Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Auto-Trends LS1 inspired M116 and M117 Performance Engine Overhauls! Summer 2008
Do you think the M116 and M117 have what it takes to handle 400+ horsepower? The LS1 did! [10 vote(s)]

Yes
90.0%
No
10.0%
How can I get involved and be the first to own one?
0.0%


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Date:
RE: Auto-Trends LS1 inspired M116 and M117 Performance Engine Overhauls! Summer 2008


Well its no secret that we have been building a lot of GM 350 engines. Mostly the LT1 as its is the last of a dying breed that is one of the last performance cast iron 350's that the general put out.

You may ask yourself what does all this have to do with Mercedes?

Glad you asked.... Glad you asked.

Here is a little known secret that not many know, especially them clowns over there at benzworld.org.

Both GM and Ford motor company started knocking out engines that basiclly copied the Mercedes design that was introduced back in the 1980's. The Mercedes Benz M117 and M116 of the 80's and 90's was an aluminum block with six bolt mains. The design was a sucess for Mercedes, so much in fact that Ford Motor company and General motors started using the design. Ford started first with the release of there Modular 4.6 motors that were cast iron, while GM started a few years later with the LS1 series. Looking at all three of these engines side by side from the bottom and you will soon realize what I am telling you is true. The only diffrence is that Mercedes has been doing it since the 80's and they were doing it with aluminum rather than cast iron.

After spending much time researching diffrent engines for our project W126 race car it became clear to me that the Mercedes M116 and M117 engines had what it took to be a performance player. For this reason I gathered up both a M116 and M117 engine and sent them off to the machieen shop. I just got back both engines and cranks and I am pleased to announce that a high compression Mercedes Benz engine is in the works here at Auto-Trend! We have a lot of diffrent ideas regarding pistons and how to under cut the camshafts to exceed horsepower ratings of 400 HP+ and not only that we are considering taking orders for this engine.

We figure that if GM can push 400+ HP out of their LS1 aluminum engines SO CAN WE! We also like the idea of a clean install using ORIGINAL Mercedes engines. We will keep you updated however many details will be keept TOP SECRET and we will be unable to give many details outside of photos showing the process and then finally a test run. We are not going to commit to a completion date, however we have all the parts needed and we are very excited about this. Many performance bolt on's are likley to spawn from these builds and we also feel that the completed engines will allow us to overthrow or nemissis BenzWorld.org with regards to forum popularity and dependable information.



__________________

Get DoFollow Link Via Guest Post or submit a article



OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

confuse

Who the heck is this Umer007 anyway?



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Got the block back from the machine shop and installed the crankshaft and 1 piston just to get an idea of where I am. I measured .023" of the piston above the deck. With the .049" thick 5.6 head gaskets the squench clearance is too close. I think because the iron block head gasket is .075". So I will need to machine a small amount from the piston top-I think about .014" if I did the math right. I will lose 2cc of dish volume in the process so it will raise my CR to a little over 10.0:1.



Attachments
__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Sweet! So that's what the cast iron block looks like huh? Pretty cool!

And look at that engine stand! That's a nice one you got there! More and more now days you need that style engine stand for the aluminum blocks.

So the piston is slightly poping out of the bore .023"? That would make for a nice high compression ratio! Providing you got at least .030 thickness after gasket crush you could get away with it as the valves are closed when the piston is at the top. I'd still check valve clearance, but you might get away with it.

You could shave .010 off the tops of the pistons, and you could even blow a bunch of cash getting the crank and rods cut although I don't know if you could find bearings. I assume the crank has already been cut .010 on the rods and mains? Cutting too much would not be a good idea.

Looking good Tony! Love the photos! Thanks! This may be a good option in terms of making a cast iron 560! Very cool!



-- Edited by SELLC on Monday 3rd of June 2013 12:20:42 PM

__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

One more question while its on my mind, does this block have sleeves? I only ask because there is what appears to be a fresh circle of steel around all of the cylinder bores. Did the MS sleeve this block?



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Hi,
Block is not sleeved-those are the marks made by the fire rings on the head gaskets. I made the engine stand from 2 cheapo Harbor Freight stands and added the removable boom to pick up the block and put it on the stand. Crank is standard and check out at factory spec. I think the easiest way is to take some material from the piston tops. I'm going for .040 squish so I need to take off about .014" using a .049" head gasket. Here's a few more pics:



Attachments
__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

It's very interesting to see the innards of the earlier style engines. This 4.5 looks a lot like the M117 but the fact it's all cast iron would really improve the strength of the lower end.

Seems the main caps look similar too. It looks like the engine has bolts for the main caps rather than studs? Or have you just not threaded them in yet? That crank looks real nice too! That's a M117 560 crankshaft right? Sorry I didn't even think about marks from past crushing of the head gasket rings. They were so perfect looking I almost thought you had it sleeved. Providing the pistons will be thick enough I too agree having them milled would be the easiest and least expensive route.

Really cool how you come up with that idea for the newer style engine stands, even cooler you have a chain fall attached! That's pretty slick and 100% custom, just like your 4.5 errrr, should I say "Cast-Iron" 5.6

This is just a really cool project you have going here! What kind of projections are you coming in with for the final compression ratio?



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Hello,
The main caps use bolts. I have not seen an aluminum block engine but the iron block is very robust apearing. It looked much mre substantial than the SBC sitting next to it at the machine shop. I had the 5.6 crank checked and polished and it meets new specs so I got lucky on it. The pistons have a deep dish so the little bit I will take off is insignificant. I had to buy 2 5.6 engines to get enough good parts and 8 pistons the same size.
I'm looking at around 10.0:1 CR if I use the smaller combustion chamber 3.5 heads. The 5.6 heads have bigger ports and intake valves and I have been tossing around the idea of seeing if I can modify them to fit the iron block. I bought 5.6 head gaskets and all the holes line up with the exception of 4 bolt holes which are off about 1/8". I need to get some 5.6 heads to see how feasible it is.

__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hello Tony,

It might pay to find out what the flow-rate is on the 350 heads and compare them with the 560 head...There's always some way of getting around these things ! See if your Machine shop can do these tests or send you to someone that can. Alternatively you can measure the variables between the two types, and do some number-crunching to estimate your potential losses. These things can provide some often unexpected results, and you never know, the smaller 350 head assembly may well prove to still be a viable option, especially when you have differing camshafts / lifts / LCA's etc etc that could provide some interesting, if not-so disappointing results. Get all your possible combinations flow-tested against the standard 560 heads ! Good luck !

Cheers,

Rastus

PS It's all looking good by the way !



-- Edited by Rastus on Tuesday 4th of June 2013 06:29:47 AM

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Thanks Rastus-I have been giving considerable thought to the heads. There is quite a bit of valve shrouding on the 3.5 heads due to the small combustion chamber-not sure how much that would affect flow but it will result in a higher CR. I'm not really inclined to start having heads flowed as I'm trying to keep it simple but I would imagine the 5.6 heads would flow more than 3.5 heads-just comparing the gaskets the intake and exhaust ports are much larger. Here is a 3.5 head compared to a 4.5 head-very similar to a 5.6 head.



Attachments
__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hello Tony,

I really don't like posting when all I can do is speculate !!! Regretfully I don't know the In / Ex port & valve sizes etc of the 560 cylinder-heads. However, when we work with what we DO know, we can determine that the 350 made its peak power at 5,800 rpm, and peak torque at 4,000 rpm. The 450 made peak power at 5,000 rpm, and peak torque at 3,000 rpm. We know that these two engines shared the same valve sizes ( at least from the information I have ), and it can be clearly seen that both peak torque and power shifted down around 1,000 rpm in the 450's rev-band, (yet was still able to red-line I believe at 6,000 rpm), and the 450 is a full - litre larger engine ( or 61 cubes if you like ). Regretfully the tech-data book ( in your case ) that I have is the 1976 edition, so the required data for your 560 I don't have ( yet ).

Apparently the standard 560 makes its peak power at 4,750 rpm and peak torque at 3,250 rpm, and you say that the ports and valves are larger...Clearly we can see that with your engine, based on the above "indicated trends", will be possibly making these peaks at an even lower rpm again. Don't forget that you've got around 2.1 ltrs, or if you like, 128 cubes of larger engine now to feed ! I'm only guessing here, but I would think that your out-puts are still going to be reasonable, but the peaks will possibly be 500 - 1000 rpm lower in the rev-range again, that would mean a lower numerical diff-ratio will give you a better spread of performance with the limited rpms you may well be faced with.

The only way you're going to be able to speculate further where you stand is to have all your possible combinations of cylinder heads and cam - lifts evaluated with the use of a flow-bench. Alternatively, hunt-down a computer program that will give you some numbers when the data is processed. Or, just find the known values of one of your cylinder-heads flow-rates, and calculate what to expect with your chosen combination. Why not just measure the ports and valves of the 560 head, and compare the sizes as percentages ? I would do this first !!!

Put basically though, the larger the port and valve area, the higher in the rpm-range that your peak torque and power will occur. ( Important to remember that Peak Torque is where the maximum amount of cylinder filling of air and fuel is...aka Maximum Volumetric Efficiency...) It would "seem" that you're behind the 8-ball at the moment to match even a standard 560's cylinder-heads flow-rates...It's primarily for these reasons that Performance Camshafts came into being...To enhance volumetric efficiency and so improve these torque and power-peaks due to deficiencies in cylinder-head design.

Your venture will still be a success ! But it's better to know and optimize now, than face possible disappointment and removing your heads for improvements down the road.

All the very best and good luck,

Rastus.

__________________


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

It would be nice to retain the cast iron cylinder heads if only because I have heard so many stories about how aluminum and cast iron expand at different temperatures. Putting on a set of 560 aluminum heads may become problematic down the road in terms of head gasket sealing due to the expansion rates of these two metals.

Given the fact its cast iron, best to stick with cast iron. That's my thought anyway. I am sure you can work these iron heads to flow well, it's just going to be more work. Take your time, research the two heads side by side (let me know if you need a photo of the 560 head) and see what you think will work best.

Looking good!

 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

The iron block M117 heads are aluminum-not iron-only the block is cast iron. I know it's confusing when discussing the 2 different engines. The heads between the 2 engines are actually very similar. I bought some 560 heads last week to play around with and all the holes line up with the exception of the cam tower bolts which are off about 1/8" so using the 5.6 heads is a posibility. Would I gain enough to make up for the loss in CR due to the larger combustion chamber on the 560 head? That's the question I need to answer. The 560 intake and head runners are sized for the engine so it seems to make sense to use them.


__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hello Tony H,

This sounds like a positive step forward!!! Now we'll all start to realize ( myself at-least LOL) that your engine will be an enhanced "iron-block"-560, rather than a stroked 450, but either is still pretty cool ! Every MB engine has always had an aluminium cylinder-head(S), whether they be 4,6,8,12 cylinders or diesel unit in the last 70+ years I think. They we're very much "decades" ahead of the others not so long ago, though now-days its maybe a little harder to say that...Still though, when taken care of, they'll out-last most other makes by a wide margine...

Also, don't be too concerned about compression-ratio, as if you really want it, you can always have the cyl-heads machined down to near-Max.-allowable-thickness that will improve things a little. ( Don't go all the way, as you'll eliminate the possibility of re-machining in the event of a blown-head-gasket etc etc ). Even by improving static compression by one full ratio will "generally" only net a maximum of 2% improvement, which is about 5-bhp when based on the std out-put of a 560. Machining of the intake-manifold is required also, but you know this.

The real advantage you will have is that your W111 predates the "Smog requirements" of to-days cars...This means a proper big-pipe free-flowing TWIN-exhaust system and 4-1 extractors plus other things that will / should allow you see the 1 bhp to 1 cube figure and beyond...Maybe... What this really means is that you can start taking advantage of your "Dynamic - compression - ratio " which is all about cylinder-filling and emptying potential at rpm. Should you be able to find those "Euro" Cams that the factory made that netted a claimed 300 bhp from the "special 560" engine, then things will be very, very, very cool...



Good luck with these 560 heads & cheers,

Rastus



-- Edited by Rastus on Sunday 9th of June 2013 01:56:11 AM



-- Edited by Rastus on Sunday 9th of June 2013 02:08:56 AM

__________________


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

You learn something new everyday. Rastus emailed me recently also to inform that your heads are aluminum and also stated that most all passenger cars have always had aluminum heads. While I can neither confirm or deny it's very interesting that Mercedes was using aluminum for their heads way back then! I had seen a little rust (must have been from the valve seats) and just assumed they were cast iron.

The cam bolts being a little off is somewhat scary, I am not sure how you would overcome this without serious work, but I have been amazed thus far so I am pretty sure you will figure something out. Seems working the heads native to the engine would be your path of least resistance. I am most positive you could massage them if needed.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hey Tony H,

Should you have to use the 450 or 350 cyl-heads, the problem of valve-shrouding becomes less & less if the valve-head, at full-lift has moved beyond the limitation of the combustion-chamber...For the most part, the valve remains at full-lift for the longest period of time, so any shrouding would only be detrimental whilst the valves are opening...But you'll have to work-out how far the valves actually move off their seats & start measuring ! Also it's nice to see the subtle variance in combustion chamber depth around the intake-valves to initiate a swirl-effect of the incoming charge. Good pics !

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Rastus wrote:

Now we'll all start to realize ( myself at-least LOL) that your engine will be an enhanced "iron-block"-560, rather than a stroked 450, but either is still pretty cool !


I find it very refreshing that a newer 560 crankshaft will set in the 450 engine! Seem's the 560 crankshafts are the key to a lot of "stroking" projects; for example I have heard that a 560 crankshaft will slide in the newer M119 500 engines to make a 6.0 liter.

Either way, if the idea was to have a 5.6 he just as well could have gone that route, so a "Stroked" or "Modified" 450 sounds much meaner than a "Iron-Block 560".

We should also not forget why a person would want a cast iron block, and that my friends is called "FORCED INDUCTION". Take solice in knowing that things like port sizes and mirror smoth runner walls are for the Naturally Asperated crowd. The forced induction crowd just CRAM the air in there! LOL! I sure hope this cast-iron beast will at some point be force fed, otherwise why the need for the iron block?

I also wanted to bring up some things that usually come into play when putting different cranks and rods in engines. Often times (on Chevy engines) you must index or cut clearance from the blocks pan mounting area and sometimes the bottoms of the cylinder walls to make room for the connecting rod's or end caps. Did you have to do any indexing to get the engine to spin freely? 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hey SELLC,

I'm pretty sure that Tony H still wants to run the standard "manual" gearbox, so that's what made him decide to retain the Iron-Block. He was also intent on just a near-standard rebuild, and realized (like most people do ) that for near the same out-lay ($$$), you're better-off to re-build a larger engine as the Hp-per-dollar-spent equation is much more favourable.

The main reason why I've been throwing things in the air for Tony to consider, is that he somewhere mentioned the likeliness of exceeding a standard 560's out-put, by ( I think ) 140 bhp. I would very much doubt forced-induction will be part of his goal, but you just never know...

If I was asked what I had under-the bonnet and said an Iron-Block 560, people may ask more questions etc and this would lead to further discussion...If I was to say I had a Stroked 450, you've maybe taken the chance for a chat away, since the questions more accurately answered...LOL. I guess that's all up to Tony what he decides to say, if anything at all...

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

For some reason page 2 of this post has disappeared. Maybe it is my browser but I can't see any of the posts I made after this one. I will try to summarize progress to date. The iron block engine used aluminum heads very similar to the aluminum block engines heads with the exception of the cam tower head bolts that are slightly off about 1/8". I bought some 5.6 heads to check out. They have much larger intake ports and the intake valves are larger. The exhaust valves have thinner stems resulting in more port area. They fit the iron block just fine and everything matches up with the exception of the 5 bolts mentioned. There is plenty of material in the head to redrill the holes to match the iron block. Since I am building a 5.6 engine it makes sense to use 5.6 heads with the correct port size for the displacement. One issue with the 5.6 heads is the combustion chamber is large and will lower my CR. I have investigated having the combustion chambers welded and reshaped to lower the CR-it is commonplace and very reliable-in fact some racing heads are 40% welded material. It is a simple wedge combustion chamber-nothing exotic. Might be a less expensive/simpler solution for someone with a US spec 560 car that wants to raise their CR without installing new pistons.

__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Very strange indeed, as the only post I deleted in this thread was a duplicate that Rastus requested be deleted.

I still see all your post, and trust me I wouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth as it pertains to a cast iron Mercedes engine displacing 5.6 liters. Hopefully it was just a browser bug in the cache, but it would appear all is present in terms of post, and I can assure you that no such modifications or changes outside of removing a duplicate post were made by me. Very strange indeed, let me know if it happens again. 

With regards to retrofitting the 560 heads to work on a cast iron 450 block... WAY COOL!  



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

yes I am excited to invent a new wheel. I'm sure someone has done it but without some means of reducing the combustion chamber volume it will just make your CR lower than it already was which would make the whole exercise pointless. I know a local welder that works on aluminum heads and he said it is very common to weld combustion chambers. Apparently there is not much than cannot be fixed on an aluminum head by welding.

__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Yes making a smaller combustion chamber will increase compression; however there are many other things that can contribute to more power. For example a heart shaped combustion chamber has a "swirl" effect that allows better air flow both in and out.

No doubt that making the CC smaller will result in increased compression, however when welding heads and making one-off modifications its VERY hard to have equal CC volumes, not impossible, but hard. Then there is the fact that a weld is often times much harder than whatever it's welded to, which could be a problem. Take for example a welded crankshaft, often times you will see pitting in a welded crankshaft after a long period of use. Welded cranks are often times frowned on in performance applications for this reason.

Best bet is a solid original casting, but since this is a custom project and no one offers aftermarket heads for this application then the idea of welding on a set of heads becomes the best option.

I wish you the best in your endeavors with this project. Moral of the story? Careful what you ask for, someone might just figure out a way to make it possible! LOL



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hi Tony H,

Talk about a man-on-a-mission LOL !!! SELLC has raised some good-points, especially about equalizing your chamber volumes again, as this would mean taking away some of the metal that you've just put in there ! But it would need to be done...

All that I'm going to suggest is to slice-in-two ( or as many pieces as needed )one of your "used" cylinder heads, so that you can determine where your coolant passages are, how deep your welds can penetrate, and learn where you can / can't add metal due to possible localization of heat - eg, too much metal without cooling...Maybe another method would be to also include "ceramic-coatings" of your piston-crowns & combustion-chambers, to keep excess-heat at bay...Good luck & we all look forward to your next post !

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

LoL!

Hey Rastus, check this Tony guy out! LoL!

http://www.benzworld.org/forums/w126-s-se-sec-sel-sd/1719508-using-560-pistons-m117-iron-block.html

Guess Tony decided to visit the village idiots over there on BenzWorld.org and refers to us as the "Other" forum! LoL!

It's flat out laughable that he claims we have not stroked engines in the past! Hey Tony, we were taking it easy on you buddy! The 4.5 Cast Iron block is a boat anchor and you could stuff FORGED STEEL pistons in the damn thing and not have to worry about nothing. The real challenge, as mentioned in THIS thread is getting the horsepower to hold on an aluminum block. You got jack crap to worry about with a cast iron block pal... Try working with aluminum, THEN you might need to get as technical as you would like to sound.

Coated pistons are used in iron blocks now days to reduce friction, however back before coatings were put on everything they did not use any coatings. The expansion rate of the pistons are going to be the same in a damn cast iron block as they would be in an aluminum block. It's the damn rings you have to worry about! But you know all this, and no one here has ever put custom pistons in an engine before. Hell most people I know would not waste time stroking a 4.5 to 5.6 liters, they would be stroking 5.6 to 6.0 or more.

But I am sure you are planing on running a nice fat nitrous system to justify hauling around that extra 100 lbs of cast iron, right Tony? Otherwise, you still got to wrap a chain around some cams and that's a bunch more work.

The "other" forum... LOL Now that's just funny. Why you got to get pissy with me because you got problems with your build?



-- Edited by SELLC on Thursday 4th of July 2013 06:56:21 AM

__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Rastus wrote:

Hey SELLC,

I'm pretty sure that Tony H still wants to run the standard "manual" gearbox, so that's what made him decide to retain the Iron-Block. He was also intent on just a near-standard rebuild, and realized (like most people do ) that for near the same out-lay ($$$), you're better-off to re-build a larger engine as the Hp-per-dollar-spent equation is much more favourable.


You know Rastus, I just now noticed this post above. I don't know about anyone else, but seems an adapter plate would be WAY easier to measure out and have CNC'd out of aluminum than trying to stroke an engine. I think most people don't realize the real $$$ out-lay when they get into such things. It looks like Tony is having fun with it, which is all that matters really. But the guy is such a two face. I hate people like that. Like as if I wasnt going to find out or something. He's defiantly among people like himself over there on BW.ORG so I have no doubts he will fit right in.

Hey Tony, weather it ends up working out for you or not, I'll give you $50 bucks for that engine stand when your done with it! LOL! And hey, let me know when this project starts tapping the ole' bank and I'll make you a tender offer on that Welder too! What is that? A Miller 180? LOL... not



-- Edited by SELLC on Thursday 4th of July 2013 06:47:56 AM

__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Yo SELLC,

I was always interested to know how Tony H was going to go about his fuel issues...The original 3.5 V-8's "D-Jetronic " system is identical to the 4.5's, all-be-it with a different computer, which would have only been a plug-in installation...And with a capacity increase to 5.0ltrs, would have possibly meant increasing the fuel pressure up from approx. 2.0-Bar up to say 2.2 or 2.3 Bar...Which is possible & quite safe to do...But with a capacity increase to 5.6ltrs, I would have thought a fuel-system up-grade would be in order, since the "D-Jetronic" is a relatively low-pressure, & many fuel-hose connexions are simply the hose & clamp type, (like on any radiator water-hose fitting)...So if Tony went with the 560 cylinder-heads, he would undoubtably have needed to move up to CISE as-well...Or maybe even "K-Jetronic" for its simplicity...But who knows what will happen now...Fingers crossed he doesn't take guidance from "you-know-who" LOL ! 560 info from him may prove very-costly...Though there may be spares lying about...

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

I guess every good thread needs a little drama... He's lucky this didn't happen on BenzWorld or for sure SOMEONE in this thread would have been banned, even if they didn't do anything! LOL!



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hey SELLC,

Lucky it's not a 500E LOL !!!

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

This is really weird-page 2 came back along with all the recent posts! Must be something my employer put in my browser. I read a lot of posts that have been added since I have been here. I did post a question(which there did not seem to be much interest/input on) at you-know-where but the "other forum" I was mentioning starts with a fruit that contains a stone and they have been pretty good through the years.
So to answer some of the questions that came up: There was a small amount of material removal at the front and rear of the crankcase to fit the 560 crank since the counterweights are larger in diameter otherwise the crank and rods fit fine. The issue with the mismatched 560 head bolt seems easily resolved as there is only about 1/8 misalignment on 5 holes(The cam tower head bolts) and there is plenty of material in the area to me machined. I also found the 4.5 alternator and P/S pump fit on the 5.6 heads but the 4.5 timing chain tensioner rail does not match up to the 5.6 tensioner/head so I need to get a 5.6 rail to try.
I threw the head welding out as more of a wish list item-I really doubt I will go there for now. If the engine lives I might look at some enhancements but initially everything is going to be stock 5.6.
My car is smog exempt due to the age so I can use Megasquirt/EDIS and whatever exhaust I wish.
It was suggested by someone whom I feel is knowledgably that the piston coating is largely nickel. I know there is not much ferrous as a magnet will hardly stick to it. I plan on going with the looser iron block piston clearance of .02-.03mm vs. the alum block clearance of .008-.018mm.
If someone were to go my route they would need to use a transmission that mates to the iron block.


__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Tony H wrote:

 I did post a question(which there did not seem to be much interest/input on) at you-know-where but the "other forum" I was mentioning starts with a fruit that contains a stone and they have been pretty good through the years.


The first rule of fight club is... "You don't talk about fight club". Care to take a guess what the second rule is?

There is an entire planet full of people with more money than brains. How the hell that happens I have no idea, but they all seemed to end up at one spot... "The other place".

Inheritance, rich spouse, government teet suckers, you name it... Trust fund babies.. Need I say anymore?

Anyone with more skill than money is quickly banned. After all it pisses rich people off when they can't buy something and the last time I checked they don't sell "skill" in a can.

The reason you thread was paid no mind is because... well... it did not include wasting a shit ton of someone elses money buying rims and AMG branded items.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hey SELLC,

I really don't know what to say...except LOL !!!

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

After some research I think the piston coating is "Nickel Creamic Composite". I can't find any information that indicates it is incompatible with iron bores. In fact it is a low friction self lubricating coating-that is probably why the alloy piston clearance is so small but I still am going to use the iron block clearance as a margin of safety.
Spent 1.5 very frustrating hrs in the heat trying to get a timing chain tensioner out of a 560SEL and could not get the pin out. Does anyone have one from a parts engine?

__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hey Tony,

I would think that the clearances that your going to use will work out fine. A possibility for the finer tolerances with the alloy-block is that the materials are probably the same, hence the expansion-rates will be similar, if-not identical. Combined with the friction-reducing surface of the pistons, & bores, would have allowed a more stable platform for the pistons, & provided better function of the piston rings, as well as extending the service-life of these components.

With your Iron block, just ensure that you allow the engine to warm-up a little ( say 50 degrees C ) before driving. This will allow everything to settle-in a little more & take a little stress away from your mind ! I'd be very surprised if things didn't work out fine for you.

Apparently oil-consumption on these Cast Iron V-8's is that you're expected to consume around 1/4 of a litre every 100 Km's, (or every 60 miles or so..). Yes this seems a little high, but it's straight out of the MB Tech. Data Book for M116 & M117 V-8's, & should be considered normal. Also, expect a little higher oil-consumption when breaking-in your new engine, so closely monitor your dip-stick readings ! And your first fill of oil into the engine before, & then after your 1st start-up may well exceed the 10 litre mark, so make sure you have plenty available !

In case your wondering, my little 350 revs quite high at highway speeds ( around 3,600 rpm @ say 65 mph ), yet it actually drinks very-little oil, & I find myself only adding 1.0 ltr of oil after "around" 10 tanks of fuel, or if you rather 3,500 miles, & then I change the oil within the next couple of weeks as it's starting to lose its clear-yellow colour on the dip-stick. Maybe you could follow these results as yard-sticks for yourself...The little V-8 has a little under 100,000 miles on the odometer.

I'm not sure if the pin your seeking comes with a new chain-tensioner kit, but a new MB assembly is HIGHLY recommended !

Cheers,

Rastus

PS I'm sorry about some of my indifferent spelling errors, but here in Oz it's how we spell things, & it's hard to change your ways sometimes LOL. ( eg litre instead of liter ).



-- Edited by Rastus on Thursday 18th of July 2013 01:53:22 AM

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Hi Rastus,
Thanks for your comments. I still cannot get positive confirmation on what the piston coating is but I am 99% sure it is NCC. Everything will be replaced in the cam timing-I am also replacing the valve guldes, springs and valves. I want to start with a new engine. Unfortunatly it might be a year or more before this engine actually gets assembled and installed. I don't want to rush my restoration but at the very least I want to get the chassis done so there is no redundant work. I still need to get the block back to the machine shop for final honing to my desired piston clearance. The machine shop set the piston clearance tight so the pistons would not rock in the bores when I measured the deck height since I am setting it to very precise clearance. I machined one piston to the desired .040" squish and reduced the dish volume to 27cc from 30cc. That bumps my CR to 9.2:1 without doing anything else.

__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hi Tony H,

It's good to hear that the l o n g process of your restoration is well under-way & comming up to your expectations. Thanks also for the indicated completion time-frame of 12 months, as it will allow most of us to stop holding our breath & breathe a little LOL. Good to hear that your timing-chain-guide issue seems to have sorted itself out, & that progress is being made on your cylinder heads. Maybe some "before & after" photos of the cylinder-head-bolt-hole relocation modification would be great to post-up if possible ?...I hope that your not too disappointed with your compression-ratio increase, as it's still an improvement over stock, though I think that your real-improvements on power-out-put will lie in your exhaust system...Have you managed to source manifolds or headers yet ? I was very surprised to see how the drivers side exhaust manifold on the US std 560's wraps around & above the transmission bell-housing, & then joins on into the passenger-sides with a "Y" piece. Not good for HP output !

Anyhow, any up-date of proceedings would be good whenever you can manage it ! Best of luck !

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

No way I will be using the funky US version exhaust system. It would not fit in my engine bay anyhow. The exhaust system is going to require a custom solution. I may build custom headers-I have the skills and equipment but it would be very time consuming. I still need to get a 560 timing chain tensioner rail-I may take another crack at the one in the wrecking yard today. I have a lot of other projects going on and I work full time so that does not leave a lot of time for this but I squeeze it in when I can.

__________________
Tony


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Decided against using the 560 heads. Too many issues for little gain. Using the 560 heads will lower my CR considerably due to the larger combustion chamber. If I use late K-jet 450 heads (they have a combustion chamber the same shape as the 560 heads only 45cc instead of 50cc) I will have 9.75 CR. I could get to 10.0 by taking about .010 off the deck when I have the block finished. When I rebuild the 450 heads I will install the thinner stem 560 exhaust valves and see if I can port the 450 heads to the 560 profile.

__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Hi Tony H,

At least you have lots of options to choose from ! Possibly the cost of having your heads ported would be comparable to the cost of relocating the cam-tower-bolt-holes on the 560 heads. The larger 560 valves would be nice to be able to use if they'll fit in there...

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Went back and got the 560 timing chain tensioner and it fits the 450 block and pin. The pin was really stuck and I had to tap it and pull it out. Not much fun in the Sacramento heat. Now I'm thinking about the 560 heads again! I put one on the bench next to a 4.5 head and the ports are so much larger. Maybe I will just work through the issues. The main issue is with the large combustion chamber. I'm going to talk to my welder and see if he can weld the heads without ruining the seats. I already expect to replace the guides.

__________________
Tony


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Have been contemplating exhaust manifolds. Was told by a very knowledable fellow 111 enthuaist that 560SL exhaust manifolds will fit the 111 chassis and are very similar to the "Euro Logs". Looked at some pictures and they are very similar to the 3.5 ones but of course will fit the 560 heads. It looks like there is a EGR port on the left side manifold that will need to be blocked off. Im on the hunt now for some 560SL manifolds.



-- Edited by Tony H on Tuesday 6th of August 2013 11:30:08 PM

__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Here are some photos of a 560 SL manifold.

The 560 SL exhaust is pretty cool, pretty much dual pipes all the way back with the exception of cat's and muffler.

I also dig how you can drop the 5.6 liter out the bottom on the R107. Of course it does suck to have to replace the mounts. But here is a look at how the drivers side pipe drops on an R107. They don't seem near the same as the Euro logs found on the W126 sedans and coupes.

In going this R107 exhaust route I would imagine said parts would be on the pricy side, but perhaps you can pick some up at a good deal.  



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Forgot to say, it's great to hear the timing parts interchange. Again, I am a big fan of photos!



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

I found a pair of 560SL exhaust manifolds on Ebay for $200. I doubt I will find a better deal. They pretty much duplicate the original 3.5 ones as far as where the downpipes route. That way I can tie into the existing exhaust system then consider upgrades later. The existing dual 1.75" system is smallish for 5.6L but will work well enough until I can build a custom 2.25" system.
I will take a pic of the timing chain tensioner over the weekend. I was very pleased to see the pin diameter was the same between the two so it was a direct swap.
Like I said it might (probably) be 1-2 years before I get this going as the car is pretty much dissasembled now.

__________________
Tony


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1495
Date:

Yo folks,

Great pics SELLC, fingers crossed people take note & find some for themselves...

I would consider a 2.5" twin-system as the bare min. requirement for your 560 Tony H...You would be amazed at how quickly back-pressure rises with a small diameter piping system...You "can" have quiet exhaust systems with min. back-pressure if you're prepared to demand the required components & shop around...Don't be contented with anything off-the-shelf...An exhaust system for a MB will always cost you a "little"- more, so you might aswell get what you ( or your engine rather ) needs...

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Here's a few pics of the 4.5 and 560 tensioner. You can see they are very different but the 560 one mounts in the same relative position on the block so it fits. You can see how the 4.5 one is totally misaligned with the tensioner.  The 560 one is on the left in the first picture



-- Edited by Tony H on Friday 9th of August 2013 05:35:22 PM

Attachments
__________________
Tony


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Still here. Have been busy at work and with replacing skylights so not much time for the project. Have been thinking about it alot though. I'm getting a quote on some MLS head gaskets-they seem the way to go if not too expensive.
Thinking of ways to increase CR without messing with welding the heads. Checking into milling the block/heads. I can buy adjustable timing gears to customize the cam timing.

__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

Them are some great photos! Nice side by side action! I love that stuff!

So by increasing the compression you would feel better about using the heads native to the block? Knowing now that they are both aluminum I'd say sticking with the original heads would save a lot of time and potential stress/money. Like you said, if you are able to bump the compression all will be good.

Am I understanding this right? Seems like the best path to take and as you said, all that hassel for such a little gain. The main part (lower end) is good to go right? You will still be using the 560 crank?

Excellent job on the photos and glad to see you staying the course. Don't be rushed, enjoy the build and take your time. There will be more than enough time to get in a hurry when its all finished and your itching to get it installed and feel the power. Take the time now so you don't have to mess with pulling it back out. Sticking with the heads native to the engine was a wise choice if you ask me.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

I'm going with the 5.6 heads due to the ports and valves being sized for the larger displacement. So it will be the same formula as the base 4.5 engine-Iron block and aluminum heads. I was hoping for a little higher CR but the US engine has the dished pistons and with the large 5.6 combustion chamber that puts my calculated CR at 9.2:1. I need the block to go back for final honing and was thinking about taking maybe .020" off the deck when they parallel deck it. then I would machine down the piston tops for .040" squish. I dissasembled the heads and the valve guides are shot but all the valves mic to new specs so at least I don't have to buy new valves.
Bottom end is dialed in with the 560 crank and rods/pistons. It's just a matter of how much to machine off the piston tops if I have the block decked. then I will need the rotating assembly balanced.

__________________
Tony


OUT-OF-HAND

Status: Offline
Posts: 8672
Date:

I thought using the 560 heads required re-location of some head bolt holes? Is that still the case?



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 42
Date:

Yes but it is a very small amount-about 1/8" on the 5 cam tower head bolts. I don't see it as any problem.
Question-on the head under where the valve spring rotater sits there is a stamped number (1 or 2)What does that refer to? I thought it might have something to do with the valve guidbore in the head but not sure.

__________________
Tony
«First  <  1 2 3  >  Last»  | Page of 3  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard