replicated in a weekend or two plus a bit of prestaging, light fabbing and bit collecting.

Every system will have its challenges, and probably a dozen possible known solutions and a bunch more unknown ones (which is where the forums and Internet can come into play)

The Ranger running around here with a 617 was a back yard get it done kind of swap, I don't believe it was done professionally or with much thought to it, but I could be wrong. I believe it was both engine and trans swapped in, sitting above the cross member. RWD for sure. Most swaps are limited when doing a 4X4, it really complicates things.
I think the biggest challenge will be mating engine to Ford Trans and having room for everything (transfer case, driveshaft, steering).
The factory Ranger diesel option is really hard to find, not impossible but very very rare and there were several configurations, diesel, turbo diesel, 2wd, 4wd, short bed, long bed, extra cab making it tough to match everything up (driveshafts and such). I have actually test driven a few over the years, lots of turbo lag and not very fast but nice units.

I considered the 4BT for my swap and went with the 617 for several reasons. In no particular order:

Cost - 4BT's cost more than my whole conversion around here. Might have been able to come close by buying a bread truck, yanking the 4BT, dropping in a gas 350 and reselling the truck to recoup some of the cost, but dang turn one motor swap project into two? Not worth the work.

Weight - 617 is much lighter than 4BT.

RPM Range - 4BT would have required re-gearing.

Torque - 617 was darned near exactly the same torque as the stock V6, 4BT would have required trans/xfer case/rear end swap to survive. I read reports of 4BT's causing issues with drivetrains when swapped into full size trucks due to huge torque pulses. Wasn't going to deal with that.

Had I to do mine again, I would have used a VW TDI engine and an older solid axle pre-EFI truck. I would have made much greater effort to keep the engine inside the hood and not need that funky radiator box/extension.

Thanks for the information on how the clutch is mounted guys! I was thinking of the clutch as it's own unit (seeing pictures of automatic transmissions was messing me up) but the clutch engaging with the flywheel makes way more sense. It actually simplifies some of the parts i thought I was going to have to make which is awesome.

So what I'm thinking of doing is getting the flywheel, clutch and pressure plate from a manual Mercedes 240D and putting that on the 300D engine in place of the flex plate. I had been all worried that the engine wouldn't fit on the ranger's transmission but the clutch for the ranger is larger then the clutch for the 240D so it should all fit.

You're a bit far from me (UMass Amherst area) but depending when you do it I'd be up for giving you hand.

I'm decent at MIG welding but my welder can't handle anything over 1/4" so hopefully there isn't much thicker then that that I'll have to weld. If there is though my friend has a 200 something amp stick welder that could handle bigger stuff.

Sweet! That's what I like to hear! I'll bring a tape when I go to check out the truck this evening to make sure there's room.

Both are good options but I'm going to stick with the OM617 because they're not hard to get and when I have problems with it I can get help from my friends who drive nothing but Mercedes 240/300 and swear by the engines.

Ok so I may not know a whole lot about how the truck's actually assembled but hey, that's a big part of why I want to do this. Also, I'm confident I can fabricate all the parts. I can weld and have small welder, I have a manual lathe and can do basic manual machining, I know how to program/set up/run both CNC lathes and mills as well as have a much more experienced machinist friend who can make me all the CNC parts for the cost of the materials if I can't do it my self.
I was thinking of just putting new gas engine in the truck like you recommend but we'll see if that happens.

I was just out driving around and a thought popped into my head regarding this, and for that matter, other swaps involving the OM617. As many know, I swapped a 617 into a 380SL chassis. This swap was extremely easy because it so happened that the 107 used the same front subframe as the W114/115 which came with an OM 617, so the engine literally bolted in.

My out-of-the-box "solution" is to research using the MB front subframe on the Ranger. The subframe mounts with 4 simple attach points and has all the front suspension components integrated except the top shock mount.

I'm wondering if it would be possible to just cut out all the Ranger's suspension, fab mount points for the MB subframe and bolt it up. The other remaining issue would be the steering gear. Might be possible to adapt the Rangers or alternately mount the MB steering gear.

If there were a question of strength, there's no reason why the subframe couldn't be welded in directly giving significant frame strength to the front crossmember, as opposed to using the rubber mounts as with the MB.

Just a thought for consideration.

At one time I took detailed measurements, but those have long since disappeared.


Here's a subframe image

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/...1&d=1462931794

Good idea!

It should be possible to swap in the rear subframe as well to be able to match track and rear end ratios and rims. It would appear that this wouldn't be quite as easy as the front as you'd need to fab up the top spring perch, shock mounts as well as a differential mount.

Conceptually you'd be doing a "body swap" onto an MB suspension.

Again I have no idea of the feasibility in practice, but it does open a different line of thinking to doing a swap.

R107 rear subframe

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/...1&d=1462988945

I think if I were going to attempt this, I'd rig a jig of the front and rear subframes in relation to each other at the proper wheelbase and relative position (level) to the ground and then drop the body down to assess possible mounting points for the subframes.

Fun to think about.

There might even be an unforeseen benefit to such a strategy and that would be in licensing and titling. If, hypothetically, the two subframes were joined with say a "tubular" frame member before the donor body was removed and properly documented, the resulting vehicle with a new body would be potentially able to be licensed and titled as the "donor" Mercedes. (Think kit cars). This could be an elegant way to deal with some of the onerous smog requirements that can plague many desirable swaps. Every state is different and requirements vary, but it's worth contemplating.

...just sayin'

At 26:50 in this Wheeler Dealer video, it shows the removal and replacement of the front subframe of the R107 - https://youtu.be/7V-0uO8t1NQ

This is an excellent illustration of how a subframe could be used as a bolt on in a 617 engine swap.


http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/...1&d=1463549003

So I bought myself a Ranger! 1986 4x4 5spd manual, the body's pretty rusty but the frame's in very good shape. Engine runs a little funky, acts like fuel starvation, but what ever I wasn't planning on keeping that. The gas tank's leaky so I'm going to pick a new one up sometime next week. The Ranger's fuel system shouldn't have any trouble running diesel right?

Mach4, good idea to use the Mercedes sub frame but I'd like to keep the truck 4wd.

I'm actually considering a TDI engine because it's lighter and it's much closer to the power of the V6 in my truck already. What I don't like about that engine is how much electronic stuff is required to make it run. I'm totally comfortable with carburetors and the Mercedes engine doesn't seem to much more complicated so not quite sure what I'll do.

I realized I was totally over complicating the adapter, all I have to do is make the engine I'm swapping in look like the stock engine to the transmission which is actually pretty sympol.

Its now a _86_ not a late 90's? Please clarify as the two trucks use different front suspensions and transmissions.