From owner-diesel-benz-digest-at-digest.net Tue Feb 21 06:29:46 2006 From: diesel-benz-digest diesel-benz-digest Wednesday, February 22 2006 Volume 01 : Number 2105 Forum for Discussion of Diesel Mercedes Benz Automobiles Derick Amburgey Digest Coordinator Contents: Re: [db] testing Re: [db] Contemplating a purchase Re: [db] testing Re: [db] Head Case Re: [db] Contemplating a purchase Re: [db] testing [db] OT: California Smog Test Strategies Re: [db] testing Re: [db] OT: California Smog Test Strategies Re: [db] testing Re: [db] testing [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) Re: [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) Re: [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) 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: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 23:21:50 -0800 From: Kevin Subject: Re: [db] testing On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 01:05:06AM -0600, Jon Filina wrote: > John typed: > > >test > > > > > > Ping! Pong? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 23:32:55 -0800 From: Kevin Subject: Re: [db] Contemplating a purchase On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:06:42PM -0600, Richard Arnold wrote: > Now, have been looking at some of the tidy examples of mid 1980's W123 300's > on e-bay for myself. > > However, an early 1990's 124 with a 602 engine caught my eye as well. > Anyone on the list have experience with that combination? There are a few floating around this list. > How is it different from the 617 engine? They are both 5 cylinder but the > 602 engine looks like a smaller version of my SDL 603 engine, 3 liters less > one cylinder. I have had absolutely no trouble from it in 190,000 miles. It looks like a short version of your 603 because it IS a short version of your 603. > I'm guessing the 602 is more than adequate but maybe not quite as bullet > proof as the 617? The 617 is considered more bulletproof, and a 123 or 126 is probably less expensive to keep on the road than a 124. There is nothing inherently wrong with a 602 that would keep it from going the distance, unlike some 603s which have a propensity for cracking heads or bending rods. Usually, a 617 powered car can be fetched a lot cheaper than a 124 with a 602. K ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 01:50:15 -0600 From: Jon Filina Subject: Re: [db] testing Kevin added: >>John typed: >> >> >> >>>test >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Ping! >> >> > >Pong? > > THUNK! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:33:27 -0500 From: "J.B. Hebert" Subject: Re: [db] Head Case Even 20 lb. ft. would be better than what they had them torqued to. :) My mechanic said that most likely they gave that job to one of the newbies who was probably fired 3 months later. Ah, well. J.B. At 09:57 PM 2/19/2006, you wrote: >you sure have a nice setup there JB... :) > >I think specs listed in NM tends to confuse some mechanics... > >too bad there is no recourse with that dealer... >john > - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.12/265 - Release Date: 2/20/2006 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 07:14:26 -0800 (PST) From: john Subject: Re: [db] Contemplating a purchase yea, but... a 602 has hydraulic lifters... NO VALVE ADJUSTMENTS... rube goldberg was less involved in the vaccum stuff for the trans as well... john On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Kevin wrote: >-->On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:06:42PM -0600, Richard Arnold wrote: >-->> Now, have been looking at some of the tidy examples of mid 1980's W123 300's >-->> on e-bay for myself. >-->> >-->> However, an early 1990's 124 with a 602 engine caught my eye as well. >-->> Anyone on the list have experience with that combination? >--> >-->There are a few floating around this list. >--> >-->> How is it different from the 617 engine? They are both 5 cylinder but the >-->> 602 engine looks like a smaller version of my SDL 603 engine, 3 liters less >-->> one cylinder. I have had absolutely no trouble from it in 190,000 miles. >--> >-->It looks like a short version of your 603 because it IS a short version of >-->your 603. >--> >-->> I'm guessing the 602 is more than adequate but maybe not quite as bullet >-->> proof as the 617? >--> >-->The 617 is considered more bulletproof, and a 123 or 126 is probably less >-->expensive to keep on the road than a 124. There is nothing inherently >-->wrong with a 602 that would keep it from going the distance, unlike some >-->603s which have a propensity for cracking heads or bending rods. >--> >-->Usually, a 617 powered car can be fetched a lot cheaper than a 124 with a 602. >--> >-->K >--> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 07:16:28 -0800 (PST) From: john Subject: Re: [db] testing ok, guys... the real story is bruce and I were testing my mail server using mail clients... I used some half-baked windows gui thing and it grabbed the diesel-benz list address as well as bruce's and I just fired off the test message and didn't realize that off to the right in that puny little address window on the windows "tool" was the list... so yes, the test worked... ;) thanx... john On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Jon Filina wrote: > -->Kevin added: > --> > -->> > John typed: > -->> > > -->> > > -->> > > -->> > > test > -->> > > > -->> > > > -->> > > > -->> > > > -->> > Ping! > -->> > > -->> > > -->> > -->> Pong? > -->> > -->> > --> > -->THUNK! > --> > --> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:14:37 -0800 (PST) From: "Jerry Kaidor" Subject: [db] OT: California Smog Test Strategies Hi guys, This is a bit off topic, please excuse. Here in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia we occasionally have to "smog" our vehicles. At least, the non-diesel ones. The vehicle registration renewal just came through for my wife's '84 Jaguar XJ6. Says "SMOG Certification Reequired at a Test Only Center". WTF? The XJ6 has NEVER failed a smog test. My habit in the past has been to have a "no-results-sent" test done first, and then minor tweaking, and then the "real" test. That's so the car does not get flagged for Test-Only-Station or "Gross Polluter" status. Mind, this is a very well taken care of car. It has a newly overhauled cylinder head, a new front cat, a new oxygen sensor, a new air filter, new sparkplugs, etc etc ad nauseum. Biggest money pit I've ever owned. So now I have a few choices: * I can take it to an ordinary smog station for pretest and tweaking, and then go to the test-only station. * I can take it to the test-only station, pay the man, cross my fingers and pray. * I can take it to the test only station, ask for a "don't transmit" test ( don't know if they do that ), pay the man, then go back to the regular smog station for whatever minor tweak is necessary. Then back to the test-only station for a real test. The objectives are 1. To spend as little as possible 2. To keep the car's Criminal Record clean. Although it's apparently flagged already.... - Jerry Kaidor p.s. Is Everclear available in Kalifornia? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:22:53 -0800 (PST) From: "Jerry Kaidor" Subject: Re: [db] testing > ok, guys... the real story is bruce and I were testing my > mail server using mail clients... I used some half-baked windows > gui thing *** Want a gui with less hooey? Squirrelmail! Runs on your linux webserver, all the windoze boxes need is a working web browser. - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry-at-tr2.com ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:40 -0800 From: Kevin Subject: Re: [db] OT: California Smog Test Strategies On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:14:37AM -0800, Jerry Kaidor wrote: > The vehicle registration renewal just came through for my wife's '84 > Jaguar XJ6. Says "SMOG Certification Reequired at a Test Only Center". > WTF? The XJ6 has NEVER failed a smog test. My habit in the past has > been to have a "no-results-sent" test done first, and then minor tweaking, > and then the "real" test. That's so the car does not get flagged for > Test-Only-Station or "Gross Polluter" status. The gross polluter flag disappears after it's been clean for a few tests. The test only station is a racket, and every year, the profile that cars meet to get sent to a test only station increases by a large margin. My EFI crown vic gets sent to a test only station for no good reason, and it burns cleaner than most of the junk on the road. > 1. To spend as little as possible > 2. To keep the car's Criminal Record clean. Although it's > apparently flagged already.... Screw it. If it's well in tune and has a new cat, just take it and get it smogged. It will do you well to shop around, as prices vary by as much as $50. Since it meets the profile, you'll have to take it to a test only station as long as you own it, until you move out of a bar-97 area, or until someone in the legislature reigns in the clowns in BAR that think they are actually solving problems (and while they're at it, let some new diesels into the state). While we're ranting about emissions, I'm waiting for BAR to start cracking down on the idiots with powerchokes and durajunks that chip the snot out of them and yank the cats to get the louder wooshing noise from the turbos. These things smoke more than an old two stroke detroit. > p.s. Is Everclear available in Kalifornia? in 153 proof variety yes. ABC rules prohibit anything stronger than roughly that from being sold in the state. As of a couple years ago, it was available in half gallon jugs at the state stores in medford, OR. Don't know about NV or AZ, didn't check when I was there last. Believe me, 190 proof grain alcohol is nothing to play around with - you will hurt yourself with it, and probably set the neighborhood on fire while you are at it. Just seeing a bottle for sale is enough for me :) K ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:21:10 -0600 From: "Kaleb C. Striplin" Subject: Re: [db] testing you failed john-at-wagoneers.com wrote: > test > > - -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 89 560SEL, 87 300SDL, 85 380SE, 85 300D, 84 250 LWB, 83 300TD, 81 300TD, 81 240D, 81 240D, 76 450SEL, 76 240D, 76 300D, 74 240D, 69 250 http://www.striplin.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:41:54 -0800 (PST) From: john Subject: Re: [db] testing On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Kaleb C. Striplin wrote: > -->you failed dang, and I studied all night long too... ;) john > --> > -->john-at-wagoneers.com wrote: > --> > -->> test > -->> > -->> > --> > -->-- > -->Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK > -->89 560SEL, 87 300SDL, 85 380SE, 85 300D, > -->84 250 LWB, 83 300TD, 81 300TD, 81 240D, 81 240D, > -->76 450SEL, 76 240D, 76 300D, 74 240D, 69 250 > -->http://www.striplin.net > --> > --> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** http://JohnMeister.com **** http://wagoneers.com ** Snohomish, Washington USA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold ** http://freegift.net *** http://greatcom.org/laws/languages.html ** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:05:31 -0800 From: Greg Fiorentino Subject: [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) I am considering upgrading a bit from the '85 F-350 Crew Cab 6.9. I had always thought the powerchoke the route to go, but have recently been hearing some good things about the Durathing. I understand that the engine is an Isuzu truck engine with some nice features. I know some of you have some expertise in this area, and seek your input. I am thinking of a 3-4 year old 3/4 ton long-bed extended cab. The kids are all driving and I don't expect back-seat passengers that much any more. Since we like to pull our trailer into some out-of-the-way places, 4WD would be nice. anyone have a recommendation or a what-to-avoid? Problems with particular years would be good to know. TIA Greg Fiorentino Vancouver USA '86 300 SDL '84 300D Turbo '79 300TD '85 6.9L F350 Crew Cab No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date: 2/21/2006 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:15:48 -0800 From: Kevin Subject: Re: [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:05:31PM -0800, Greg Fiorentino wrote: > I am considering upgrading a bit from the '85 F-350 Crew Cab 6.9. I had > always thought the powerchoke the route to go, but have recently been > hearing some good things about the Durathing. I understand that the > engine is an Isuzu truck engine with some nice features. I know some of > you have some expertise in this area, and seek your input. I am thinking > of a 3-4 year old 3/4 ton long-bed extended cab. The kids are all > driving and I don't expect back-seat passengers that much any more. > Since we like to pull our trailer into some out-of-the-way places, 4WD > would be nice. anyone have a recommendation or a what-to-avoid? > Problems with particular years would be good to know. There are people out there that swear by them, and there are people out there who fail to be impressed by them. I fall into the latter. Apparently, the engine in izusu trim is an impressive engine. A lot of medium duty mechanics like the isuzu version, but aren't overly thrilled by the GM electronics. I had one run-in with an isuzu diesel (in an NPR) and saw their 'proven' diesel design, and won't touch one with a barge pole. My personal bias aside, its repair costs seem to be noticeably more than the powerstroke. A 3-4 year old truck puts you towards the end of when they were still a new drivetrain, and early on there were BIG injector problems. If you value ground clearance (which might seem silly on a LWB truck), the GM frame comes a LOT lower than the dodge or ford. Unfortunate to say, but I don't think anything will touch your 6.9 in terms of reliability. There isn't much that is cheap for maintenance on these trucks anymore. K ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:29:05 -0500 From: "Jim Hoffman" Subject: Re: [db] Diesel Truck Question (slightly O/T) Greg, If it were me, I'd build a nice '94 F-250/F-350 with the factory turbo setup. Then take the IP and have it rebuilt by these guys: http://www.dps-performance.com/ (They build a special IP for the turbo setup!) Then use their stage 1 injectors and increase the size of the downpipe out of the turbo. The ATS turbo downpipe is undersized. Then increase the size of the exhaust system and you'll have one nice truck. These are upgrades I plan to do to my truck in the near future. *I* favor the IDI's over the Powerstrokes simply because when something does go wrong with the Powerstroke it's usually an expensive adventure. And with the mods I mentioned (and maybe a few more) the IDI can get just as much HP as the Powerstroke. As for the Duramax? I refuse to ever buy another GM product after what they did to the diesel market back in the late 70's and early 80's. In my opinion they single handedly destroyed the diesel market in the US. So forget that one. Actually, my dream truck would be a '00-'02 F-250/F-350 retrofitted with a nicely built IDI ;) Jim > I am considering upgrading a bit from the '85 F-350 Crew Cab 6.9. I had > always thought the powerchoke the route to go, but have recently been > hearing some good things about the Durathing. I understand that the > engine is an Isuzu truck engine with some nice features. I know some of > you have some expertise in this area, and seek your input. I am thinking > of a 3-4 year old 3/4 ton long-bed extended cab. The kids are all > driving and I don't expect back-seat passengers that much any more. > Since we like to pull our trailer into some out-of-the-way places, 4WD > would be nice. anyone have a recommendation or a what-to-avoid? > Problems with particular years would be good to know. > > TIA > > Greg Fiorentino > Vancouver USA > '86 300 SDL > '84 300D Turbo > '79 300TD > '85 6.9L F350 Crew Cab > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date: 2/21/2006 ------------------------------ End of diesel-benz-digest V1 #2105 **********************************