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! [11 vote(s)]

Yes
90.9%
No
9.1%
How can I get involved and be the first to own one?
0.0%


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:
RE: Auto-Trends LS1 inspired M116 and M117 Performance Engine Overhauls! Summer 2008


Tony H wrote:

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.


I am not quite understanding what you are saying. The valve spring rotater sits on top of the spring.

Do you have a photo? 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Sure-I will take one tonight. Thanks!

__________________
Tony


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Here you go.  The numbers do not correlate to cylinder of valve.  Most are "1" but a few "2"



-- Edited by Tony H on Saturday 28th of September 2013 11:26:54 AM

Attachments
__________________
Tony


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Tony H,

I'm only guessing here, but I think the numbers represent an inspection-code offered by an employee after the casting / manufacturing of the cylinder-heads, to determine the suitabilty of service. Since it was fitted to a vehicle & has already seen service, I'd say your safe ! Aluminium has always been a ficcle metal to cast, & back in the "early-days" quality control was paramount for MB, as any failure of any component would not see service on any vehicle sold to their customers. Quality was ( & hopefully still is...) the most important ingredient to their success.

I believe that the "star" shaped raised "notches" that have been cast around the guide ( right where your number of concern is ) was made to reduce the possibility of porosity & corrosion of the metal around the guides, & to provide a more stable platform for valve guide security when temperatures move from cold-to-hot with regards to expansion-rates of the differing metals etc etc. You'll possibly find similar marks around the cyl-head bolt-holes as-well. Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Tony H,

I went back & revisited some earlier photos you provided ( see page 1 ), & in one of these, it "looks" like the No-2 is possibly consistent with your exhaust valve / port. You yourself have the heads, & if the numbers are consistent with the ports, ie, 1=intake, & 2=exhaust, then it would seem that the numbers do represent the valve-guides to be used for each valve, as you hinted at earlier with the guide-bore diameter. Are the numbers consistent with the ports ? I have to ask since there's not enough "photo" of the head to see the adjacent cylinders etc etc.

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I think it relates to the machining of the valve spring pockets from the factory. Its important, but not if the valve train that come off the vehicle has been kept in order. If not, well you got some work ahead of you.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi SELLC,

Great post & picture !!! What took you so long LOL ?

Rastus

__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I guess there has been a lot going on.

You have access to the V8 Cafe so you know what I'm dealing with at the moment.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

A quick update on my 5.6L iron block project. I have abandoned the idea of using 560 heads-there is really no point to it. Using 450 heads will result in a 9.7:1 CR due to the smaller combustion chamber(45cc vs 50cc). After much side by side comparison between the two heads I believe I can make the 450 heads comparable to the 560 heads. I discussed installing larger intake valve seats so I could use the larger(by a small amount) 560 intake valves and my machine shop said it would be a waste of money for such a small increase in valve size. I can fit the slimmer stem 560 exhaust valves since the exhaust valve guide bore is the same size between the two heads.
The other thing I was pondering was what camshafts to use. I bought some very early 02/03 500SL (Euro market) camshafts that I believe will offer the most performance potential with a stock camshaft. Since the 500SL is around 240-245HP with 5.0L I would think I might achive 280HP with my higher CR, larger displacement and better FI/ignition/exhaust. Regardless it will be a substantial increase over the original 3.5L. Block is going to the machine shop next week for final honing/deck resurfacing. Next I will start working on the heads.

__________________
Tony


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Tony H,

Good to hear that things are moving along nicely ! How's the rest of the restoration progressing ?

Only a few things concern my thoughts ( LOL) at the moment, & that's the camshaft business again....The M117 5.0ltr engine I'm pretty sure went out of production through the 1980's...The year you quoted above was for a 2003-4 year model, these were DOHC with 4-valves per cylinder designs, & then SOHC with 3-valves per cylinder...Also, your original 3.5 & 4.5 ltr engines would have had adjustable valve lash capability, not the later hydraulic-compensating-elements...These hyd-elements are not cheap to buy new, & I'm not sure whether you can use camshafts with either type, so be warned & tread carefully !

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

The camshafts are from a 117.960 which is early 80's Euro market 450SL 5.0 or 500SL. The heads I am now using are later 4.5 heads which have(accept) the hydraulic adjustors. Yes the early 3.5 and 4.5 engines used mechanical valve adjustors-the heads do not have oil passages for the hydraulic adjustors. I bought the camshafts with the matched rockers that were originally mated to them. Just by a visual inspection the lobes are "fatter" than the 26/27 stock 5.6 cams but I will profile them this weekend. The 02/03 I quoted is the cam code stamped on the camshaft and referenced in the manual by "05-215 Checking and adjusting camshaft timing". That code defines the grind of the camshaft. I will see if I can attach the PDF.



Attachments
560cams.pdf (355.4 kb)
__________________
Tony


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

That was a very juicy PDF Tony!

Thanks for good read! Sounds like you're getting your numbers in order and I'm defiantly most interested in the progression of this modification! 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

A quick analysis shows the 500 cams with a little more duration (193 deg vs 189 deg @.050") a narrower LSA (106 vs 111 deg) but the biggest difference is the amount of retard-the 560 cams are retarded about 15 deg more than the 500 cams. All this seems like the 500 cams would be a little "hotter" but still very mild cams. They should work fine for my project. The 500 cams would probably not pass smog due to the tighter LSA and less retard.
So I pretty much have everything dialed in. Now I just need time to work on it!

__________________
Tony


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I have always marveled over the performance of the 500's 

I once had a 1985 Euro 500 SEL and it really seemed to haul ass! 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

No wonder-the 500SL was the quickest of the 107's. I'm excited about using the 500SL cams in my project and they are not too hard to find. The 500 cams are retarded too-just not as much. I'm having some adjustible timing gears made so I can play with the timing.

__________________
Tony


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Tony H,

Yep, you're going to have some fun LOL ! The tighter the Lobe-Centre-Angle, the more valve-overlap, & generally more top-end power. However, it's interesting to note how the 560 cams are retarded by so many more degrees, as this too increases top-end power...

As always, the general understandings / rules of camshafts are always conflicting with one-another, & one guide-line with one motor, has a differing out-come with another ! Maybe since the 500's were generally 3-speed auto's ( in the 1970's ), so we find advanced camshaft timing, for more low-end torque etc etc, & the 560, though smogged-completely-out, had a 4-speed trans.

All I'm getting at is that usually, you find cams with tighter LCA's on the larger engines, not the smaller, & 106 degrees to 111 degress LCA is significant in camshaft design.

Very interested to see your results when you start adjusting your camshaft phasings Tony, keep us posted !

Cheers,

Rastus

PS It's also annoying that MB don't offer the full-specs of their cams, & only timing values etc. So well done Tony on finding the full-specs yourself !



-- Edited by Rastus on Friday 21st of February 2014 01:47:16 AM



-- Edited by Rastus on Friday 21st of February 2014 01:47:46 AM

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Apparently a larger LSA and retarding the cam reduces emissions by leaning out the low speed operation(that's where they tested emissions in that era) I kind of wanted to know what they were doing with the different camshafts. I'm sure it is always a balance between emissions, smoothness, economy, and power. These engines are really under-headed for the displacement so the tighter LSA 500 cams should help with the scavenging but increases emissions so no go for the USA. I don't think much more than 280-300HP is realistic with the small valves/heads these engines have-you can only move so much air through a given port/valve with NA. I'm not looking for tire shredding power but a substantial increase over the small 3.5 for a minumun of money. I don't mind spending money but one can spend crazy money for a small increase in power on these engines and end up with drivability/reliability problems and noisy valvetrains. I think my combination should be solid.
Where I am now is only a few hundred $ more than a quality stock rebuild-just the cost of the doner engines and having the 4.5 block bored. Everthing else I am doing should be done on any rebuild.
My 3.5 has an even tighter LSA than the 500 cams and it has a really nasty burble at idle. Hope the 500 cams have some of that.

__________________
Tony


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

So here is the latest: my old fears about the "mystery" coating on the 560 pistons has returned to the point where I am looking for other options. I am putting a lot of effort and $ into this and just don't want to risk it on the pistons. After much research I think a good candidate are Buick 3.8 turbo pistons-they are forged, the correct diameter with several oversizes available, the compression height is .085" higher(leaves me room to mill the top to the ideal squish clearance) and they have a dish very similar to the volume of the 560 pistons. The Buick pin is about .060 smaller which leaves me the option to have the pin bores machined to the Mercedes pin size. I bought a cheap cast piston off Ebay to see how the valve, skirt clearance and deck height is before I get more serious.



-- Edited by Tony H on Friday 14th of March 2014 03:47:36 PM

__________________
Tony


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

Piston selection is one of many advantages you have with a cast iron block. To get a similar aftermarket piston into an M117 aluminum casting one would have to have all the cylinders sleeved. Aluminum walls are far less forgiving in this aspect.

Early on in this thread I made mention of the above, interesting that you are making it a reality. I look forward to hearing what you come up with.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Last flip-flop-I promise! After a lengthy discussion with my machinist I decided to stay with my original plan and go with the 560 pistons. Customs were way too expensive and I could not find a off the shelf that was close enough in compression height to work.  Block is now in the machine shop for final honing and parallel decking.  I have flip floped on my head choice as well. The 560 heads really do have more potential and the exhaust valves are larger as well as the intake. The main reason I was reluctant to use them was the loss of CR I would relaize. To compensate I am having .020" taken off the deck and after I machine the piston tops(about .035" to get .040" squish) I should end up with about 9.4-9.5:1 CR. Pics when I get it back.



-- Edited by Tony H on Monday 24th of March 2014 12:05:30 AM



-- Edited by Tony H on Monday 24th of March 2014 12:07:52 AM

__________________
Tony


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hey Tony,

Once again, at least you have plenty of possible combinations to choose from ! Don't forget about your free-breathing dual-exhaust system...You only need to calculate the amount of exhaust-slugs that a V-8 produces at 2,000 rpm to realize that a twin-system is the ONLY way to go with any V-8 engine...Single systems do nothing but rob you of power-making potential !

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Totally agree concerning the exhaust system. My goal is to build custom long tube headers connected to a 2.25 or 2.5" dual system with an H-pipe. I may use euro logs until I can get the headers built. Inderstand this is all in the future.

__________________
Tony
Ben


Rookie

Status: Offline
Posts: 2
Date:

G'day fellas...

Newbie here obviously... And Aussie... Both good things...right?
Is there an M116 sticky on what to look for and stuff? I'm just looking at my first foray into MB classics and am eyeing off a damn nice looking '72 W108 that claims full restoration including paint, interior and rebuild of the 3.5... Looks great.. I want reliable, comfy.. Stylish.. Versus a bit more for a 6.3 with THAT air suspension (cringe)..

Have been avidly going through this discussion and have to say I'm impressed by the motor... My background is ford windsors and clevelands (Aussie builder etc etc) have a handy father who is a retired mechanic with a penchant for w111 220s's...

From what i have been reading.. I like what a small displacement 6bolt alloy (?cast?) V8 offers... Being strong, smooth and perky..
So here's a few questions relating to early posts...
a) What's the fuel (and it seems oil) usage of the stock 3.5 assuming good condition?
b) output seems high on any scale...?
c) if I'm looking for smooth n cruiser type limo would a tiny blowback turbo and a slightly taller final drive give me lower revs on the highway and therefore lower fuel use? I noticed the mention of 3k+ rpm at highway speeds and look at current cars sitting way lower...

I enjoy the improvement and that more is better but I'm looking to get minor power improvement with better fuel on a car rather than tyre smoking high hp.. I'm looking at the current euro push towards efficiency with tiny turbos..

I'm not even sure if I'm being sacrilegious by suggesting low boost turbos on a classic... But this seemed a good place to start...

Cheers..

Ben



-- Edited by Ben on Sunday 20th of July 2014 09:54:51 PM

__________________
Ben


Rookie

Status: Offline
Posts: 2
Date:

Having said all that... Would I get more enjoyment just putting a free flow exhaust on it and enjoying the drive?

plus the option is a W108 2.8 manual.. Vs the 3.5 auto.. 

Ben



-- Edited by Ben on Sunday 20th of July 2014 09:53:55 PM

__________________


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Ben,

I've got one of these 3.5 V-8's in a '73 SLC coupe, & it's a good all-round tourer, with a healthy dollop of top-speed.. This is about 205 kmph @ 6,300 rpm. MB had always geared their cars to be capable of pulling max. rpm in top gear. - ( Pre over-drive & 5-6-7 speed auto days of course LOL). For the 3.5 to do this, they fitted it with 3.46 final drive ratio. I would not change the ratio, as although the over-all performance is surprisingly pretty good for its 213.5 ci displacement, it's NO 1/4 mile drag car, & though it's a V-8, its tiny capacity means that it lacks that big V-8 torque at low rpms & wide open throttle...So what you get is a very happy, free-revving motor that needs high rpms to pull the heavy payload that a MB is...

Just check your oil-level after every tank of fuel. Regular driving at legal speeds won't / shouldn't see it drop on the stick. Sustained high-speed motoring may see it start to drink depending on the weight of the oil & brand. I use Shell Helix HX-7, & she only starts to drink it after sustained 100mph motoring, where the engine is happily sitting at about 5,250 rpm...

The hardest thing for me to get used to was the way the motor revs !!! Think of it as a great little V-8 that offers typical V-8-like power delivery, but with 6-cylinder fuel economy. You should be able to get around 24mpg, or 8.33 km per litre, or if you rather, around 12.0 ltrs consumption for 100k's traveled. Not too bad for heavy cars...

If I were you, & had my eyes on these cars that are older than my SLC, I would with no hesitation grab a 6.3, & put-up with the air-suspension. These 6.3's hammer, & offer a far better dollar for dollar running cost over the time of your ownership. And that's not including the smile-factor that you'd have !!!

Any of these V-8's will benefit from a free-flowing dual exhaust, & unleash more power for free. I highly recommend it !!!

The 2.8 in the W108 is a nice car, & the motor will impress you for what it is, but it would honestly struggle to satisfy any performance quest without flogging it everywhere you went. That being said, if it's the "Twin-Cam" 2.8, top speed will see you top-out at about 195kmph, at approx 6,500rpm, with fuel consumption very similar to the 3.5 V-8. The 3.5 is an overall far better / stronger engine than the Twin-Cam in my opinion.

I hope this helps, I'd go for the 6.3 ( though they're thirsty ), & enjoy whatever you grab yourself.

Rastus

__________________


Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Finally got the block back from the machine shop but been too busy to do anything with it. I had .030 taken off the deck so by time I machine the piston tops for proper squish I should have about 9.5:1 cr which is where I want to be. I had the front cover machined at the same time. I am designing some adjustable timing gears to dial in my cam timing. All the stock cams are retarded various amounts for emissions and from what I have read this reduces fuel economy, runs hotter and less responsive at lower speeds (where we drive most of the time)
Speaking of air suspension I have been giving some serious thought to converting my coupe. There is no downside(except cost) and the systems available today are very sophisticated. Plus the thought of reinstalling my front springs scares the heck out of me more than when I removed them. Worth the cost of the system just not to do that.

__________________
Tony


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hi Tony H,

Good to hear that progress is being made. Even just a little bit everyday still moves you closer to completion.

The air suspension systems were only good on smooth roads, since when you encounter a heap of bumps successively on the road, the air heats-up & then expands, & this changes the dynamics of your ride from comfortable to really poor & harsh quite quickly...Stick with the springs & regular shock-absorbers would be my suggestion. You'd also have a wider range of comfort settings to choose from, though these would remain fixed.

Also, MB went to the trouble of color-coding the springs, so that they went back into the correct / allocated positions...eg, the drivers side front spring is calibrated for that position only & shouldn't be used in any other position. They do this knowing that the car will more often have just the one occupant in it ( driver ), so its actually a different spring to the passenger side etc etc.

A good / new spring compressor is all you need to gain confidence in the tool...The threaded bar does flex quite a bit & often puts that lump in the throat as you wind-it-down for clearance. Using a new compressor, or a MB special tool is the trick in your situation. It's only the older tools that can slip & move around a little that will give these concerns. New ones or even OEM tools are not too expensive, & worth it for the piece-of-mind. I'm sure some-one somewhere will make a spring tool for the old W-108's.

Cheers,

Rastus

__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I did a little write up on using the spring compressor tool -

http://autotrend.activeboard.com/t34382884/mercedes-benz-w126-front-coil-spring-tool/

Definatly makes the job 1000 times easier. I too feel the soft air ride would take away from the classic and tight feel of these cars.



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Senior Guest

Status: Offline
Posts: 43
Date:

Appreciate every ones comments. The 108/111 front suspension is totally different than the 126-the spring is in a very enclosed area and expands to about 3 times its compressed length-there is no way to get a tool around the spring. The 109(300SEL) was an air suspension car and it's essentially the same chassis as the 111-in fact there was an air suspension version of the coupe-the 112. From the many people I have conversed about concerning the conversion the ride is better and more controlled. Plus I went from the original 185/75/14 tires to 225/60/15 front and 235/55/16 rear so the tires have a stiffer sidewall. The ride was harsher with the low profile tires. I'm hoping the air suspension will compensate somewhat.
The main problem with the early air suspension cars(109/112) was the leaking leveling valves since it was a totally pneumatic system-no electronic ride height sensors like todays systems. Nothing on my car will be cut/modified/welded preventing return to original if desired.

__________________
Tony


Rookie

Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Date:

I just found this thread, 5 stars GREAT. I am an older hot rodder with many different engine builds. I got 400HP out of my 351 Windsor back in 1971 using Pontiac 389 valves in the Ford heads. Had a Morris Minor pickup with a 1311 CC Cooper engine pitting out 130 HP, blew the doors of a lot of V Dubs back then.

I have wanted to do a Mercedes V8 engine for almost 15 years now. Finally have a 1977 450 SLC with 33K miles, engine runs great with CIS.

Back 10 years ago I bought 8 MB pistons on eBay, told they were for a 450 M117 engine. But there is no dish, Mahle A031-96L26 in 92 MM zero over bore. Pistons came with rings and piston pin, I was thinking a ceramic coating and a skirt coating and find a low mileage 450 block. Piston is flat top with 4 valve notches.

But now a 560 crank would bolt up, sweet. Nothing better than more torque.

Speaking of air suspensions, my first MB was a 1969 300 SEL 6.3. Air suspension was great as everything was fresh and working well. But a new air suspension would be much better. I could go over speed bumps at 60 MPH with zero issues. Some lame expert at Benzworld was saying no way a 6.3 could beat R107 or other 560 engine car. HA. Maybe 3-4 car lengths to 60 MPH and 10 lengths or more to 120 MPH! Mine had a Borla dual exhaust and dynode @ 300 HP at the flywheel and 433 #/Ft torque. Blew the doors off a LOT of rice rockets. Zero to 60 was under 6 seconds sometimes, usually 6.5 seconds.

If I were to do this 560 crank into a 450 iron block I definitely would go to the General Motors parts bin with hot rodder options.

Somewhere a long time ago I read about a MB with Chevy pistons and rods. Cursed with a photographic memory that with age is now CRS, cant remember s**t. Anyone remember it?



-- Edited by breastroker on Monday 17th of April 2017 12:51:25 AM

__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

Thanks! Although I can't take much credit as the other member was working on a pretty custom build too! I wonder how that project has come along since the last time he posted? 

I agree Chevy performance parts would be the way to go, perhaps some of them newer sealed power light weight flat top LW2256 pistons with the full floating pins and low drag rings would  a better option than Mercedes own pistons? I must admit though, I'm very impressed with factory MB rods and Crankshaft's as they are made very well, much better than some of the older 350 factory GM stuff! Although some of the newer LS titanium rods in their high end engines may best the older MB rods.

One thing is for sure, it's VERY RARE to see internally modified Mercedes Engines here in the USA! I'd imagine once I get off my butt and start fiddling with one of these many engines I've been collecting over the years a clear path could be documented and proven. It's amazing how quick time flies, and although my financial situation has greatly improved since I've started this thread the fact remains that these Mercedes engines do hold up well, so much in fact I haven't had any real need to rebuild one! Heck, at this rate I could be an old fart without the brass to even use that extra horsepower by the time I get it figured out! LOL, just kidding! I don't think that part of me will ever grow apart. 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Rookie

Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Date:

Any updates on this its very interesting . Even though I'm playing with a M100 that has custom extractors and I have had a cad scan 85mm billet throttle body made of original 65mm throttle body and once car is back from painting with fit it and FrankenCIS fron Dkubus 



__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I have always been one to be brutally honest with regards to all things automotive, and here is my take on the Mercedes-Benz M117 and M116 engines...

Imagine if you will rebuilding an engine to almost race specs and you have the equivalent of what the M116 and M117 engines give you straight from the factory! Honestly! There really is not much more room for improvement on the inside of these engines save a few areas!

For example, the connecting rods are massive with large counter weights on them and very strong tinsel strength hardware - right out of the factory! The engine block and heads are aluminum for weight savings and better heat disbursement with SIX (yeah that is right) "6" bolt mains! There could be a little more webbing as I have heard rumors that on high horsepower applications the block has actually cracked, but I don't think when my machinist was telling me about it that he himself ever seen a Mercedes engine split that way, rather perhaps another manufacture of an "aluminum" block. In other words I think he was just saying in general that aluminum blocks suffer an inherent weakness in this area that cast iron does not. 

The pistons are a very solid casting with full floating wrist pins, bushed on the rods even! The valve train utilizes a triple valve spring and sodium filled exhaust valves! The brass guides are set well and the only real improvement here outside more aggressive camshafts would be a roller follower which is not offered on the M116 and M117 as I know it. 

Even the exhaust and intake ports are a perfect circle to aid in airflow! The ignition and fuel management system on the other hand, well these leave a little to be desired in this day and age but you'll never get something that can legally run and feel as smooth thru the powerband!

So it's no wonder people aren't doing much to their Mercedes, because most of it has already been done by the factory!



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



Rookie

Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Date:

Hey guys,

You are stating MUCH misinformation when it comes to the M116 / M117 as it pertains to your dates, and production information and most importantly GM / Ford's use of the "designs" for the M116/117 All the information below is to help you not to criticize or insult because I am an engineer and teaching by correct information is always a good start, and there is no better place to start than the SOURCE so please take this into consideration and enjoy the read!  

I really hate to burst your bubble here, but everything you are talking about and the "performance" upgrades you are attempting on the M116 / M117 has already been done back in the late 70's-90's when two actual automotive ENGINEERS that once worked for Mercedes-Benz quit and started a small performance race engine development company called..... Ohhh lets see what was the name..........A M G........  Which if you do not know that AMG wasn't always ////AMG well then you might not even need to attempt what you are doing because, Hans Werner Aufrecht and Erhard Melcher of Grossaspach (That is what AMG stands for) they designed and fabricated their OWN IN HOUSE 4 Valve heads for the M116 / M117 and producing max HP out of these blocks including 6.5ltr conversions.

Now AMG did this SO WELL in fact and WON many DTM races 24hrs of Spa etc. etc.  That Mercedes-Benz worked up a deal to BUY their tuning / design company. Now between the early 70's until the MERGER with Mercedes in the 90's. Mercedes wanted to buy and have AMG build the 4 Valve heads for them which is still used TO THIS VERY DAY.... AMG still builds by hand, their AMG engines which is a totally separate company from Daimler-Benz AG..

Now up until the Merger with Mercedes in the early / mid  90's AMG had licensed tuning shops all over the world including Japan and the USA. Now, it is of a great opinion being an Engineer myself, that those two German Engineers were just that, Engineers that understood flow dynamics, and power-train design and the entire picture of electronic tuning which even back then, they were also modifying ECU, TCM and even Idle control modules which for everyone on every single forum this is (Out of their abilities). Now AMG even turbo / supercharged these engines way back then, and let me tell you if those two engineers were able to determine all of this in the 70-90's can you please tell me what you are trying to bring to the table that hasn't already been done??????

It would appear that your 400HP number is less than what AMG was producing way back then.... So, you are not creating anything NEW or amazing here as far as I am concerned because I highly doubt you are going to be creating from scratch your own 4 VALVE HEAD design to use.... And from what I read you are trying to use 2 VALVE heads which AMG drained the life out of what could be done to the 2 Valve heads and maxed that out, which is WHY they designed and built their own 4 VALVE heads. 

So.... all things aside, I believe you guys need to do your homework on this block, the heads, HP, flow dynamics, and basically everything concerning the use of the cast iron and aluminum blocks which even at that, one must understand when and why Mercedes broke away from their cast iron block to the Aluminum block....... This took place in 1981 with the introduction of the C126 Mercedes Coupe which under development Mercedes determined that an aluminum block was needed during their "ENERGY CONCEPT" design protocol which ultimately had to do with Emissions C.A.R.B, and weight savings....... Now, unless your engines are for track use only, Federal and especially CA emissions standards dictate what must STILL be in effect which for all of the Mercedes vehicles of this era must past both visual and tailpipe standards, which modifying these types of engines need to be controlled and run to Emission spec standards...... I have much more to go into about this, but first want to touch base on..............

Now you talk about the Mercedes block design being used by GM etc. Let me help you out.... This was due to another Merger...... DAIMLER-BENZ....May 7th 1998, Daimler-Benz AG in Germany and Chrysler Corporation in the USA signed a merger contract where Mercedes bought Chrysler and formed Daimler-Chrysler (Daimler-Benz) AG. And in doing so Chrysler had German engineers which had access to Mercedes block an general automotive designs, Now how that relates to GM etc. GM did not take or buy Mercedes designs and reverse engineer them for use. Chrysler engineers which came from Germany to help the Daimler Chrysler transition which stayed in the USA eventually quit and went to work for GM and others so on and so forth was able to obtain these engineers which had knowledge of their block designs and I am sure they smuggled some CAD designs too.... Now this is before FIAT bought Chrysler so keep that in mind! So individuals out in the world did not just STUMBLE upon a realization that GM blocks share the design from Mercedes Blocks....... This is very old news, Circa 1998, and if you look at Mercedes forums, you would have seen this topic already discussed. 

Now let me jump back to the entire concept at hand....... Trying to take a block that has already been worked through the roof in terms of design, re-design to be used out on the German Racetracks including Nurburgring! Hans Werner Aufrecht is the HEAD OF DTM today, which I would hope people on here know what DTM is??  And he just happens to be the "A" in AMG, so if you are trying to tell me that what you guys are attempting is "New, Hasn't been done" etc. I think you will find that you are late in this game and you might want to think about researching AMG and the companies engineering efforts on the M116 and M117 V8 Mercedes Power plants..... NOW the biggest aspect that you might want to take into consideration is that Mercedes had two different versions of the M116 and M117 which ranges from the M116.962 - M116.968 and similar for the M117 (I didnt give full range of numbers)... What does this mean you may ask?  Its all in production engineering for USA market VS European market.... Euro or "Grey Market" Mercedes from factory came with higher displacement and higher HP rated variations which if you want to start off right like AMG did.......... You might want to consider sourcing a EURO-SPEC motor, you would be amazed at some of the differences, but it is 100% clear you are using a US spec foundation which yet again you are behind the 8 ball here. 

To cap it off..... German engineering the United States has a lot to be thankful, I mean BOSCH invented fuel injection, which you would be amazed at people that will say that US invented this........ WRONG.... Bosch's first rendition of EFI started with a very genius system called KEJETRONIC...... Now for BMW guys, they know K-Jet or Motronic (BMW) it is all BOSCH and it was a very smart Electro-Mechanical fuel injection system which pretty much every automotive MFG then used, it took the USA quite a few years to adopt this, and were stuck with carbureted petrol engines which was a joke compared to CIS (Continuous Injection System), which eventually in a short amount of time turned into full Electronic Fuel Injection which was invented by Bosch, which Bosch also invented the O2 sensor, Hell Bosch pretty much invented all of the Electronic and Mechanical fuel injection systems for advanced Emissions...... Might want to consider homework on BOSCH also.

Now why am I bringing BOSCH and emissions into this??? Well if you are planning on running these blocks on the street, well then you have even MORE work ahead of you..... If they are only being designed for track use, well then you might as well visit MEGA-SQUIRT and Elbe Engineering or HB Motorsport because yet again, they have already figured this out along with much more HP VS whats being discussed between you guys on this forum..... Lastly AMG stopped playing with the M116 / M117 systems in the 90's because they moved on to bigger and better things (Thus is the Engineering world)

So, someone mentioned MBworld forum etc....... Umm, you all might want to consider AMG Classic forum if you want to truly understand the M116 and M117 to AMG standards..... Because, yet again AMG is the gold standard when it comes to the M116 / M117 and everything has already been done, documented, and is being propelled today by other companies like Elbe Engineering, HB Motorsport, and I can name off 5 or 6 more but to be honest, I have said enough. 

It is a big world out there and there is a TON of information / misinformation on the web....... I like to bet my money on actual engineers not home mechanics, and if you look hard enough you will find that these blocks have already been engineered inside and out, and there is NOTHING new that can be discovered or "figured out" about the M116 / M117. So gentlemen do not waste your time trying to invent the wheel, the wheel has already been invented and if you are truly interested in the M116/117 please visit companies like Elbe Engineering, and Carobu Engineering... You might discover that they have figured out even MORE in terms of modernizing these M116/117 power plants for street and track use, which yet again I can't stress enough that if these are to be run on the street well none of them are excused from Emissions standards.  Take care everyone and Happy Motoring!  



__________________


FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

Hello & welcome C126AMG !

Thanks for your insight ! You would love it over at Gerry's 500E forum btw.

Regretfully sir, you've failed to understand the basis behind this thread, as these engines were already "old" by the time it was started. The Administrator here makes a good living working-the-tools, ( as with a few others here ), & had already found significant & reliable Horse Power with the use of NO2...Something AMG may not have looked at, or yet perfected it's reliable use with.


Personally, Rotex make most excellent under-bonnet-superchargers, & when combined with Multi-point Injection, you can dial-in how much HP you want on "any" engine....But how far can you go before it breaks ?...

NO2 is hands-down the best bang-for-buck. And if you wish to learn more about its application here, where the fruits-of-the-labor of its use are in print, you may like to show a little more respect / courtesy to the members here, otherwise F*** off.

Have fun.



__________________


CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

Oh, we have a wanna-be purist amongst us...

Rastus I suppose everyone has their own style, this dude C126AMG isn't sporting any photos and he sure is throwing around a bunch of names. 

C126AMG, no one is trying to re-invent the wheel here, most people already know the best bang for the buck is nitrous... You could spend tens of thousands of dollars on an AMG 6.0 DOHC and get walked by a two valve 5.6 liter with a relatively small injection of nitrous (read that as less than 200 HP). The heat involved in Turbos, Superchargers and Blowers makes daily driving such a fine road cruiser something that will not quite be Mercedes and it will also add increased cost for maintenance any way you slice it.

I still have six M116 and M117 engines laying around, not including the one that runs and is currently for sale... but I can assure you that thru it all I have been PAID to drive a Mercedes-Benz W126 S Class 420 or better for the past 12 years (up until I got my Corvette). Can you say the same Mr. C126AMG? I have cut up and scrapped over one million MSRP dollars in late W126 sedans and coupes over the past 20 or so years... I have driven them all in just about every configuration and I can tell you it was my pleasure! 

Do you even OWN a C126AMG? Or even a plain old W126?  

 

 



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Status: Offline
Posts: 11706
Date:

I should also mention that AMG was not a part of Mercedes-Benz back in the W126 era, as you probably already know.. There was a reason for this and it was because their experiments were not something Mercedes wanted to cover under warranty...

It has already been PROVEN that a 6.0 liter M117 is at it's MAX and very prone to head gasket leaks! You don't see any form of forced induction on AMG engines of the era, especially DOHC and 6.0 variants because they just couldn't handle it! 

Sure, todays modern technology is great and wonderful! But todays modern technology comes with environmental restrictions and often times propriety software that is illegal to modify. Enter the Bosch CIS-E fuel system! This system is so smooth and linear it is illegal to replicate it's smoothness today! But like all things of old there is lots of maintenance involved in keeping them at optimal performance. Spark plugs every 10-12k on cars now-days would seem unheard of! 

In todays day and age you can get yourself a vehicle that does 1.9 seconds zero to sixty for almost half what a real AMG in full trim would cost you back in the 80's and early 90's...

Anyone seen an electric W126 yet? Now that would be re-inventing the wheel! LOL



__________________

State of Michigan Certified Master Auto Mechanic +2

Specialty Certified Since 1994



FAR BEYOND DRIVEN

Status: Offline
Posts: 2868
Date:

LOL !

I wasn't going to bother, but since we are "correcting" C126AMG's post, I'll state this...

In the US-of-A, Bendix & others were developing the first electronic fuel injection systems in the early 1960's. By the end of the decade, Bosch secured the rights to manufacture & distribute the finished product, that being "D-Jetronic", which was first fitted to a VW, then Mercedes & the others...

D-Jetronic was the first EFI system.

The M100 6.3 was fuel injected too, but it ran a similar system to a Diesel engine, with a mechanical lift-pump, that fed the 8-injectors.

The advent of the digital age & super fast & accurate electronics provided a more suitable means to use EFI than K-Jetronic or CISE.

__________________
«First  <  1 2 3 | Page of 3  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard