list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing
: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ
rumor has it that Steve wrote:
What I wrote:
The reason for recalibrating the pump up is to squirt enough extra
fuel into the cylinder to make full use of the extra air that's being
pumped in.
What you wrote:
Also, unless the pump was removed and recalibrated up to compensate for
the
: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30
Well, I for one am willing to try supercharging Gump. I figure an
inverter and commercial blow drier will suffice.
On Sunday, October 30, 2005, at 03:25 PM, Sunil Hari wrote:
If the car was intended to have more power, the Mercedes engineers
would
have put it there.
On 10/30/05, Marshall
Hendrik Riessen wrote:
My question is why would MB want to turbo the 240D? I would think that a
turboed version would use the same amount of fuel as a 300D if not more. The
only reason I can think of is in commercial applications where there is not
enough room for the 5 cylinder motor but more
I once saw the changes made to the 617 when the turbo was added. I
can't find the article now, but IIRC, it included strengthened crank
and rods, oil spray under the pistons for cooling, and sodium cooled
valve stems.
I could be wrong, it's been a long time (1981?).
The 616 engine won't many, if
Then I will have to cut into the exhaust and fit the blow drier closer
to the manifold. Might have to get the stainless model to survive the
heat.
On Sunday, October 30, 2005, at 04:26 PM, OK Don wrote:
Since a Diesel supplies more air than needed, and adds the right
amount of fuel, maybe
there is not
enough room for the 5 cylinder motor but more power was required.
Hendrik
- Original Message -
From: Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
Tom
No - I meant use the blowing exhaust instead of the blow drier --
Perpetual motion like -- -
On 10/30/05, redghost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then I will have to cut into the exhaust and fit the blow drier closer
to the manifold. Might have to get the stainless model to survive the
heat.
--
OK Don wrote
The C111 was used as a test bed for the turbo charged 617 engine. They
established several speed and duration records, and learned a lot with
that car.
Too bad they seem to have forgotten much since then ...
Rick Knoble
1985 300 CD
h, I do not want to lower Gump's power. EGR is a bad thing, since
I would have to engineer a way to put a BB in to block the valve. Will
just stick with the blow drier idea
On Sunday, October 30, 2005, at 04:49 PM, Marshall Booth wrote:
OK Don wrote:
Since a Diesel supplies more air
I do not know that the FSM would approve. If he were to touch it with
his noodley appendage, then I could consider that. Right now the
exhaust just blows into the cabin. May be better to route it back
through the manifold
On Sunday, October 30, 2005, at 04:42 PM, OK Don wrote:
No - I
Kaleb C. Striplin wrote:
why would it use more fuel all other things being equal?
The amount of fuel used in this series of engines depends almost
entirely on the amount of work done. The different versions don't change
efficiency much. Turbo the engine so it produces a little more power and
: redghost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
h, I do not want to lower Gump's power. EGR is a bad thing, since
I would have to engineer a way to put a BB in to block the valve
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
Boy thanks
Rick Knoble wrote:
OK Don wrote
The C111 was used as a test bed for the turbo charged 617 engine. They
established several speed and duration records, and learned a lot with
that car.
Too bad they seem to have forgotten much since then ...
Rick Knoble
1985 300 CD
Well they HAVE since
]
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
The crazy Finns make claims of improved mileage and double power
from 60x engines with larger turbos and intercoolers.
Sounds like turbocharging a 240D is not a viable solution. I would think
putting a 300D turbo engine in the 240D - assuming you have a 240D and want
more power from it - would be more practical. I suspect there's plenty of
used engines around -
Sincerely,
Larry T (78 240D)
A Blood Test
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds like turbocharging a 240D is not a viable solution. I would think
putting a 300D turbo engine in the 240D - assuming you have a 240D and want
more power from it - would be more practical. I suspect there's plenty of
used engines around -
It's even more
rumor has it that Steve wrote:
2. Was the four banger designed to allow and run
properly witht his type of adder.
**snip**
Also, unless the pump was removed and recalibrated up to compensate for
the additional fuel demand from the turbocharging, the engine will be
under-fueled and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason for recalibrating the pump up is to squirt enough extra
fuel into the cylinder to make full use of the extra air that's being
pumped in.
And that differs from what I said, in what respect?
Mac
: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] 1982 240D TURBO, YES TURBO
I want another 240D...I am in the NEWhat is the asking price?
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 02:53:32AM -0500, Steve MacSween wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason for recalibrating the pump up is to squirt enough extra
fuel into the cylinder to make full use of the extra air that's being
pumped in.
And that differs from what I said, in what
Tom,
I don't know much about it other than you should pass it up and tell me
how to contact the owner right awayLOLOL..I loved my 240DA turbo
would have made it near perfect!
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Tom Scordato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mercedes mailing list [EMAIL
it would be aftermarket unless its a euro model. Aftermarket turbos
will blow the engine up sooner rather than later.
Tom Scordato wrote:
I have a line on a 1982 240D that I may be interested in. It has a turbo on
it. Owner who is the original says it was put on I believe after market.
1.
If the car was intended to have more power, the Mercedes engineers would
have put it there.
On 10/30/05, Marshall Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Scordato wrote:
I have a line on a 1982 240D that I may be interested in. It has a turbo
on
it. Owner who is the original says it was put on
28 matches
Mail list logo
