rumor has it that Peter wrote:
> Diesels use very little fuel except when accelerating since heating air at
> high compression ratios yeilds plenty of pressure to spin the engine (and
> hence the need for a governor -- engine runs away at constant fuel addition
> above what is required for idle,
Yup, that's theory alight...
Diesels use very little fuel except when accelerating since heating air at
high compression ratios yeilds plenty of pressure to spin the engine (and
hence the need for a governor -- engine runs away at constant fuel addition
above what is required for idle,
What happens, I think, at low load is th
sombitch don, you blew it!
Don & Teresa Merriman wrote:
Not nessasarly true about blowing up. MY 1982 380SEL 487,000 miles on
the orginal tranny. Filter always changed at roughly 50-60,000 miles.
Don
Mercedes requires that the filter be changed at least every 30kmi!
Marshall
--
Marshall Boo
Don & Teresa Merriman wrote:
Not nessasarly true about blowing up. MY 1982 380SEL 487,000 miles on
the orginal tranny. Filter always changed at roughly 50-60,000 miles.
Don
Mercedes requires that the filter be changed at least every 30kmi!
Marshall
--
Marshall Booth (who doesn't res
My experience...mostly following Marshall's advice:
I bought a 300SD last September that had been driven
with a light foot for 19 years. Had 188K when I bought
it. Now has 206K. Mostly highway miles. Diesel Purged
a couple times, drove/drive it hard/italian tune ups
on the open road. First valve a
that tranny still workin'?...maybe it likes the warm weather
B Dike wrote:
>
> Mitch,
>
> The gas engine may well be more efficient at full
> throttle, but that efficiency is offset to some degree
> by compression stroke power loss which increases as
> intake vacuum decreases.
N! Vacuum is the enemy of efficiency. On a gas engine
with constant compre
It's probably not true though unless there's actual slippage when the trans
shifts.
Shift quality is a mechanical process relating to vacuum on the modulator
valve and RPM. Firm shifting is required under WOT or the trans would burn
up over time. Soft shifts are normal under light throttle or when
I thought Diesel Purge could clear up the carbon
buildup?
It can clean up injector nozzles pretty well, but I'm not sure about carbon
that's built up over time. Marshall once said that it could take thousands
of miles of hard driving and long highway runs to clean up an engine in a
car drive
I'm convinced accellerating hard is actually easier on the tranny in my
300D Turbo. When I accellerate moderately, it tends to flare or hang
during shifts. When I accellerate hard, it shifts firmly and crisply.
David,
This is my theory as well. Less slippage should mean longer life as does
le
Not nessasarly true about blowing up. MY 1982 380SEL 487,000 miles on the
orginal tranny. Filter always changed at roughly 50-60,000 miles.
Don
On 6/29/05, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Johnson wrote:
> > What does running hard like this mean to the
> > transmission? Would
Mitch,
The gas engine may well be more efficient at full
throttle, but that efficiency is offset to some degree
by compression stroke power loss which increases as
intake vacuum decreases. I am theorizing that the
diesel efficiency curve is steeper than the gasser
curve.
Bruce
--- Mitch Haley
Manual shifter in Gump, so first gear is going to toast before anything
else. Old car, going to need a tranny rebuild some day
On Tuesday, June 28, 2005, at 11:31 PM, kevin kraly wrote:
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster?
Here I going again, jumping to conclusions. Got quit that.
Hank
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mercedes mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Theory vs Practice
hey hank...interesting
- Original Message -
> From: "JJJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Mercedes mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 7:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [MBZ] Theory vs Practice
>
>
> > when i drove my '86 300sdl to mexico
you can make your own pretty easy, lots of folks have.
David Brodbeck wrote:
Kaleb C. Striplin wrote:
you need to get yours adjusted properly.
Quite possibly. It shifts fine at light throttle and full throttle. Not
so hot in between. I don't have the special gold-plated gauge to
measur
Kaleb C. Striplin wrote:
you need to get yours adjusted properly.
Quite possibly. It shifts fine at light throttle and full throttle.
Not so hot in between. I don't have the special gold-plated gauge to
measure the internal trans pressure, though, so I'm afraid to monkey
with it.
you need to get yours adjusted properly.
David Brodbeck wrote:
David Johnson wrote:
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster? If that's the case, I'd rather run the engine
at lower efficiency than having to shell out 2K for a
ne
a crisp shifting tranny will last much longer than a soft shifting one.
kevin kraly wrote:
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster?
That's hard to say. Generally, everything wears faster when the car is
pushed harder, but drivi
Anyone care to jump in on this one?
Kevin in Hillsboro Oregon
Kevin and all.
About my experience of running hard and transmission wear:
For 5-6 years, I autocrossed w/my '80 300SD in the GWS series in the DC
area. The series runs for 8 months, once a month. That's over 40
times out, eac
mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Theory vs Practice
when i drove my '86 300sdl to mexico last year (7000 miles), i mostly
watched the mileage...if i went 75 or below, i might get 27-8mpg...around
85mph, i might get 25mpg
David Johnson wrote:
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster? If that's the case, I'd rather run the engine
at lower efficiency than having to shell out 2K for a
new trannny.
I'm convinced accellerating hard is actually easier on
--- kevin kraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> pushed harder, but driving at low RPM builds up
> carbon which can kill an
> engine over time.
I thought Diesel Purge could clear up the carbon
buildup?
David
Yahoo! Sports
Rek
I've always believed that the life of a tranny is directly
proportional to the number of times it "shifts". IOW, a car driven for
long periods of time on the highway will have a longer life
transmission than one in constant stop and go situations.
John
On 6/28/05, kevin kraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster?
That's hard to say. Generally, everything wears faster when the car is
pushed harder, but driving at low RPM builds up carbon which can kill an
engine over time. The tranny usually shifts
--- kevin kraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My experience is that my cars tend to run better
> when they're driven hard.
What does running hard like this mean to the
transmission? Would that wear down the transmission
faster? If that's the case, I'd rather run the engine
at lower efficiency tha
Bruce,
Using Gump as trial platform (72 115), I find the hard driving to be
best for her.
When I got her about 16 months ago, she had sat for a long while and
been driven with care by a musician. I suspect he did not really take
her out and use her, just puttered along. Throttle was set lo
B Dike wrote:
So Dieselers,
With many of you folks advocating that our diesels
must be driven *hard*, I decided to look into it a
little. I theorized that diesels differ from gas
motors in that the power loss (per stroke) from
compressing the intake air is relatively constant over
throttle sett
when i drove my '86 300sdl to mexico last year (7000 miles), i mostly
watched the mileage...if i went 75 or below, i might get 27-8mpg...around
85mph, i might get 25mpg...when we cruised at 105 for two hours at a time on
the new toll roads (and in utah), i got 19mpg...
the car gets about 25mpg
My experience is that my cars tend to run better when they're driven hard.
When I first picked my 300CD up down in Southern California, it was
sluggish, but once it was floored up the grapevine, it ran better, and
during the rest of the trip running 75-80MPH, it got nearly 30MPG. When
it's dri
B Dike wrote:
> On the other hand, a
> gasser has much less compression, and compression
> power loss is proportional with throttle setting due
> to their intake air butterfly.
Backwards. Sucking a vacuum in the intake causes loss in efficiency.
Your gasser will see maximum horsepower-hour/btu o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Anyone else have any data to validate the 'drive it
> hard' theory?
Only that every old-time Mercedes mechanic I have spoken to (and all the old
timers here are either German or Czech) says that the diesels breathe better
when driven hard.
mac
So Dieselers,
With many of you folks advocating that our diesels
must be driven *hard*, I decided to look into it a
little. I theorized that diesels differ from gas
motors in that the power loss (per stroke) from
compressing the intake air is relatively constant over
throttle setting. In other w
34 matches
Mail list logo
