From owner-diesel-benz-digest-at-digest.net Thu Aug 5 20:24:21 2004 From: diesel-benz-digest diesel-benz-digest Friday, August 6 2004 Volume 01 : Number 1523 Forum for Discussion of Diesel Mercedes Benz Automobiles Derick Amburgey Digest Coordinator Contents: Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject Re: [db] paraguay disaster? Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject Re: [db] paraguay disaster? Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... [db] Re: xj: Two Used 96-up 4.0L Pistons Needed [db] squeaky rear suspension 190D Diesel Benz Digest Home Page: http://www.digest.net/diesel-benz/ Send submissions to diesel-benz-digest-at-digest.net Send administrative requests to diesel-benz-digest-request-at-digest.net To unsubscribe, include the word unsubscribe by itself in the body of the message, unless you are sending the request from a different address than the one that appears on the list. Include the word help in a message to stag-digest-request to get a list of other majordomo commands. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:04:14 -0700 From: john meister Subject: Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject you need an analysis kit? I may have one laying around... cost me $10. I was thinking of analyzing my oil... been down to Monterey twice on this change and then over to Spokane... only 1/2 quart low after all that... turned 194,000 miles on the 300d. :) I can check to see if I can get more sample kits... I like the 15w40 marine grade synthetic... use it in my lawnmower even... for grins I tried the new Series 3000 5w30 Diesel oil... my mileage seems to be pretty good... have hit almost 40mpg with it so far. ;) looking at the specs on the new 2005 E320CDI, it's rated at 27/37. But the 320CDI will leave my '91 300D in the rear view right quick. ;) john Kevin Pekarek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 02:32:23PM -0500, Alec_Cordova-at-Dell.com wrote: > >>But your basic Quaker State/Pennzoil 5W-30 and 10W-40 available in most >>places is not really a great oil. > > > Not really. About all I'd use it for is to carry a couple of quarts in the > trunk in case I ran low on fuel. And with Delo 400 being about $32-35 for > a box of SIX gallons at costco, it's hard to argue that some cheapo oil > (that is compression ignition rated) is saving you money. I mean, that's > about as cheap as kragen (shucks, checker) charges you for pennzoil for > gassers. > > >>Don't go strictly by the brand name. Different "model lines" and even >>different weights within a model line can have very different >>performance characteristics. Even the more common Mobil1 synthetic >>weights do not meet MB specs, although some of theirs do and are used as >>factory fill oil by MB. > > > Yes, Mobil 1 is one of the more famous examples of that. > > >>Just as a plug for John, I believe most Amsoil formulations and weights >>do in fact meet various MB specs. > > > One of the attractive things about amsoil is that it can be shipped to > you. Because of this, you don't need to deal with McParts for anything, > especially since you get good oil filters from one of the previously mentioned > on this list sources for parts. > > For grins, sometime when I have nothing better to do, I should send some of > the oil in the turbodiesel pacer wagon in for analysis. It's amsoil marine > diesel 15w40, and it's been in the car since 99, when the car last ran and > headed to the junkyard. Should be interesting to say the least. :) > > K ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:12:13 -0700 From: Kevin Pekarek Subject: Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 01:04:14PM -0700, john meister wrote: > you need an analysis kit? I may have one laying around... cost me $10. > I was thinking of analyzing my oil... been down to Monterey twice on this > change and then over to Spokane... only 1/2 quart low after all that... > turned 194,000 miles on the 300d. :) I can check to see if I can get > more sample kits... Shoot, at ten bucks, I might as well just get the kit myself. If they recommend keeping the oil, I'll have to scan a copy and send it your way. That engine hasn't even cranked for over four years. :) K - -- Kevin Pekarek Redwood City, CA (near San Francisco) and Los Osos, CA (near San Luis Obispo) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:41:26 -0400 From: "Renaud (Ron) Olgiati" Subject: Re: [db] paraguay disaster? On Thursday 05 August 2004 12:43, john wrote: > it's a terrible tragedy... it sounded like the > storekeeper locked the doors??? More convoluted, since first the owner got out with the days takings, having ordered all staff inside to remain at their posts, and on his way out ordering the security guards to lock all the doors after he had gone, "to avoid looting". And the emergency exits had been welded shut shortly after the shop was opened, to prevent unauthorized access/exit. Cheers, Ron. - -- Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going to speak it to ? -- Clarence Darrow -- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:58:39 -0400 From: "Jim Hoffman" Subject: Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Jim Hoffman wrote: > > >-->You still haven't answered "why"... The suspension is designed to > >-->handle a certain amount of weight. I drive an F350 with the 7.3 > >-->IDI Turbo diesel. Yeah, it's heavy. But the suspension is designed > >-->to handle it. I don't tip over when I go around a turn! ;) > > it's like this... we're dealing with the distribution of weight. > > If you put too much weight in the front the vehicle will not > handle properly... regardless of what the suspension is capable > of handling... > > an improperly balanced rig can be quite dangerous... > > john Well, my truck has one honkin' heavy engine in the front and an empty box in the back. Are you saying it's dangerous to drive? It doesn't handle poorly. Rides very nicely. Wouldn't a J10 with suspension modifications to handle the weight of a 6cyl diesel have essentially the same weight distribution after it was done?? I guess I just don't agree... Jim/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:09:21 -0700 From: Kevin Pekarek Subject: Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 04:58:39PM -0400, Jim Hoffman wrote: > > >-->You still haven't answered "why"... The suspension is designed to > > >-->handle a certain amount of weight. I drive an F350 with the 7.3 > > >-->IDI Turbo diesel. Yeah, it's heavy. But the suspension is designed > > >-->to handle it. I don't tip over when I go around a turn! ;) > > > > it's like this... we're dealing with the distribution of weight. > > > > If you put too much weight in the front the vehicle will not > > handle properly... regardless of what the suspension is capable > > of handling... > > > > an improperly balanced rig can be quite dangerous... > > Well, my truck has one honkin' heavy engine in the front and an > empty box in the back. Are you saying it's dangerous to drive? > It doesn't handle poorly. Rides very nicely. Wouldn't a J10 > with suspension modifications to handle the weight of a 6cyl diesel > have essentially the same weight distribution after it was done?? > I guess I just don't agree... It isn't just the suspension. It's a lot more complicated than it seems. Having driven a Dodge 3/4 ton with a cummins, I know exactly what John is talking about. Having driven a pinto with a 429, I know what it's like in a car too :) Anyways, John takes his truck off road. One could go into how a Jeep Wagoneer was relatively well balanced, or how a Mercedes G-wagon is relatively well balanced, but when making an off road toy, you want to keep the weight low enough so that you don't have an obnoxiously high center of gravity, but high enough that you don't put holes in things (like oil pans and fuel tanks). It's hard to be balanced with a rockcrawler, but if you look at a lot of them, they've moved the front axle forward so that not only do they fix approach angle problems, they also center more weight between the axles. Weight hanging over an axle when going down hill and meeting a rock with a tire can be rather spooky, if you're lucky. There isn't anything wrong with a dodge cummins in a truck, but in a lighter duty vehicle like a J10 or ramcharger, it's probably not as good of an idea. Its sheer mass is just one of the reasons. Also, don't forget, that ISB cummins weighs more than my powerchoke and your IDI. It is a *HEAVY* engine. Ford specs that engine when you don't need the big Cat, but need more than a powerstroke. It is actually an option in an F550. K - -- Kevin Pekarek Redwood City, CA (near San Francisco) and Los Osos, CA (near San Luis Obispo) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:52:33 -0400 From: "Marc" Subject: Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject > But the 320CDI will leave my '91 300D in the rear view right quick. ;) > > john Yes it does. I drove my father's car a few weeks back. It is quick. And speaking of oil, there's no dip stick. To check the oil level, there is a small "screen" in the center of the speedometer. I had to read the 1 inch + think manual to figure out how to check the fluid. The only thing it tells you is that it's "OK". I'll be picking up my newly acquired 1983 300TD this Saturday in Pompano Beach, FL. I'm looking forward to that. I'll be driving back to NC on Sunday. Marc '83 300D Turbo, 322,000 miles '83 300TD, 204,900 miles '89 XJ, 152,000 miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:41:57 -0700 From: john meister Subject: Re: [db] paraguay disaster? Does it look like he'll be staying in a place with bars on the doors? Tragic that the loss of life might have been reduced... the reports of people being found in their burned up cars too... man, what a mess... how did this happen? could it happen here? john Renaud (Ron) Olgiati wrote: > On Thursday 05 August 2004 12:43, john wrote: > > >>it's a terrible tragedy... it sounded like the >>storekeeper locked the doors??? > > > More convoluted, since first the owner got out with the days takings, having > ordered all staff inside to remain at their posts, and on his way out > ordering the security guards to lock all the doors after he had gone, "to > avoid looting". > > And the emergency exits had been welded shut shortly after the shop was > opened, to prevent unauthorized access/exit. > > Cheers, > > Ron. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:49:53 -0700 From: john meister Subject: Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... no, the extra weight on the front of a J10 would upset the balance if I went with the Cummins. I am looking for a 6.2/6.5L V8 GM Diesel... but am also going to consider using the Mercedes Diesel, I don't care about performance, rather economy, durability and longevity. Where am I going to go with a "hot rod" Diesel? :) On my J10 I'll have a heavy duty brush guard in front and a big honkin' bumper in the back. Once I get out and rolling I don't have to be rolling fast... :) Anyway, even with the 4.0L that I have planned I'm moving the batteries to the back of the cab to help distribute the weight. My J10 is a short wheelbase and already pretty light in the back because of the stepside and the fiberglass fenders. It came with a 4.2L I-6 that's pretty light. Stay tuned as we commence the Diesel dreams... the delays in setting up my J10 has finally resulted in going this way. My friend won't be able to get it done this year... so... Diesel it is. :) john Jim Hoffman wrote: >>On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Jim Hoffman wrote: >> >> >>>-->You still haven't answered "why"... The suspension is designed to >>>-->handle a certain amount of weight. I drive an F350 with the 7.3 >>>-->IDI Turbo diesel. Yeah, it's heavy. But the suspension is designed >>>-->to handle it. I don't tip over when I go around a turn! ;) >> >>it's like this... we're dealing with the distribution of weight. >> >>If you put too much weight in the front the vehicle will not >>handle properly... regardless of what the suspension is capable >>of handling... >> >>an improperly balanced rig can be quite dangerous... >> >>john > > > Well, my truck has one honkin' heavy engine in the front and an > empty box in the back. Are you saying it's dangerous to drive? > It doesn't handle poorly. Rides very nicely. Wouldn't a J10 > with suspension modifications to handle the weight of a 6cyl diesel > have essentially the same weight distribution after it was done?? > I guess I just don't agree... > > Jim/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:54:11 -0700 From: john meister Subject: Re: [db] engine oil - infamous subject I was down in Seattle today, I should have stopped at the Benz dealership to get a new belt, exchange a pan gasket and see if they had a 320CDI in stock. :) On the other hand, if it gets 27/37 and mine gets about the same, or better... well, I think I know how I can save myself about $60,000. ;) john Marc wrote: >>But the 320CDI will leave my '91 300D in the rear view right quick. ;) >> >>john > > > Yes it does. I drove my father's car a few weeks back. It is quick. And > speaking > of oil, there's no dip stick. To check the oil level, there is a small > "screen" in the center > of the speedometer. I had to read the 1 inch + think manual to figure out > how to check > the fluid. The only thing it tells you is that it's "OK". > > I'll be picking up my newly acquired 1983 300TD this Saturday in Pompano > Beach, FL. > I'm looking forward to that. I'll be driving back to NC on Sunday. > > Marc > '83 300D Turbo, 322,000 miles > '83 300TD, 204,900 miles > '89 XJ, 152,000 miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:03:11 -0700 From: john meister Subject: Re: [db] Diesel dreamin'... the technical aspects... Kevin Pekarek wrote: > It isn't just the suspension. It's a lot more complicated than it > seems. Having driven a Dodge 3/4 ton with a cummins, I know exactly > what John is talking about. Having driven a pinto with a 429, I know what > it's like in a car too :) > > Anyways, John takes his truck off road. One could go into how a Jeep > Wagoneer was relatively well balanced, or how a Mercedes G-wagon is > relatively well balanced, but when making an off road toy, you want to > keep the weight low enough so that you don't have an obnoxiously high > center of gravity, but high enough that you don't put holes in things (like > oil pans and fuel tanks). It's hard to be balanced with a rockcrawler, but > if you look at a lot of them, they've moved the front axle forward so that > not only do they fix approach angle problems, they also center more weight > between the axles. Weight hanging over an axle when going down hill and > meeting a rock with a tire can be rather spooky, if you're lucky. Spooky isn't the right word... there is a serious "pucker" factor involved. You want your rig balanced fore and aft and you want to keep the CG as low as you can. That's why Jeeps are so good offroad. The CG on an XJ or a Wagoneer is about where the driver's seat hits the seat. Things are tucked up in the frame but not way high. Just look at a Chevy or a Toyota 4x4, then look at an XJ or SJ or even the GC's both ZJ and WJ... notice how things are situated... the chevy and the toy will have xfr cases and stuff dangling, the body way up on the frame and so on... You do NOT want to have a nose heavy rig on a steep trail either... you get into a sideslip situation with mud and such and you'll end up sliding the wrong way... you want to be able to predict where things go and get them there without rearranging sheetmetal or the forest. :) > > There isn't anything wrong with a dodge cummins in a truck, but in a lighter > duty vehicle like a J10 or ramcharger, it's probably not as good of an idea. > Its sheer mass is just one of the reasons. amen. unless you could put it right dead center of the vehicle... but that thing would make way too much noise as a center console. ;) john ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:31:46 -0700 From: john meister Subject: [db] Re: xj: Two Used 96-up 4.0L Pistons Needed doug wrote: > Hi John, > > Diesel might not be a bad way to go at all. News > today said oil hit a new high of $44 per barrel. > Some experts think it's going to go to $50 per > barrel. With gasoline prices like they are now, > a diesel engine's higher MPG makes it a good choice. I'm loving my '91 300D with the 2.5L TD right now... got 39.44 mpg driving it over to Spokane on Sunday... and I think it's faster than my XJ... > > What sort of diesel engine are you going to put in > your Jeep? Jeep made a few diesel Cherokees back I was just swapping email with a buddy of mine who ran several dealerships... he's saying to go with the 6.5L TD (Chevy/GM). He's going to help me find one... possibly a crate motor. > in the mid-80's (I've seen a couple for sale on the > Internet), but that engine would be very hard to > find. Are you going to try to find a Jeep diesel, > or use something else? I had one. '85 Cherokee with the Renault All Aluminum 2.1L Turbo Diesel... bosch injection pump... garret turbo... overall it was a nice little unit. 26mpg in town and 32mpg on the freeway... had a crappy 5 speed... the biggest downsides were it was gutless for towing and parts from the French were as bad or worse then their attitudes... ;) the sleeve kit for the engine listed for more than I paid for my last XJ. :) > > As far as stroker 6 cyl engines go, the guys that > have built them seem to like them (but I haven't > seen anything on the web about how long they last). a couple of guys on the xj list are doing ok with them... > One thing, the 258 has a lousy rod-to-stroke ratio > (the 4.0L is much better, shorter stroke and longer > rods). When I get try building a stroker motor, I'm > planning to use 4.0L rods (0.25" longer than 258 > rods) in it. The rod-to-stroke ratio still won't > be great, but it'll be better than the stock 258. > >>From what I've seen on the web, a lousy rod-to-stroke > ratio creates more friction and piston wear, this > might be why some of the stroker motors are having > problems. could be... my 4.2L ended up cracking an oil control ring in #2 at around 130,000 miles... it had serious blowby before that... my '87 4.0L has blowby, but it's over 250,000 miles right now so I really don't mind... doesn't use oil really... but you can tell it doesn't have the giddyup and go it probably did when it was newer. :) later, john ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:46:54 -0400 From: "wmpless" Subject: [db] squeaky rear suspension 190D Hello again, shortly after I bought the car last year it developed a squeak in the rear suspension. Sounded as if the coil springs were grinding against metal. In the end it turned out the metal clad bushing in the wheel carrier were worn out. Replacement can be done without a spring compressor or any other special tools. You will not be able to hammer the bushing out but replacement can be done with a threaded rod, some larger sockets with 1/2" drive and some nuts to push the bushing out and in again. In my case noise disappeared and I feel road holding improved. A MB parts person mentioned to me that this is a fairly common repair performed. Wiard ------------------------------ End of diesel-benz-digest V1 #1523 **********************************