From owner-diesel-benz-digest-at-digest.net Fri Mar 28 18:15:11 2008 From: diesel-benz-digest diesel-benz-digest Saturday, March 29 2008 Volume 01 : Number 2703 Forum for Discussion of Diesel Mercedes Benz Automobiles Derick Amburgey Digest Coordinator Contents: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] Opinions on parked 240D Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] Opinions on parked 240D Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) 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: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:22:53 GMT From: "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" in the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of "pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND "comPLIant." It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. J - -- john wrote: so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... precision instruments... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:33:38 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: [db] Opinions on parked 240D parts are plentiful, same as for the Ford 8Ns. :) fair price depends on where you live... rust belt, desert or rain forest.. each affect the condition/value... ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, cosmos wrote: # I was assuming it was a 123 series...Not sure what to make of the tractor comment... # # So $1,000 for this car if the exterior/interior are in decent shape is a fair price? It currently has no battery and oval tires that I know of. If $1000 is fair, I certainly gave my old car away :C # # # On Friday, March 28, 2008, at 12:30PM, "john" wrote: # >these things are like Ford 8N tractors... assuming this is a 123 series. # > # > ----- # >---------------------------------------------------------------------- # > Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold # > http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** # >---------------------------------------------------------------------- # > # > # >On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, cosmos wrote: # > # > # Hey guys, # > # It's been a long time since I sent out a message, but have been lurking on the list for a while now. Long story short, I miss my 300D and have an opportunity to pick up another one. A family member of a co-worker is selling a 240D (unsure of year) that's been sitting for about 3-4 years but with less than 200,000 miles. From what I understand her daughter used it for college and it ended up just getting parked when she was done with it. What kind of things should I look for, should I even bother with it? The battery is missing so not sure if it will start. My co-worker is going up to take pictures/look at the car for me this weekend. What should I have him look for since it won't start w/o battery? It sounds like I should be able to pick it up for ~$1,000 which seems a bit much since it's been sitting for so long. # > # # > # What would need to be done if I did buy it? I assume at least new fuel lines and an engine oil flush but diesels are a little foreign to me. Are hoses and what not easily found by the dealer or other means? # > # # > # Thanks for reading! # > # Tim # > # # ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:36:07 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) If I'm not mistaken, excessive oxides of nitrogen have been linked to acid rain and may be impacting the black forest in germany... there is rational and statistically valid information on some of these emissions. ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? # Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" in # the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # "pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. # In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND "comPLIant." # # It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # # J # # -- john wrote: # # # so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # precision instruments... # ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:36:39 GMT From: "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" Subject: Re: [db] Opinions on parked 240D Yeehaa! Go for it, man! If it looks good, agree to buy it contingent upon a basic driving test. Then go find a battery (doesn't need to be the right one unless it's very cold out) and fire it up. If it was running when parked, it will start right up with minimal effort. Assuming the valves aren't way out of adjustment and/or it's not below about 40 degrees (f). It should not smoke at an idle (once it shakes out a bit from sitting and the pipes warm up if it's cold out) and should not wobble or clank at an idle. Just happy diesel clatter. Drive it around a bit, maybe just in the yard, and make sure the brakes feel like they'll stop it OK, then take it down the road a bit. It will be slow, but should feel steady and solid. Make sure the steering isn't all shaky and stuff, but if everything seems good, just put plates on it and carry some extra fuel filters for awhile (AND the appropriate tools to change them; there are a few involved.) Depending on where you live, the brake rotors may need to be replaced, but if it's been in a fairly sheltered area, they may be OK. Also, be sure to check the underside because once they start to rust, they rust out very quickly. If you see any signs of rusting, plan to redo the underbody coating. $1000 is fair for that car if it's in decent condition. Pristine examples are worth much more. Of course, there's always something you can use to argue about the price.......slight oil leak? A/C not working? Chip in paint? 8^) If it seems like a good car, go for it. But.........what year is it? Up through 1976 is the 115 body (cute, old-school look) and 1977-1983 is 123 body (looks like a normal car). I have owned many 123 body diesels, and parts are plentiful. I don't know about 115 body. Never had one. They sure are lookers, though, if they're in good condition.... J - -- cosmos wrote: Hey guys, It's been a long time since I sent out a message, but have been lurking on the list for a while now. Long story short, I miss my 300D and have an opportunity to pick up another one. A family member of a co-worker is selling a 240D (unsure of year) that's been sitting for about 3-4 years but with less than 200,000 miles. From what I understand her daughter used it for college and it ended up just getting parked when she was done with it. What kind of things should I look for, should I even bother with it? The battery is missing so not sure if it will start. My co-worker is going up to take pictures/look at the car for me this weekend. What should I have him look for since it won't start w/o battery? It sounds like I should be able to pick it up for ~$1,000 which seems a bit much since it's been sitting for so long. What would need to be done if I did buy it? I assume at least new fuel lines and an engine oil flush but diesels are a little foreign to me. Are hoses and what not easily found by the dealer or other means? Thanks for reading! Tim ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:38:25 GMT From: "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) You're mistaken. That was SO2, Sulfur Dioxide. That's why they stripped all the sulfur out of our diesel fuel. J - -- john wrote: If I'm not mistaken, excessive oxides of nitrogen have been linked to acid rain and may be impacting the black forest in germany... there is rational and statistically valid information on some of these emissions. ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? # Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" in # the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # "pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. # In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND "comPLIant." # # It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # # J # # -- john wrote: # # # so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # precision instruments... # ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:43:45 GMT From: "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) To be fair, I have to remind you to make sure you're comparing apples to apples. The Imperial Gallon is 5 quarts, not 4, and their quart is slightly larger than ours. Make sure you take that into account when comparing MPG. If you did, and it's still 2/3, that would certainly back me up. 8^) And it would make sense, too: the uS has a much greater paranoia of NO2 than most of Europe, and in order to reduce NO2, you have to drastically lower combustion temperatures, and therefore, efficiency. J - -- cosmos wrote: Ya, it's tuned for emissions first, then performance. Look at how the performance of the smart was killed. It's 2/3 of the european mpg :C On Friday, March 28, 2008, at 03:24PM, "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" wrote: >Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? >Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" in >the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of >"pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. >In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a >challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND "comPLIant." > >It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE >efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. > >J > >-- john wrote: > > >so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... >precision instruments... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:53:17 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) I sit corrected. :) ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # You're mistaken. That was SO2, Sulfur Dioxide. That's why they stripped all # the sulfur out of our diesel fuel. # # J # # -- john wrote: # If I'm not mistaken, excessive oxides of nitrogen have been linked to acid # rain and # may be impacting the black forest in germany... there is rational and # statistically # valid information on some of these emissions. # # ----- # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold # http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # # # On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # # # Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the # efficiency? # # Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" # in # # the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # # "pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so # sensitive. # # In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # # challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND # "comPLIant." # # # # It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # # efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # # # # J # # # # -- john wrote: # # # # # # so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # # precision instruments... # # # ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:55:47 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) your turn to be corrected: ONE Imperial Gallon (UK) = 1.20095 US Gallon or, ONE UK Gallon = 4.803802 Quarts. close, but not close enough mr. j. :) ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # To be fair, I have to remind you to make sure you're comparing apples to # apples. The Imperial Gallon is 5 quarts, not 4, and their quart is slightly # larger than ours. Make sure you take that into account when comparing MPG. # # If you did, and it's still 2/3, that would certainly back me up. 8^) And it # would make sense, too: the uS has a much greater paranoia of NO2 than most of # Europe, and in order to reduce NO2, you have to drastically lower combustion # temperatures, and therefore, efficiency. # # J # # -- cosmos wrote: # Ya, it's tuned for emissions first, then performance. Look at how the # performance of the smart was killed. It's 2/3 of the european mpg :C # # # On Friday, March 28, 2008, at 03:24PM, "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" # wrote: # >Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? # >Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" # in # >the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # >"pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. # >In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # >challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND # "comPLIant." # > # >It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # >efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # > # >J # > # >-- john wrote: # > # > # >so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # >precision instruments... # ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:19:41 GMT From: "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) OK, OK......that's why we're all here.... .......but 4.8xxxxx quarts is closer to 5 quarts than NO2 is to SO2.....and which quarts are we talking about? Their ounce is a little bigger.... 8^) Anyway..... J - -- john wrote: your turn to be corrected: ONE Imperial Gallon (UK) = 1.20095 US Gallon or, ONE UK Gallon = 4.803802 Quarts. close, but not close enough mr. j. :) ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # To be fair, I have to remind you to make sure you're comparing apples to # apples. The Imperial Gallon is 5 quarts, not 4, and their quart is slightly # larger than ours. Make sure you take that into account when comparing MPG. # # If you did, and it's still 2/3, that would certainly back me up. 8^) And it # would make sense, too: the uS has a much greater paranoia of NO2 than most of # Europe, and in order to reduce NO2, you have to drastically lower combustion # temperatures, and therefore, efficiency. # # J # # -- cosmos wrote: # Ya, it's tuned for emissions first, then performance. Look at how the # performance of the smart was killed. It's 2/3 of the european mpg :C # # # On Friday, March 28, 2008, at 03:24PM, "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" # wrote: # >Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the efficiency? # >Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible pollutants" # in # >the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # >"pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so sensitive. # >In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # >challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND # "comPLIant." # > # >It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # >efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # > # >J # > # >-- john wrote: # > # > # >so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # >precision instruments... # ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:14:27 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: [db] BlueTEC clean diesel (fwd) our quarts to their gallon (UK), aka Imperial. we're not talking chemistry at this point, we're talking about basic units of measure... ;) stay focused. :) ----- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sat, 29 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # OK, OK......that's why we're all here.... # # .......but 4.8xxxxx quarts is closer to 5 quarts than NO2 is to SO2.....and # which quarts are we talking about? Their ounce is a little bigger.... 8^) # # Anyway..... # # J # # -- john wrote: # your turn to be corrected: # # ONE Imperial Gallon (UK) = 1.20095 US Gallon # # or, ONE UK Gallon = 4.803802 Quarts. # # close, but not close enough mr. j. :) # # ----- # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Snohomish, Washington -o|||||o- where Jeeps don't rust, they mold # http://freegift.com ** http://wagoneers.com ** # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # # # On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, jasonbassett-at-juno.com wrote: # # # To be fair, I have to remind you to make sure you're comparing apples to # # apples. The Imperial Gallon is 5 quarts, not 4, and their quart is # slightly # # larger than ours. Make sure you take that into account when comparing MPG. # # # # If you did, and it's still 2/3, that would certainly back me up. 8^) And # it # # would make sense, too: the uS has a much greater paranoia of NO2 than most # of # # Europe, and in order to reduce NO2, you have to drastically lower # combustion # # temperatures, and therefore, efficiency. # # # # J # # # # -- cosmos wrote: # # Ya, it's tuned for emissions first, then performance. Look at how the # # performance of the smart was killed. It's 2/3 of the european mpg :C # # # # # # On Friday, March 28, 2008, at 03:24PM, "jasonbassett-at-juno.com" # # wrote: # # >Yeah, BUT.....why must they be so "finely tuned" to achieve the # efficiency? # # >Because they have to be efficient AND not produce any "horrible # pollutants" # # in # # >the process. Like, no NO2, CO, HC, etc. If there wasn't such paranoia of # # >"pollUtion," they could actually run much BETTER without being so # sensitive. # # >In particular, the unnatural paranoia of NO2 makes an efficient diesel a # # >challenge, requiring a veritable swiss watch to be efficient AND # # "comPLIant." # # > # # >It's still the enviro-whackos. Without them, the engines would be MORE # # >efficient and far less fussy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. # # > # # >J # # > # # >-- john wrote: # # > # # > # # >so it's not enviro-whackos, but finely tuned engineering, clock works... # # >precision instruments... # # # ------------------------------ End of diesel-benz-digest V1 #2703 **********************************