380SL - when the timing chain breaks?
Ptolemy
timing chain breaks?
Is there a notice giving an advanced warning?
Say the chain breaks, what are the results - cost, engine damage, etc?
What is the cost to put in the "dual timing chain"?
What happens if the "dual chain" breaks?
My 380SL is strong and purrs like a kitten but it is 21 years old. Is the chain
metal or some sort of fiber? Does age without regard to milage affect the
reliability of the chain?
How much does it cost to replace the chain? Only Mercedes can do it?
sdp1
<Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I have a 380SL, 37k miles, and was wondering what are the syntoms when the
>timing chain breaks?
A very loud noise followed by the engine stalling and not
re-starting.
>Is there a notice giving an advanced warning?
If the tensioners areloose, when you first start the engine you could
hear a rattle as the slack in the chain is hitting the tensioners.
>Say the chain breaks, what are the results - cost, engine damage, etc?
>
The valves will hit the pistons, needing a complete valve job at
several thousand dollars.
>
>What is the cost to put in the "dual timing chain"?
>What happens if the "dual chain" breaks?
Same thing happens if a dual chain breaks.
>
>My 380SL is strong and purrs like a kitten but it is 21 years old. Is the chain
>metal or some sort of fiber?
Metal
> Does age without regard to milage affect the
>reliability of the chain?
>
>How much does it cost to replace the chain? Only Mercedes can do it?
Any mechanic should be able to replace the chain and tensioners. It
is not a dealer only repair.
>
Logic316
"sdp1" <sd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4qca801c51fmjnlnp...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 07:42:36 -0400, "Ptolemy"
> <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Say the chain breaks, what are the results - cost, engine damage, etc?
> >
> The valves will hit the pistons, needing a complete valve job at
> several thousand dollars.
And if you're really unlucky, those valves could punch holes in one or more
of the pistons.
- Logic316
"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an
accordion. You just leave a lot of useless noisy baggage behind."
-- Jed Babbin
VCopelan
>> >Say the chain breaks, what are the results - cost, engine damage, etc?
>> >
>> The valves will hit the pistons, needing a complete valve job at
>> several thousand dollars.
>
>And if you're really unlucky, those valves could punch holes in one or more
>of the pistons.
Punching holes in pistons is not likely. It's more likely that you will cut a
hole in the oil pan with the broken timing chain and shear off the crankshaft
sprocket woodrift key. So you have to pull the crankshaft as well as the heads
to repair the engine. The crankshaft woodrift key slot will have to be welded.
Ugly stuff. I should know because I broke a timing chain on a 617 Mercedes
diesel engine.
Bill Ditmire
the timing will fall
and down will come valve heads
pistons and all.."
Eight out of ten times you just get four bent intake valves... occassionally
more... once in a great while a valve head breaks off and damages both a piston
and a cylinder wall, sometimes punching into the cooling jacket.
Bill Ditmire
Ditmire Motorworks,Inc.
425 White Horse Pike
Absecon,NJ 08201
http://www.ditmire.com
609-641-3392
Michael Davis
- When the timing chain breaks, your whole life flashes in front of
your eyes. Loud bang, engine stops immediately, possible crack or
hole in valve cover. Thousands of dollars to fix.
- There is a very distinctive chain slap noise if the tensioner is bad
or the chain is stretched/worn excessively. It is different than
lifter tick and may be present only at startup. The flopping around
of the chain can cause it to jump a tooth on the sprocket or break a
guide rail, then the interesting things happen. I believe the
suggested replacement interval is 40K miles, 100K for the double row
chain. As the chain wears, valve timing becomes less accurate. Lack
of the chain slap noise does NOT mean you are safe with a single row
chain.
- The chain, sprockets, and guide rails are metal, rail covers are
plastic. A new single row chain can be had for $70 (but not at a
dealer), and can be replaced by one person in a few hours, removing
sparkplugs, fan, and RH valve cover only. An extra set of hands makes
it a LOT easier. The idea is to not lose valve timing as you pull one
chain out and feed the new in while turning the engine by hand.
Replace the tensioner at the same time as cheap insurance.
- Some early 380 SLs had the conversion done at dealers, in a sort of
stealth recall. If you have long skinny fingers you may be able to
feel if the conversion has been done through the oil filler hole in
the valve cover. Otherwise, use a dental-type mirror or pull the
valve cover. You don't say what year you have, but you may be late
enough to have a factory install. All the parts (chain, rails,
gaskets and seals, sprockets, tensioner, etc.) for the conversion can
be had in a kit for $700-$800 and the job is one long day or short
weekend depending on what tools you need to run out to get and general
skill level. Not difficult. Do be careful, as the block is alloy and
it is easy to strip threads.
- Do the conversion, life is too short.
Mike
"Silverbird" '82 380 SL 161K
--------------------------------
Ptolemy
"Michael Davis" <michae...@ttuhsc.edu> wrote in message
news:9c0b28af.0404...@posting.google.com...
Heck, if Mercedes will do it for free, I'd like my 380SL with 37k miles done.
Ptolemy
MERCEDES STATEMENT START:
"...all we are saying is that it is impossible to predict timing chain failure.
There are too many vairables (age, mileage, usage, driving conditions, etc.),
and because of this we do not provide a listing, or recommended mileage for
replacement. We now only provide a double-rolling chain because we used it on
the new 6 and 8 cylinder engines after 1985. Because it is retrofittable for the
previous engines, why supply both? It is simply an evolution of parts. We don't
feel the single rolling chain is a "time bomb", it was a very effective design,
and yes many have lasted (according to owner reports) in excess of 200,000
miles."
MERCEDES STATEMENT END
"Ptolemy" <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:I18hc.235$uP.1...@eagle.america.net...
Richard Sexton
Ptolemy <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Here is what mercedes told me about the single timing chain a few years ago:
>
>MERCEDES STATEMENT START:
>"...all we are saying is that it is impossible to predict timing chain failure.
>There are too many vairables (age, mileage, usage, driving conditions, etc.),
>and because of this we do not provide a listing, or recommended mileage for
>replacement. We now only provide a double-rolling chain because we used it on
>the new 6 and 8 cylinder engines after 1985. Because it is retrofittable for the
>previous engines, why supply both? It is simply an evolution of parts. We don't
>feel the single rolling chain is a "time bomb", it was a very effective design,
>and yes many have lasted (according to owner reports) in excess of 200,000
>miles."
>
>MERCEDES STATEMENT END
Lawyers wrote this, not engineers. The single row chains
were an unmitigated disaster and he's right about not
being able to predict failure - they can go in as few
as 30K miles.
They only used them on US spec 380's for a couple of years.
--
Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org
Ptolemy
timing?
"Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
news:HwMo8...@T-FCN.Net...
Jerry Wolfram
Mercedes never officially acknowledged there was any thing wrong with
the single row timing chains, and given that there was never an
*official* recall for the 380 SL's so equipped, I doubt whether Mercedes
would be too eager to establish a legal precedent by picking up the tab
for anyone's conversion to a two row chain at this late date.
It might be possible to romance some enterprising attorney into
championing your cause and filing a class action suit against Daimler
Chrysler on behalf of all 380 SL owners who paid for their own
conversion, but bear in mind that Jerkin Shrimp has lawyers too - lots
of 'em. Personally, I think you might be better advised to fork over
the $3K (or so) required for the conversion to your favorite
independent, and sleep soundly knowing you did your share to help get
our sagging economy back on its feet again. They're basically good
long-lived cars, and sooner or later you'll have owned it long enough to
see things swing back around your way again financially. Keep the
faith...!!
Jerry Wolfram
'78 450 SL - 211K miles
Bill Ditmire
chain
timing?<<
Wait... something's coming in... I see flames... wailing... gnashing of
teeth... men with red skin, horns and tails... and now.. could that be a
snowball?
Richard Sexton
Ptolemy <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Whats the chances of getting Mercedes to foot the bill to convert to dual chain
>timing?
These days? Zero.
Ptolemy
post card to bring my Mercedes in for a free inspection - this was a general
mailing for all Mercedes and was really an attempt to get customers in the
showroom. In any case, the post card said a Mercedes Rep was going to be there.
Well, I took my 1983 380SL and asked about the famous single row timing chain
issue and said that it was mentioned all over the Net. The Mercedes rep said
that is was not a concern and not to be worried. Just keep the oil changed
regularly and consider the single timing chain a 'maintence item' and at 75,000
miles just replace the chain. He said that it was mileage that is the issue not
that my SL was 21 years old and 37,000 miles.
So, I got his card and told that all is OK. At the rate I drive my SL, it will
be 40 years old before it needs the timing chain replaced.
Evidentually, there are some high mileage SL's out there with the single timing
chain. Perhaps this issue about the single row timing chain is overblown. With
this confidence that the Mercedes rep has given me, if it does fail, I will have
to raise a ruckus and see what happens. Most likely with my luck, I'll just
have to pay for the cost of a new engine. BTW, what would a replacement engine
cost me?
"Ptolemy" <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:I18hc.235$uP.1...@eagle.america.net...
Jeremy
Or you can just wait until it breaks and buy a new engine for about
$5,000 US :-)
BTW, driving the car is better for it than leaving it sitting for long
periods.
Bill Ditmire
keep the oil changed regularly and consider the single timing chain a
'maintence item' and at 75,000 miles just replace the chain. <<
The rep's lie might be the biggest blooper since WMD in Iraq. Many of these
chains failed while the cars were still in warranty!
Bill Ditmire
>$5,000 US :-)
Maybe you can buy a used or "rebuilt" engine for $5,000, but a new one might
set you back more like $12,000.
380SL
engine? Is it worth more as spare parts than fixing?
wren...@aol.com (Bill Ditmire) wrote in message news:<20040425093925...@mb-m12.aol.com>...
380SL
How about reliability of the single timing chain versus the dual
timing chain?
What happens if one of the chains in a dual chain engine breaks or
jumps off its guides?
wren...@aol.com (Bill Ditmire) wrote in message news:<20040425093802...@mb-m12.aol.com>...
Bill Ditmire
reliability of the single timing chain versus the dual
timing chain? What happens if one of the chains in a dual chain engine breaks
or
jumps off its guides?<<
The single row chain is unreliable even when new. It was tried on a single-cam
engine back in the 1960's (the 180.954 used in model 230 and 230S) and they all
broke. So they went back to duplex chains until the 1981-1983 380 engines for
the US market only. And SURPRISE- the chain too thin to turn one cam, doesn't
do any better trying to turn two!
In the 380SL, the single chain can skip or even break, pretty much unprovoked.
With duplex chains, failure is usually initiated by a guide reil breaking and
slipping between chain and gears.
The result is the same- usually four bent valves in one head. Rebuild the head
or better, both heads, replace chain, gears and rails, new tensioner, ghood to
go for another 100,000 miles. Check condition of chain, tensioner and rails
every 30k or so (major services or tuneups).
Richard Sexton
The best bang for the buck is to find a good used 380 engine
that tests (when hot!) with good compression AND already
has a dual row chain. But you want to look for a sedan engine,
when you say "SL" people see dollar signs.
In article <9e8981e4.04042...@posting.google.com>,
Richard Sexton
>How about reliability of the single timing chain versus the dual
>timing chain?
The shortest anybody so far seen a chain break at is 34K mi.
>What happens if one of the chains in a dual chain engine breaks or
>jumps off its guides?
Your engine is destroyed. These are interference engines and the
pistons and valves bang into each other. Best case you bend valves
and gouge pistos. Worst case the valve ead breaks off and gets mached
into the heads ruiing them and the block as well.
Keep in mind only the US got single row 380's and only for
a couple of years.
--
Ptolemy
"Bill Ditmire" <wren...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040422075851...@mb-m25.aol.com...
> "...and when the chain breaks
> the timing will fall
> and down will come valve heads
> pistons and all.."
>
> Eight out of ten times you just get four bent intake valves... occassionally
> more... once in a great while a valve head breaks off and damages both a
piston
> and a cylinder wall, sometimes punching into the cooling jacket.
Here you have suggested an 80% probability. Four questions ...
1- approximately how much to repair?
2- could the engine repair costs be minimized as soon as you hear the slapping
noise of a loose chain to turn off the engine? Or are you basically screwed no
matter what you do?
3- assume you are faced with replacing the engine - are there other alternatives
than another 3.8L engine?
4- What are the probabilities of a well maintained engine lasting for 200k
miles?
Bill Ditmire
Rebuild both heads, some new valves, all new guides, timing chain, gears,
rails, tensioner, water pump, approx $4,000
Add: Change over to duplex chain- $1,800
>2- could the engine repair costs be minimized as soon as you hear the
>slapping
>noise of a loose chain to turn off the engine?
There is not usually any warning to chain failure.>3- assume you are faced with
replacing the engine - are there other
>alternatives
>than another 3.8L engine?
Not realistically. Any "swap" is a Monster Garage project that will cost a
fortune.
>4- What are the probabilities of a well maintained engine lasting for 200k
>miles?
About 100%. Many of these engines have 200 to 300k on them now.
Ptolemy
> >1- approximately how much to repair?
>
> Rebuild both heads, some new valves, all new guides, timing chain, gears,
> rails, tensioner, water pump, approx $4,000
>
> Add: Change over to duplex chain- $1,800
>
> >2- could the engine repair costs be minimized as soon as you hear the
> >slapping
> >noise of a loose chain to turn off the engine?
>
> There is not usually any warning to chain failure.>3- assume you are faced
with
> replacing the engine - are there other
> >alternatives
> >than another 3.8L engine?
>
> Not realistically. Any "swap" is a Monster Garage project that will cost a
> fortune.
> >4- What are the probabilities of a well maintained engine lasting for 200k
> >miles?
>
> About 100%. Many of these engines have 200 to 300k on them now.
Are you saying "about 100%" meaning that a single timing chain 380SL engine that
is well maintained lasting to 200k to 300k miles?
Bill Ditmire
>that
>is well maintained lasting to 200k to 300k miles?
WHOA BOY! NO! There should NOT be any single chain cars by now. If you have
one, DO NOT START THE ENGINE before changing to a duplex chain. Period.
Ptolemy
position which is that the 380SL with single timing chain is an inherently
unreliable design but reliability is greatly improved if converted to dual
timing chain.
What bothers me is that two mercedes reps have told me that the single timing
chain is not that important an issue. One stated that many have gone over 200k
without problems, and another to do regular oil changes and just get the timing
chain replaced when my car reaches 75k miles as a regular service item. Shit,
it Mercedes Benz feels like this is as big an issue as many on the internet, you
would think that they would stand behind their product with a recall. Recently,
Toyota sent me a letter about peoples questions about oil sludge concerns and
Toyota extended the warrantee on engine sludge to eight years. Surely one would
assume a Mercedes engine to have higher reliability than a Toyota - well maybe
not.
"Bill Ditmire" <wren...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040427084504...@mb-m22.aol.com...
Bill Ditmire
>would
>assume a Mercedes engine to have higher reliability than a Toyota - well
>maybe
>not.
Toyota was dragged kicking and screaming to settle the class-action suit
involving late-model, low mileage cars that had engine failure despite proper
maintenance, due to a design defect. For five years they had stonewalled!
Ptolemy
> >Toyota extended the warrantee on engine sludge to eight years. Surely one
> >would
> >assume a Mercedes engine to have higher reliability than a Toyota - well
> >maybe
> >not.
>
> Toyota was dragged kicking and screaming to settle the class-action suit
> involving late-model, low mileage cars that had engine failure despite proper
> maintenance, due to a design defect. For five years they had stonewalled!
>
Welp, at least Toyota came around and backed their engines and Mercedes is not
going to acknowledge a problem. The net result is that I won't purchase anymore
Mercedes but likely will purchase another Toyota.
Bill Ditmire
>not
>going to acknowledge a problem. The net result is that I won't purchase
>anymore
>Mercedes but likely will purchase another Toyota.
You missed the point. Toyota did not "come around." They settled a lawsuit. You
know... instead of risking a jury decision.
Ptolemy
> >Welp, at least Toyota came around and backed their engines and Mercedes is
> >not
> >going to acknowledge a problem. The net result is that I won't purchase
> >anymore
> >Mercedes but likely will purchase another Toyota.
>
> You missed the point. Toyota did not "come around." They settled a lawsuit.
You
> know... instead of risking a jury decision.
>
So, both Mercedes and Toyota did not want to do the 'right' thing --- its that
we let Mercedes get away with it?
Seems to me that the Mercedes engine problem is more serious than the Toyota oil
sludge problem. In any case, the letter I got from Toyota was written like they
were doing a 'community service' or the honorable and right thing for their
customers. I guess its all how good one is wording things. BTW, has Mercedes
even made a public acknowledgement about their engine problem?
Bill Ditmire
>oil
>sludge problem.
Well Mercedes has a closetful of disgraceful issues like this. The "Bicycle
Chain" motor. The whole 3.5 liter Diesel engine program 1990-1995. Derfective
oil pump drive gears 1974-1976 280 with M110 engine. Windage tray breakage
300D/SDL 1986-1987. AC Evaporator failure all mid-nineties Mercedes models.
Head gaskets all twin-cam inline engines 1990 on up. And there are more.
Richard Sexton
Ptolemy <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Thanks for your inputs. I was restating the issue to make perfectly clear your
>position which is that the 380SL with single timing chain is an inherently
>unreliable design but reliability is greatly improved if converted to dual
>timing chain.
>
>What bothers me is that two mercedes reps have told me that the single timing
Can you say "vested interest"?
>chain is not that important an issue. One stated that many have gone over 200k
>without problems, and another to do regular oil changes and just get the timing
I simply don't believe it.
>chain replaced when my car reaches 75k miles as a regular service item. Shit,
>it Mercedes Benz feels like this is as big an issue as many on the internet, you
>would think that they would stand behind their product with a recall. Recently,
You'd think they'd do something about the ovoid bores in thr 3.5L
diesel, too, but no. OTOH if you have an unrepaired 107 chassis
they will still to this day fix it free, same as the trap
oxidizer problem. They're weird about what they'll fix and what
they won't.
Richard Sexton
>customers. I guess its all how good one is wording things. BTW, has Mercedes
>even made a public acknowledgement about their engine problem?
Well, they stopped using the single row timing chain after a
two year experiement on US only cars, that's pretty public.
Ptolemy
single-row timing chain engine. This is something I did last week. A few years
ago, I sent email to Mercedes about this same issue and this is what they said:
MERCEDES STATEMENT START:
"...all we are saying is that it is impossible to predict timing chain failure.
There are too many vairables (age, mileage, usage, driving conditions, etc.),
and because of this we do not provide a listing, or recommended mileage for
replacement. We now only provide a double-rolling chain because we used it on
the new 6 and 8 cylinder engines after 1985. Because it is retrofittable for the
previous engines, why supply both? It is simply an evolution of parts. We don't
feel the single rolling chain is a "time bomb", it was a very effective design,
and yes many have lasted (according to owner reports) in excess of 200,000
miles."
MERCEDES STATEMENT END
Mercedes seems to be telling me from that statement that:
a) the single row timing chain
b) Its a very effective design
c) Its not a "time bomb"
d) That the reason fro going to double row chains is simply to cut down on
inventory of parts
e) that "it is impossible to predict timing chain failure" and "many have lasted
in excess of 200,000 miles"
Sounds like Mercedes is saying this concern about 'single row timing chain" is
all hype. I wonder if the 'data' on these engines will support their stance and
that is the reason I requested data to support their position that the single
timing chain is not as big a concern as many feel.
"Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message news:Hwux...@T-FCN.Net...
Richard Sexton
>all hype. I wonder if the 'data' on these engines will support their stance and
>that is the reason I requested data to support their position that the single
>timing chain is not as big a concern as many feel.
Mercedes has made hundreds if not thousands of different models of
cars and engines. A complete list can be foudn at the bottom of ths
post.
Here is a complete list of all MB motors that use single row
timing chains:
M180 230 (W114)
M180 230.6 (W114)
M123 250 (W123)
M102 up to 1988 (W123,W124,W201except 2.3-16 version.)
M103 300E/CE/TE (W124)
M116 380SE/SEL/SEL Only early crap US version.
1968 W114 250
M180 230 and 230S (W111 65-68)
If they're so good why did they use them so very very infrequently?
Mercedes is the only place you'll hear they're ok. The rest of the world
just giggles and snickers at the idea.
100 980 600 Limo 100 012 1963-1981 2190 SWB
100 980 600 Limo 100 014 1963-1981 0 Four Door Pullman
100 980 600 Limo 100 015 1963-1981 0 2 Door Landaulet
100 980 600 Limo 100 016 1963-1981 0 Six Door Pullman
100 981 300SEL 6.3 Sedan 109 018 1968-1972 6526
100 985 450SEL 6.9 Sedan 116 036 1977-1979 7380
102 920 200 Sedan 123 220 1980-1985 217315
102 920 200T Wagon 123 280 1980-1986 18860
102 963 200E Sedan 124 021 ???- ??? 0
102 980 230CE Coupe 123 243 1980-1985 29858
102 980 230E Sedan 123 223 1980-1985 245882
102 980 230TE Wagon 123 283 1980-1986 42284
102 982 230E Sedan 124 023 ???- ??? 0
102 982 230TE Wagon 124 083 ???- ??? 0
102 983 190E 2.3-16 Sedan 201 034 1986-1987
102 985 190E 2.3 Sedan 201 024 1984-1986
102 985 190E 2.3 Sedan 201 028 1987-1993
103 940 260E Sedan 124 026 1987-1989 0
103 940 300E 2.6 Sedan 124 026 1990-1992
103 940 260E Sedan 124 027 ???- ??? 0 LWB
103 941 260SE Sedan 126 020 1985-1991 20836
103 942 190E 2.6 Sedan 201 029 1987-1993
103 943 260E 4MATIC Sedan 124 226 ???- ??? 0
103 981 300SE Sedan 126 024 1985-1991 105422
103 981 300SEL Sedan 126 025 1985-1991 40958
103 982 230CE Coupe 124 043 102- 982 0
103 982 300SL Roadster 107 041 1985-1989 0
103 983 300E Sedan 124 030 1986-1992
103 983 300TE Wagon 124 090 1988-1989
103 983 300CE Coupe 124 043 ???- ??? 0
103 985 300E 4MATIC Sedan 124 230 1990-1993
103 985 400TE 4MATIC Wagon 124 290 1990-1993
104 941 C280 Sedan 202 028 1994-2000
104 941 C36 Sedan 202 028 1994-1997
104 942 300E 2.8 Sedan 124 028 1993-1993 0 Also Badged 280E/E280
104 942 280E/E280 Sedan 124 029 ???- ??? 0 LWB
104 980 300CE Coupe 124 051 1990-1993
104 980 300CE-24 Cabriolet 124 061 ???- ??? 0
104 980 300CE-24 Coupe 124 050 ???- ??? 0
104 980 300E-24 Sedan 124 031 ???- ??? 0
104 981 300SL Roadster 129 061 1990-1993
104 990 300SE Sedan 140 032 1992-1993
104 990 S320 Sedan 140 032 1994-1994
104 991 SL320 Roadster 129 063 1994-1995
104 992 300CE/E320 Coupe 124 066 1993-1995
104 992 300E/E320 Sedan 124 032 1993-1995
104 992 300TE/E320 Wagon 124 092 1993-1993
104 992 300CE/E320 Coupe 124 052 1994-1995
104 992 E320A Cabriolet 124 066 1994-1995
104 995 E320 Sedan 210 055 1996-2002
104 995 E320 Wagon 210 1998-2002
107 922 200 Sedan 124 020 ???- ??? 0
108 920 250S Sedan 108 012 1965-1969 74677
110 921 280 Sedan 114 060 1972-1976 44537
110 921 280C Coupe 114 073 1972-1976 13151
110 922 280S Sedan 116 020 1972-1976 0 9.0:1 Compression Ratio
110 922 280S Sedan 116 202 1976-1980 0 8.7:1 Compression Ratio
110 923 280 Sedan 123 030 1975-1981 33206
110 923 280C Coupe 123 050 1977-1980 3704
110 924 280S Sedan 126 021 1979-1985 man trans up to 003769 auto up to 007282
110 926 280S Sedan 126 021 1979-1985
110 981 280CE Coupe 114 072 1972-1976 11518
110 981 280E Sedan 114 070 1972-1976 22836
110 982 280SL Roadster 107 042 1971-1976 0 D-Jet inj.
110 982 280SLC Coupe 107 022 1971-1976 0 D-Jet inj.
110 983 280SE Sedan 116 024 1972-1976 0 Elec D-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
110 983 280SEL Sedan 116 025 1972-1976 0 Elec D-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
110 984 280E Sedan 123 033 1975-1978 0
110 984 280CE Coupe 123 053 1977-1978 0
110 985 280SE Sedan 116 024 1976-1978 0 Mech K-Jet FI (8.1:1 Compression Ratio)
110 985 280SEL Sedan 116 025 1976-1978 0 Mech K-Jet FI (8.1:1 Compression Ratio)
110 986 280SL Roadster 107 042 1976-1979 0 K-Jet inj.
110 986 280SLC Coupe 107 022 1976-1979 0 K-Jet inj.
110 987 280SE Sedan 126 022 1979-1985 man trans to 007277, auto to 035562
110 987 280SEL Sedan 126 023 1980-1985 man trans to 007277, auto to 035562
110 988 280E Sedan 123 033 1978-1985 0
110 988 280TE Wagon 123 093 1978-1986 19789
110 988 280CE Coupe 123 053 1980-1985 0
110 989 280SE Sedan 126 022 1979-1985
110 989 280SEL Sedan 126 023 1980-1985
110 990 280SL Roadster 107 042 1979-1985 0 K-Jet inj.
110 990 280SLC Coupe 107 022 1979-1979 1985 K-Jet inj.
110 ??? 280SE Sedan 116 024 1977-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
110 ??? 280SEL Sedan 116 025 1977-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
111 940 200CE/E200 Coupe 124 040 ???- ??? 0
111 940 200CE/E200 Coupe 124 060 ???- ??? 0
111 960 220CE/E220 Cabriolet 124 062 ???- ??? 0
111 960 220E/E220 Coupe 124 042 ???- ??? 0
111 960 220E/E220 Sedan 124 022 ???- ??? 0
111 960 220TE/E220 Wagon 124 082 ???- ??? 0
111 961 C220 Sedan 202 022 1994-1997
111 974 C230 Sedan 202 023 1998-2000
111 ??? SLK230 Cabriolet 170 447 1997- -
112 912 C240 Sedan 203 061 2000- -
112 940 CLK320 Coupe 208 365 1998- -
112 942 ML320 SUV 163 154 1998- -
112 946 C320 Sedan 203 064 2001- -
113 940 E430 Sedan 210 670 1998-2002
113 942 ML430 SUV 163 172 1999- -
113 943 CLK430 Coupe 208 370 1999-
113 960 S500 Sedan 220 175 1999- -
114 920 250 Sedan 114 010 1968-1972 95534
114 920 250C Coupe 114 021 1968-1972 11204
114 980 250CE Coupe 114 022 1968-1972 21787
115 538 200 Sedan 123 020 1976-1980 158772
115 920 220/8 Sedan 115 010 1968-1973 128399
115 923 200/8 Sedan 115 015 1967-1976 288785
115 951 230.4 Sedan 115 017 1973-1976 87609
115 954 230 Sedan 123 023 1976-1981 196185
115 954 230 Sedan 123 023 1977-1978
115 954 230C Coupe 123 043 1977-1980 18675
115 954 230T Wagon 123 083 1978-1980 6884
116 960 380SL Roadster 107 045 1981-1981
116 960 380SLC Coupe 107 024 1981-1981
116 961 380SE Sedan 126 033 1981-1983
116 961 380SE Sedan 126 032 1984-1985
116 962 380SL Roadster 107 045 1982-1985
116 963 380SEC Coupe 126 043 1981-1983
116 964 420SL Roadster 107 047 1985-1989 0
116 965 420SE Sedan 126 034 1985-1991 13996
116 965 420SEC Coupe 126 046 1985-1991
116 965 420SEL Sedan 126 035 1985-1991 74017
116 980 280SE 3.5 Cabriolet 111 027 1969-1971 1232
116 980 280SE 3.5 Coupe 111 026 1969-1971 3270
116 981 300SEL 3.5 Sedan 109 056 1969-1972 9583
116 981 280SE 3.5 Sedan 108 057 1970-1972 8250
116 981 280SEL 3.5 Sedan 108 058 1970-1972 951
116 982 350SLC Coupe 107 023 1971-1973 0 Euro
116 983 350SE Sedan 116 028 1972-1976 0 Elec D-Jet FI (9.3:1 Compression Ratio)
116 983 350SEL Sedan 116 029 1972-1976 0 Elec D-Jet FI (9.3:1 Compression Ratio)
116 984 350SL Roadster 107 043 1971-1976 0 D-Jet inj.
116 984 350SL Roadster 107 043 1976-1980 0 K-Jet inj.
116 985 350SE Sedan 116 028 1976-1978 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.3:1 Compression Ratio)
116 985 350SEL Sedan 116 029 1976-1978 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.3:1 Compression Ratio)
116 ??? 350SE Sedan 116 028 1978-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
116 ??? 350SEL Sedan 116 029 1978-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (9.0:1 Compression Ratio)
117 960 450SLC 5.0 Coupe 107 026 1978-1979 0
117 960 500SL Roadster 107 046 1980-1981 0 Early go hard version
117 960 500SLC Coupe 107 026 1980-1981 0
117 962 500SL Roadster 107 046 1982-1985 0 Later not so good version.
117 963 500SE Sedan 126 036 1980-1985
117 963 500SEC Coupe 126 044 1984-1985
117 963 500SEL Sedan 126 037 1984-1985
117 964 500SL Roadster 107 046 1985-1989 0 Even later ke injection.
117 967 560SL Roadster 107 048 1986-1989
117 968 560SEC Coupe 126 045 1985-1991 28929
117 968 560SEL Sedan 126 039 1985-1991 75051
117 968 560SE Sedan 126 036 1988-1991
117 981 300SEL 4.5 Sedan 109 057 1971-1972 2553
117 982 350/450SL Roadster 107 044 1972-1975 0 EFI 4.5 liter, US badged 350 in 1972
117 982 450SLC Coupe 107 024 1972-1975 Elec inj
117 983 450SE Sedan 116 032 1973-1975 0 Elec D-Jet FI (8.8:1 Compression Ratio)
117 983 450SEL Sedan 116 033 1974-1975 0 Elec D-Jet FI (8.8:1 Compression Ratio)
117 984 280SE 4.5 Sedan 108 067 1971-1972 13527
117 984 280SEL 4.5 Sedan 108 068 1971-1972 8173
117 985 450SL Roadster 107 044 1976-1980 0 CIS 4.5 liter
117 985 450SLC Coupe 107 024 1976-1980 CIS Inj
117 986 450SE Sedan 116 032 1975-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (8.8:1 Compression Ratio)
117 986 450SEL Sedan 116 033 1975-1980 0 Mech K-Jet FI (8.8:1 Compression Ratio)
119 940 200E/E200 Sedan 124 019 ???- ??? 0
119 960 500SL Roadster 129 066 1990-1993
119 970 500SEL Sedan 140 051 1992-1993
119 970 500SEC Coupe 140 070 1993-1993
119 970 S500 Coupe 140 070 1994-1994 0
119 970 S500 Sedan 140 051 1994-1994
119 971 400SE Sedan 140 042 1992-1992
119 971 400SEL Sedan 140 043 1993-1993
119 971 S420 Sedan 140 043 1994-1994
119 972 500SL/SL500 Roadster 129 067 1993-1995
119 974 500E Sedan 124 036 1992-1995
119 975 400E Sedan 124 034 1992-1995
119 985 E420 Sedan 210 072 1997-1997
120 980 600SEL Sedan 140 057 1992-1993
120 980 600SEC Coupe 140 076 1993-1993
120 980 S600 Coupe 140 076 1994-1994 0
120 980 S600 Sedan 140 057 1994- ???
120 981 600SL/SL600 Roadster 129 076 1993-1995
121 920 190b Sedan 121 010 1959-1961
121 921 190SL Roadster 121 040 1955-1961 Hard top only
121 921 190SL Roadster 121 042 1955-1961 Soft top only
121 923 180a Sedan 120 010 1957-1959
121 923 180b Sedan 120 010 1959-1961
121 924 190c Sedan 110 010 1962-1965 130554
121 927 180c Sedan 120 010 1961-1962
121 928 190SL Roadster 121 040 1962-1963 Hard top only
121 928 190SL Roadster 121 042 1962-1963 Soft top only
121 940 200 Sedan 110 010 1965-1966 70207
123 920 250 Sedan 123 026 1976-1979 0
123 920 250 Lang Sedan 123 028 1977-1979 0
123 920 250T Wagon 123 086 1978-1979 0
123 921 250 Sedan 123 026 1979-1985 0
123 921 250 Lang Sedan 123 028 1979-1985 0
123 921 250T Wagon 123 086 1979-1982 0
127 980 220SE Sedan 128 010 1958-1960 0
127 980 220SE Sedan 128 011 1958-1959 0 Sunroof
127 981 230SL Roadster 113 042 1963-1966 19831
127 982 220SEb Sedan 111 014 1959-1965 66086
127 983 220SE Sedan 128 010 1958-1960 0
127 984 220SEb Cabriolet 111 023 1959-1965 2729
127 984 220SEb Coupe 111 021 1959-1965 14179
127 ??? 220SE Cabriolet 128 030 1958-1960
127 ??? 220SE Coupe 128 037 1958-1960
129 980 250SE Coupe 111 021 1965-1967 5259
129 980 250SE Sedan 108 014 1965-1968 55181
129 980 250SE Cabriolet 111 023 1966-1967 954
129 982 250SL Roadster 113 043 1966-1968 5196
130 920 280S Sedan 108 016 1967-1972 93666
130 923 250/8 Sedan 114 011 1969-1976 16830
130 923 250C Coupe 114 023 1969-1972 9388 2.8 Litre
130 980 280SE Cabriolet 111 025 1967-1971 1390
130 980 280SE Coupe 111 024 1967-1971 3797
130 980 280SE Sedan 108 018 1967-1972 91051
130 980 280SEL Sedan 108 019 1968-1971 8250
130 981 300SEL /8 Sedan 109 016 1968-1970 2519
130 983 280SL Roadster 113 044 1968-1971 23885
136 043 170S Cab B Cabriolet 136 043 1949-1951 0
136 920 170V Sedan 136 010 1947-1950 0
136 922 170S Sedan 136 040 1949-1952 0
136 922 170S Sedan 136 049 1949-1952 0 With Sliding Roof
136 922 170S Cab A Cabriolet 136 042 1949-1951 0
136 922 170Sb Sedan 191 010 1952-1953 0
136 922 170Sb Sedan 191 018 1952-1953 0 Sunroof
136 922 170Sb Cab A Cabriolet 191 011 1952-1953 0
136 922 170Sb Cab B Cabriolet 191 012 1952-1953 0
136 923 170Va Sedan 136 060 1950-1953 0
136 923 170Va Sedan 136 072 1950-1953 0 With Sliding Roof
136 923 170Vb Sedan 136 060 1950-1953 0
136 923 170Vb Sedan 136 072 1950-1953 0 With Sliding Roof
136 923 170S-V Sedan 136 081 1953-1955 0
136 926 170S-V Sedan 136 082 1953-1955 0 With Sliding Roof
137 970 S600 Sedan 220 178 2000- -
180 920 220 Sedan 187 011 1951-1953 0
180 920 220 Sedan 187 014 1951-1953 0 With Sliding Roof
180 920 220 Cab A Cabriolet 187 012 1951-1954 0
180 920 220 Cab B Cabriolet 187 013 1951-1954 0
180 920 220 Coupe 187 015 1954-1955 0
180 920 219 Sedan 105 000 1956-1959 Ambulance, partial body, 4 doors
180 920 219 Sedan 105 010 1956-1959
180 920 219 Sedan 105 011 1956-1959 Sliding roof
180 921 220a Sedan 180 010 1954-1956 0
180 924 220S Cabriolet 180 030 1956-1959 0
180 924 220S Sedan 180 010 1956-1959
180 924 220S Sedan 180 011 1956-1959 0 Sunroof
180 924 220S Coupe 180 037 1957-1959 0
180 940 220b Sedan 111 010 1959-1965 69691
180 941 220Sb Sedan 111 012 1959-1965 161119
180 945 230 Sedan 110 011 1965-1966 40258
180 947 230S Sedan 111 010 1965-1968 41107
180 949 230 Sedan 110 011 1965-1966 40258 7/66-1968 w/INAT carbs
180 954 230.6 Sedan 114 015 1967-1976 219208
180 954 230.6 Sedan 114 017 1967-1976 1131 3400mm Wheelbase
186 920 300 Cabriolet 186 013 1951-1954 0
186 920 300 Sedan 186 010 1951-1954 0
186 920 300 Sedan 186 015 1951-1954 0 Sunroof
186 920 300b Sedan 186 010 1954-1955 0
186 920 300b Sedan 186 015 1954-1955 0 Sunroof
186 920 300c Cabriolet 186 033 1955-1957 0 033A, Manual trans.
186 920 300c Sedan 186 016 1955-1957 0 Manual trans.
186 920 300c Sedan 186 017 1955-1957 0 017A, Manual trans, sunroof
186 920 300c Sedan 187 017 1955-1957 0 Manual trans, sunroof
186 921 300c Cabriolet 186 033 1955-1957 0 Auto. trans.
186 921 300c Sedan 186 017 1955-1957 0 Auto trans, sunroof
186 921 300c Sedan 186 916 1955-1957 0 Auto. trans.
186 921 300c Sedan 187 017 1955-1957 0 Auto trans, sunroof
188 920 300S Cabriolet 188 010 1952-1955 0
188 920 300S Coupe 188 011 1952-1955 0
188 920 300S Roadster 188 012 1952-1955 0
189 980 300d Cabriolet 189 033 1958-1962 0 Auto trans
189 980 300d Sedan 189 010 1958-1962 0 Auto trans
189 980 300d Sedan 189 011 1958-1962 0 Auto trans, sunroof
189 981 300d Cabriolet 189 033 1958-1962 0 Manual trans
189 981 300d Sedan 189 010 1958-1962 0 Manual trans
189 981 300d Sedan 189 011 1958-1962 0 Manual trans, sunroof
189 984 300SE Sedan 112 014 1961-1963 3776
189 984 300SE Lang Sedan 112 015 1962-1963 388
189 985 300SE Cabriolet 112 023 1961-1964
189 985 300SE Coupe 112 021 1961-1964
189 986 300SE Sedan 112 014 1964-1965 1426
189 986 300SE Lang Sedan 112 015 1964-1965 1158
189 987 300SE Cabriolet 112 023 1964-1967 0
189 987 300SE Coupe 112 021 1964-1967 0
189 988 300SEL Sedan 109 015 1965-1967 2369
189 989 300SEb Sedan 108 015 1965-1967 2737
198 980 300 SL Coupe 198 040 1954-1957 1371 Gullwing
198 980 300 SL Roadster 198 042 1957-1962 1658 Roasdster
198 981 300 SL Coupe 198 043 1955-1956 29 Gullwing, alloy body
198 982 300 SL Roadster 198 042 1957-1962 200 Roadster, Alloy engine
199 980 300Sc Cabriolet 188 013 1955-1958 0
199 980 300Sc Coupe 188 014 1955-1958 0
199 980 300Sc Roadster 188 015 1955-1958 0
601 912 200D Sedan 124 120 ???- ??? 0
601 921 190D 2.2 Sedan 201 122 1984-1986
602 911 190D 2.5 Sedan 201 126 1987-1989
602 912 250D Sedan 124 125 ???- ??? 0
602 912 250D Sedan 124 127 ???- ??? 0 LWB
602 961 190D 2.5T Sedan 201 128 1987-1987
602 962 300D 2.5 Sedan 124 128 1990-1993 0 Also Badged E250 D Turbo
603 913 300D 4MATIC Sedan 124 330 ???- ??? 0
603 960 300TD Wagon 124 193 1987-1987 0 Turbo
603 960 E300 D Turbo Sedan 124 133 1987-1987 0
603 961 300SDL Sedan 126 125 1986-1987 13830
603 963 E300D 4MATIC Sedan 124 333 ???- ??? 0 Turbo
603 970 350SDL Sedan 126 135 1990-1991 2925
603 970 350SD Sedan 126 134 1991-1991 2066
603 971 300SD Sedan 140 134 1992-1993
603 971 S350 Sedan 140 134 1994-1994
605 911 E250 D Sedan 124 126 ???- ??? 0
605 911 E250 D Sedan 124 129 ???- ??? 0
606 910 E300 D Sedan 124 131 1995-1995 0
606 912 E300D Sedan 210 020 1996-1997
615 912 220D Sedan 115 112 1967-1973 4027 3400mm Wheelbase
615 912 220D Sedan 115 110 1968-1976 412830
615 913 200D/8 Sedan 115 115 1968-1976 339927
615 940 200D Sedan 123 120 1976-1985 378138
615 941 220D Sedan 123 126 1976-1979 56736
616 912 240D Sedan 123 123 1977-1983
616 912 240D Lang Sedan 123 125 1977-1985 0
616 912 240TD Wagon 123 183 1978-1986 38903
616 916 240D Sedan 115 117 1973-1976 126148
617 910 240D Sedan 115 114 1974-1976 53690 3.0 Litre (Badged 300D For US)
617 912 300D Sedan 123 130 1976-1985 0
617 912 300CD Coupe 123 150 1977-1981 7502
617 912 300D Lang Sedan 123 132 1977-1985 0
617 912 300TD Wagon 123 190 1978-1986 36874
617 950 300SD Sedan 116 120 1978-1980 28634
617 951 300SD Sedan 126 120 1980-1985 78726
617 952 300TD Wagon 123 193 1980-1986 28219 Turbo
617 952 300CD Coupe 123 153 1981-1985 8007 Turbo
617 952 300D Turbo Sedan 123 133 1981-1985 75261
619 916 240D Sedan 115 119 1973-1976 3655 3400mm Wheelbase
621 910 190Db Sedan 121 111 1958-1961 0 Sunroof
621 910 190Db Sedan 121 110 1959-1961 Diesel
621 912 190Dc Sedan 110 110 1962-1965 225645
621 914 180Dc Sedan 120 110 1961-1962 Diesel
621 918 200D Sedan 110 110 1966-1967 161618
621 918 200D Sedan 110 116 1967-1967 Long Wheelbase
630 912 300D Sedan 124 130 ???- ??? 0
636 915 170D Sedan 136 110 1949-1950 0
636 916 170Da Sedan 136 160 1950-1953 0
636 916 170Da Sedan 136 172 1950-1953 0 With Sliding Roof
636 916 170Db Sedan 136 160 1950-1953 0
636 916 170Db Sedan 136 172 1950-1953 0 With Sliding Roof
636 918 170Ds Sedan 191 110 1952-1953 0
636 918 170Ds Sedan 191 113 1952-1953 0 Sunroof
636 930 180D Sedan 120 110 1953-1959 Diesel
636 930 180Db Sedan 120 111 1953-1961 0 Sunroof
636 930 180Db Sedan 120 110 1959-1961 Diesel
Jeremy
I would suggest you believe whomever you please in regards to your
timing chain, and we will gladly give you all the advice you need when
it comes to changing your engine. Until then the engineers, mechanic and
mercedes enthusiasts and 380 owners, with hundreds of cumulative years
of experience and no vested interest in the answer, will continue to
state, "Single row chains are a time bomb and may go at any moment,
change them as soon as humanely possible before destroying your engine."
MB will continue to prevaricate, you chose whichever statement suits you
best.
JJ
Ptolemy
opinions I am trying to reconcile with and even though one would think Mercedes
would be the definitive authority, I am at least giving a lot of respect to the
opposing stance. I have no desire to throw away $4 G's to install a dual timing
chain in an engine that seems to 'purr like a kitten' unless I have to. I have
to weigh these two opposing positions and potential costs. Perhaps Mercedes has
even opened themselves up to a class action lawsuit if enough data can be
obtained. I'm kinda pissed about this as I purchased my 380SL thinking I bought
a well designed, well engineered, and highly reliable vehicle. Why the h*ll
would I pay $45K for a car that is a piece of crap. I remember well when I
purchased my SL that I seriously considered the 1984 Corvette at 1/2 the cost I
paid for the SL. I guess I should have instead bought the Vette and have 20 G's
more in my pocket.
I assume those of you who advocate converting to dual timing chain believe the
380SL engine should then be reliable to 200k miles if well maintained.
"Jeremy" <jer...@dcnet2001.com> wrote in message
news:408FD5DF...@dcnet2001.com...
Richard Sexton
>380SL engine should then be reliable to 200k miles if well maintained.
If you're real nice to it it should last longer than that.
Jeremy
If you really want to believe MB, it is your choice.
That year corvette would have already consumed the extra $20k and not be
worth more than $4k, rides like a pig and is what it is, a cheap sports
car.
Where did you get the $4k figure?
If you are so unhappy with buying the SL, I will take it off your hands
for $6k and change the flaming chain myself.
JJ
Ptolemy
"Jeremy" <jer...@dcnet2000.com> wrote in message
news:40902BD7...@dcnet2000.com...
> 400,000 miles should be attainable with proper scheduled maintenance.
> If you really want to believe MB, it is your choice.
> That year corvette would have already consumed the extra $20k and not be
> worth more than $4k, rides like a pig and is what it is, a cheap sports
> car.
>
> Where did you get the $4k figure?
>
> If you are so unhappy with buying the SL, I will take it off your hands
> for $6k and change the flaming chain myself.
Fat chace at $6k - thanks for the offer anyway. Its pristine (no scratches, no
dents, no blemishes, total showroom floor) and h*ll, if I have to, I'll consider
something other than a Mercedes motor if all they have is something unreliable.
Isuzu motors are highly reliable and have more ponies than the 3.8L engine --
now that would be interesting, a half-breed vehicle Mercisuzu. BTW, I saw a
1982 380SL that had a 1986 Camaro motor and transmission that would be
interesting to drive to see what its like. I've seen others with 5.0L Ford
engines, and one with a Mercedes 6.9L engine. Too bad there are not any 'kits'
out there to convert these Mercedes.
Ptolemy
> If you really want to believe MB, it is your choice.
> That year corvette would have already consumed the extra $20k and not be
> worth more than $4k, rides like a pig and is what it is, a cheap sports
> car.
>
> Where did you get the $4k figure?
>
$4k for a dual timing chain conversion? Somebody posted that number a while
back. Have you heard of other costs or what would be a fair cost to have it
done?
Bill Ditmire
>back.
I posted the $4,000 , NOT for a conversion, which costs about $3,000 in a 380SL
(less in a sedan because the pan is split in those). The $4,000 was in answer
to an inqury about the cost of chain FAILURE.
Ptolemy
> >$4k for a dual timing chain conversion? Somebody posted that number a while
> >back.
>
> I posted the $4,000 , NOT for a conversion, which costs about $3,000 in a
380SL
> (less in a sedan because the pan is split in those). The $4,000 was in answer
> to an inqury about the cost of chain FAILURE.
What is the breakdown of parts versus labor for the conversion?
Does the engine have to be 'pulled'?
How many hours does it take?
My AC is the old refrigerant and most likely I would convert to R134 at the same
time.
Bill Ditmire
>Does the engine have to be 'pulled'?
>How many hours does it take?
>My AC is the old refrigerant
You can pull the engine or drop the subframe to pull the pan in the car.
Parts about 1,000, labor about 20-25 hours depending on what else is being done
at the same time. AC conversion not a time factor.
Jeremy
you break the engine by not changing the chain, expect less than $5,000
for it, I was just offering to rescue the car from an untenable
position. If you want to drop something different in it, try the
European 560 engine and really get the performance that the chassis was
built for.
As for the $6k, that was sight unseen, with a car under utilized and
with the old single chain and a fair offer.
JJ
Ptole
Richard Sexton
>dents, no blemishes, total showroom floor) and h*ll, if I have to, I'll consider
>something other than a Mercedes motor if all they have is something unreliable.
>Isuzu motors are highly reliable and have more ponies than the 3.8L engine --
>now that would be interesting, a half-breed vehicle Mercisuzu. BTW, I saw a
>1982 380SL that had a 1986 Camaro motor and transmission that would be
>interesting to drive to see what its like. I've seen others with 5.0L Ford
>engines, and one with a Mercedes 6.9L engine. Too bad there are not any 'kits'
>out there to convert these Mercedes.
With an Isuzu motor? $2500.
I can understand your reluctance to accept that these single chain
motors are not crap because Mercedes says so, but did you mention
you had one before you asked?
Try calling some other MB dealers and chat up the parts
guy and say you're thinking about getting an SL and
ask them what they feel the good points and
bad points are between say a 560SL and a 380SL.
Tom at Calibre motors might be a good plae to start.
Or if you want an outside opinion on the chance everybody
on the Internet is lying to you try asking recognized
authorities; try John Olson at slmarket.com or Todd
Knutson who runs my SL list. They each have decades of
experiece with all things Mercedes and expecially SL's.
Ptolemy
"Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
Well, I certainly am not outright discrediting you guys, instead I am searching
for the truth. In any case, I appreciate you guys giving me advice. You guys
tell me one thing and Mercedes seems to be telling me another. Imagine my
position. I tend to think that "where there's smoke, there's fire" and my
thinking right now is that I need to get the damn chain fixed. I have 37k on my
380SL and she purrs like a kitten - it ought to purr as she is a garage queen
and has had all the scheduled service and more oil changes than a cheap whore.
Most likely sometime in the next few weeks, my 380SL will get the dual chain. I
hope Mercedes will give me a break on this expense.
In any case, what is it going to cost me? The tires are 12 years old (still
looks new though) and they need replacing. So, this is likely to be an
expensive month.
Jeremy
You have had the truth, now time for you to decide. Let us know how it
goes after the chain either gets replaced or broken.
JJ
Ptolemy wrote:
>
> "Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
>
Ptolemy
"Jeremy" <jer...@dcnet20009.com> wrote in message
news:40926D0F...@dcnet20009.com...
> $5k and no more bitching and I will replace the tyres too.
> You have had the truth, now time for you to decide. Let us know how it
> goes after the chain either gets replaced or broken.
> JJ
This morning I stoped at an independent Mercedes repair shop. The guy I talked
with was in his 50's and said he has spent his entire life working on Mercedes
and knows SL's in and out. He claims he is well known in the area for his
Mercedes repair expertise and he seems quite knowledgable. He said that the
380SL is the worst of the 107 group because of the engine being underpowered.
He said that since I bought my 380SL new, did regular service, changed oil
often, and did not abuse it that the single timing chain might not be that that
big an issue. He said he thinks that perhaps those who let the oil get too low
or did not change oil often enough is the reason for the failure. Mine does not
leak oil nor burn oil - just not driven enough. He said he has repaired many
engines when the timing chain failed and his costs were $1700-$2000 to convert
to dual timing chain and $300 to convert the AC to R134 freon. Course, he did
say that it might cost $6k if the chain failed to rebuild the engine.
It would be interesting to obtain 'data' as hard numbers on how these chains
hold up so one can predict with probabilities of potential failure.
Jeremy
your choice, and when It breaks I will not feel that I failed to try to
help
Good luck
JJ
Ptolemy
> Not going to waste any more time trying to convince you, it is your car,
> your choice, and when It breaks I will not feel that I failed to try to
> help
>
> Good luck
Thanks for your advice JJ and most likely your advise is truth. All this talk
has made me sorta paranoid and every little unusual sound from the engine has me
in a state of wondering that I should take you guys advice. I most likely will
have the chain converted but was wondering what 'data' Mercedes has on this
issue and what internal memorandums they have that should be made available to
back up what you say.
I remember when I was looking for an SL seeing an ad in Hemmings Motor News,
around 1982-1983 timeframe. The ad was for a large number of 1978 450SL's that
were stored for an Arab prince and housed at a location here in the USA. I
looked in to this came close to flying out for a look see. I sometimes wished I
had obtained one of those 450SL's instead of my 380SL. Then there was the 500SL
I looked at buying - a German version gray market that would have been air
lifted here. I think I remember that they offered a gray market 280SL too. All
the same body as the 450/380SL but with the Euro bumpers and lights. Had to be
retrofited for safety and evironment regulations but also might have been a
interesting car. The Mercedes mechanics talked me out of the gray market SL --
they bad mouthed the ones they saw.
Richard Sexton
>with was in his 50's and said he has spent his entire life working on Mercedes
>and knows SL's in and out. He claims he is well known in the area for his
>Mercedes repair expertise and he seems quite knowledgable. He said that the
>380SL is the worst of the 107 group because of the engine being underpowered.
The 6 has less HP. If he's so well known what's his name?
>He said that since I bought my 380SL new, did regular service, changed oil
>often, and did not abuse it that the single timing chain might not be that that
>big an issue. He said he thinks that perhaps those who let the oil get too low
>or did not change oil often enough is the reason for the failure. Mine does not
>leak oil nor burn oil - just not driven enough. He said he has repaired many
>engines when the timing chain failed and his costs were $1700-$2000 to convert
>to dual timing chain and $300 to convert the AC to R134 freon. Course, he did
>say that it might cost $6k if the chain failed to rebuild the engine.
>
>It would be interesting to obtain 'data' as hard numbers on how these chains
>hold up so one can predict with probabilities of potential failure.
Dude, give the fuck up already. Everybody and his brother has
assured you these things are ticking time bombs and have been
known to break in as few as 30K miles. Do you really care what
the statistical average is, or MTBF might be for your car? Just
get the damn thing fixed already and be done with it.
The only people you seem to believe are ones that have a vested interest
in your engine failing, have you considered that?
Have you googled "mercedes single row timing chain" ?
http://www.google.com/search?pg=q&fmt=.&q=mercedes+single+row+timing+chain&x=49&y=8
Ptolemy
"Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
Oh yeah, I have googled for "mercedes single row timing chain" and looked at a
lot of websites. I would feel better if I had some data - MTBF, etc for
assurance. You guys have put enough doubt in my mind that I need to get it
converted unless Mercedes can refute (better yet give me some sort of guarantee)
the need for it to be done.
I think this issue is detrimental to 380SL owners and possibly the reason that
it has gone on for so long is what our local independent Mercedes expert stated
that 'Mercedes has never done a recall'. Perhaps Mercedes is willing to abandon
their customers in order to save their reputation?
Richard Sexton
Please pass this on, if you will:
First off, here is a pretty good article on the subject:
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~gbf/107/rt.html
I've played with 107 cars for 13 years. I've seen many early US market
380's succumb to the single row timing chain failure. I've also seen a
number of those cars survive because the timing chain and top rails were
swapped out every 50-60 K miles. The 40K reference in the article is a
bit conservative, but not overly so. It's relatively cheap to just
replace the chain. To the best of my knowledge, MB has stopped
supplying that chain, but there are plenty of alternatives.
To conclude: A conversion is not necessary if the chain is replaced at
50K intervals or less. The cost of a single row chain replacement is
10% of a conversion to a double row, so it's doubtful that there would
be any economic benefit for making the conversion. It's important to
replace the rails, as they can cause as much damage when they get old
and brittle as a snapped or slipped chain.
Todd Knutson
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard J. Sexton [mailto:ric...@killi.net]
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:15 PM
To: to...@mbz.org
Subject: 380 chain
Mr. Knutson;
I read with interest this opinion on Usenet:
"This morning I stoped at an independent Mercedes repair shop. The guy
I talked
with was in his 50's and said he has spent his entire life working on
Mercedes
and knows SL's in and out. He claims he is well known in the area for
his
Mercedes repair expertise and he seems quite knowledgable. He said that
the
380SL is the worst of the 107 group because of the engine being
underpowered.
He said that since I bought my 380SL new, did regular service, changed
oil
often, and did not abuse it that the single timing chain might not be
that that
big an issue. He said he thinks that perhaps those who let the oil get
too low
or did not change oil often enough is the reason for the failure. Mine
does not
leak oil nor burn oil - just not driven enough. He said he has repaired
many
engines when the timing chain failed and his costs were $1700-$2000 to
convert
to dual timing chain and $300 to convert the AC to R134 freon. Course,
he did
say that it might cost $6k if the chain failed to rebuild the engine.
It would be interesting to obtain 'data' as hard numbers on how these
chains
hold up so one can predict with probabilities of potential failure."
I was wondering if yoru group would like to comment on the accuracy of
these statements.
-----------------------
Ptolemy
following:
- Doug Rugg says that at one time Mercedes did convert some of the early 380SLs,
free of charge, to double row chain for some customers.
- Todd Knutson thinks a conversion is not necessary if the chain is replaced at
50K intervals or less.
- My local independent Mercedes mechanic concurs with Todd Knutson.
- But we have other experts whose opinion is that it is necessary to do a
conversion to dual timing chain ASAP.
- Another post states that Mercedes MBUSA Note in its Technical Bulletin that
the single timing chain "MUST NO LONGER BE INSTALLED!!!!"
- Mercedes no longer will supply the single timing chain.
- Still we have 1981-1983 380SL engine failures due to timing chain failures.
My Gosh, this is a highly controversial topic!!! As we say in the software
world, is there a "Best Practice"????
"Richard Sexton" <ric...@vrx.news> wrote in message
news:Hx1rD...@T-FCN.Net...
Raoul
>
> My Gosh, this is a highly controversial topic!!! As we say in the software
> world, is there a "Best Practice"????
>
Best Practice: Replace the single row chain with a double row chain.
There is evidence that the single row chain can break and screw
everything up. You can do various things to give the single row chain
from causing probles, one of which includes replacing the chain every
50K and taking good care of the motor. There is no record of double
row chains breaking and screwing up the motor.
You wanna piss about with a single row chain? Have at it, brother. But
if you want a "Best Practice"- replace it with a double row chain.
Jeff
manapy
Ptolemy wrote:
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
manapy
this thread is repetitive.
you obviously prefer mercedes's information to the info supplied by
everyone else. if you won't let yourself be convinced, there is no need
to post further on the subject.
on a final note, changing a timing chain in a 380SL far from makes it a
piece of crap as you stated in an earlier post.
Ptolemy wrote:
> I have a 380SL, 37k miles, and was wondering what are the syntoms when the
> timing chain breaks?
> Is there a notice giving an advanced warning?
> Say the chain breaks, what are the results - cost, engine damage, etc?
>
>
> What is the cost to put in the "dual timing chain"?
> What happens if the "dual chain" breaks?
>
> My 380SL is strong and purrs like a kitten but it is 21 years old. Is the chain
> metal or some sort of fiber? Does age without regard to milage affect the
> reliability of the chain?
>
> How much does it cost to replace the chain? Only Mercedes can do it?
Ptolemy
from those with a hair-trigger on the reply
key".
No, that is *not* what I was trying to do -- I was seeking to learn the truth
from experts on this newsgroup who are more familar about this subject than I
am. There is a lot of knowledge here and some of it is opposing and I was
trying to discern what to do.
"manapy" <man...@gankish.net.nospam> wrote in message
news:40953079$1...@corp.newsgroups.com...
Ptolemy
"manapy" <man...@gankish.net.nospam> wrote in message
> just change the chain or not.
> this thread is repetitive.
> you obviously prefer mercedes's information to the info supplied by
> everyone else. if you won't let yourself be convinced, there is no need
> to post further on the subject.
If you studied this entire thread, you will find independent Mercedes mechanics
who are on both sides of this issue. Some of these independent mechanics are
adamant that the chain must be replaced ASAP, others that it can exist but
replaced every 50k or so miles. I believe that all the viewpoints were
presented based on what they truely feel is the best thing to do based on their
experiences. I respect all their opinions and wanted a forum to work this out.
>
> on a final note, changing a timing chain in a 380SL far from makes it a
> piece of crap as you stated in an earlier post.
That is a rather vague statement that can be construed both ways.
Bill Ditmire
>who are on both sides of this issue.
the only independent mercedes mechanics on the goofy (single chain OK) side of
this issue are those whose experience is too limited to provide a
representative sample of failures, or are too young to remember that these
engines experienced timing chain failure even within the original warranty
period (36 months/36,000 miles).
William Brown
and on, seeking to keep his post alive.
If memory serves, Ptolemy was an ancient astronomer who believed the
universe revolved around himself, and there is certainly a flavor of
that here.
--
SPAMBLOCK NOTICE! To reply to me, delete the h from apkh.net, if it is
there.
Richard Sexton
Ptolemy <Nyquis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Richard, thanks for the post. Regarding this issue, it appears we have the
>following:
>
>- Doug Rugg says that at one time Mercedes did convert some of the early 380SLs,
>free of charge, to double row chain for some customers.
>
>- Todd Knutson thinks a conversion is not necessary if the chain is replaced at
>50K intervals or less.
>
>- My local independent Mercedes mechanic concurs with Todd Knutson.
>
>- But we have other experts whose opinion is that it is necessary to do a
>conversion to dual timing chain ASAP.
>
>- Another post states that Mercedes MBUSA Note in its Technical Bulletin that
>the single timing chain "MUST NO LONGER BE INSTALLED!!!!"
>
>- Mercedes no longer will supply the single timing chain.
>
>- Still we have 1981-1983 380SL engine failures due to timing chain failures.
>
>
>
>
>My Gosh, this is a highly controversial topic!!! As we say in the software
>world, is there a "Best Practice"????
Yeah, upgrade the chain.
The only conclusion I can draw from this since I don't
have one of these engines and have no vested interest
either way is, if you're REALLY careful and REALLY
lucky and are REALLY good about maintenance then you
can get by with a single row chain. While it is no doubt
possible you'll find higher milage single row engines
I know for a fact of one that was changed at 80K
miles then broke 37K miles later with regular 3000
ile oil changs.
In terms of risk assesement it's prudent to upgrade; if
you feel lucky, don't.
I would never consider buying a single row car, ever.
Benz...@webtv.net
...............END OF THIS THREAD........