Jul 8, 2015 - 3 min - Uploaded by MercedesDieselGuyIn this update, I discuss removing the transmission and clutch from my 1983 Mercedes-Benz. Sep 12, 2014 Someone suggested the T-5 so did a little more research and: The Mercedes transmissions are generally short and.

Is it a stout transmission? Is it easy to rebuild? I ask because I am contemplating a diesel swap into my Land Rover Range Rover Classic. I know the OM617 doesn't produce the same power as my gasser, but I rarely use the power of my gasser anyway (I drive like a granny). I kind of like the idea of an engine that will run forever and not tear up my running gear (some other diesels produce too much power for my stock Rover stuff).

I have figured out how to divorce my LT230 transfer case so I am looking for a suitable 2wd diesel donor car with a manual transmission (or auto if it is really short).the OM617 is high on my list due to availability, price, and durability. I am curious about the manual trannies. I have heard the autos need rebuilds often compared to the engines, I am wondering if the manuals are the same.and if they are, how easily are they rebuilt?

I am divorcing the transfer case the same way Mike Slade's crew cab was done. There are a couple places online that describe it. You take the output flange assembly from the front output of an LT230, widen the splines hole in the center, press a rover coupler shaft through it, and weld the seams. Then you take place your assembly into the LT230 input and take the PTO port off of your LT230.

Use a bolt and a couple washers through the coupler (it is hollow) to hold it in place. Replace the PTO port. Now you have a divorced LT230 just like Mike Slade's.

Not easily done, as I recall. I think the flywheels are different from a 617 and a 615 (w123 240D engine). 4speed manual Mercedes transmissions are worth their weight. A lot of the Mercedes guys want them.In addition these motors are ballanced as a complete assembly. My factory engine manual goes into detail as to the ballancing of the flywheel. Each motor is individually ballanced as a complete unit and the final adjusting done to the flywheel.

If you look at your flywheel you will see factory paint marks, note this before you remove (the bolt circle is even) and have the replacement flywheel match ballanced. I just found this site and find it quite interesting. I have personally logged close to a million miles in 123 Mercedes cars with 616 diesels and four speed transmissions and my family. Has driven them probably another several hundred thousand miles. No one besides myself ever put a wrench on these cars so I'm quite familiar with them.

The 617/616 engine family are the diesels used from about 1977 to 1985. The engines were used in the 126 series chassis which were the big bodied cars such as the 300SD. They were also and much more commonly found in the 123 series cars that were the 240D and 300D. The 240 having the four cylinder 616 engine while the 300D having the five cylinder version. Basically same engines. In all the 126 chassis cars and in the last four years, 82-85 of the 123 cars were turbocharged versions of the 617.

The turbo versions recieved internal improvements to cope with the turbo. In US models manual transmissions were available and widely sold in the 240D cars from 77 to 83. The 240 model was dropped in the US lineup beginning 84. There were never any manual transmission 300D's in the US lineup, but were quite common in Europe with both four and five speeds. A few of them made it to the US as grey market cars.

There were NEVER, even in Europe, turbo 617's sold with a manual transmission. A few have been built by US enthusiasts with varying levels of success.

The manual transmission from the 240D will indeed fit onto a 617 five cylinder engine, but there are a few things that one should be aware of: The early 123 cars, 77-to somewhere in the 80 model year, had a different manual transmission and starter than did the late cars. They will interchange IF the adapter plate that corresponds to the transmission is used. Bosch Wfb 3200 Manual Woodworkers. In the 123 chassis, due to engine length, the transmission is moved further back in the chassis necessitating a custom driveshaft, but in the context of this thread or even this forum, custom driveshaft would be a given anyway.

Additionally, the starters in the early and late versions are different. It's an achilles heel of these cars because the starters will interchange to the point of bolting in place, but there are slight dimensional differences that will wear the starter and flywheel ring gear teeth rapidly. This is not a typical MB engineering occurrence. The manual transmissions are quite robust. I drove my first 240D almost 300,000 miles and my second to just over a half million miles without ever opening up the transmission. I changed the oil in it every 100,000 miles.

I understand that they are not an easy rebuild, but with a shop press it can be accomplished, but parts are expensive. The 5 cylinder transmission is the same as the four and I fully expect that unless bang shifted like a drag racer, it would last forever behind a 617 or 616 MB diesel engine in whatever chassis situation it were properly installed into. I have lots of wrenching and interchangability knowledge for this family of cars, so feel free to PM or email me with any questions. Manual transmissions in many cases are cheaper and easier to rebuild, but that's a moot point, since unless abused, they never need rebuilding. I have driven many cars multiple hundreds of thousands of miles without ever doing ANYTHING to a manual transmission except change the lubricant every 100,000 miles or so. That's one of the things I love about them, low maintenance. I have a car with over 300,000 miles which not only has ever had the manual transmission touched, but it still has the factory clutch.

How many fluid and filter changes would that car have seen had it been equipped with an automatic? Give it to a sixteen year old kid, however, and it might need both in a few thousand miles, even if it were new, but driven properly, they are almost totally maintenance free. I have gotten flamed SO many times on discussion forums because of my complete love and admiration for manual transmissions. On the other side, even though I'm certified by ASE on automatic transmissions, I LOATHE them! I hate driving them, I hate maintaining them and I hate rebuilding them! So, what I have learned is that transmission choice is as much opinion related as is color choice.

The VAST majority of Americans today prefer automatic transmissions. Go to Europe and you have a tough time finding automatic transmissions in cars. Of course, they are paying $8 a gallon for gas over there, so there's not much money left for auto frills and they need to save a fraction of an MPG wherever they can. Please don't flame me! I'm not knocking those that love their slush boxes. It's personal choice, and I respect anyone's opinions and tastes. On top of that, on a forum like this one, personal taste and opinion is everything.

That's why people here are doing engine swaps. Schlepper, Since finding this site my head is spinning with MB engine transplants possibilities. If you are not talking about a 4X4 Toyota or Nissan pickup, and you're not talking about an auto gearbox, I would use the MB gearbox. Also, if you're looking for reliabilty and economy as opposed to performance I would swap in the 616 as opposed to the 617. The four cylinder version is SUPER easy to work on, more fuel efficient and compact as diesels go and DIRT reliable if maintained properly. I have one that I and my son took past 500,000 miles.

If you are looking to mate the 616/617 (same bellhousing fit) to the native Toyota or Nissan transmission, I would expect that you would have to build your own adapter. This might not be as tough as you think because of the way they are fitted into the MB vehicles. All the 616/617 engines have the same four bolt mount on the rear of the engine. A transmission 'adapter' bolts to the engine, and the transmission bolts to the 'adapter.'

If you're an accomplished fabricator/machinist type or know of someone who is, look at the desired transmission and one of the MB Adapters and see what it would take. If you were to go this far, you would want set it up with some eccentrics or something in order to be able to adjust for crankshaft/input shaft concentricity. I have a couple of parts cars with very rebuildable 616 engines and manual transmissions.

My thinking is puttig one of these units in a Ranger pickup. These trucks are light enough, as would be the Japanese trucks, that the 240 engine would move it along quite well. There should be plenty of room in the engine compartment. The only major variable I haven't looked into is sump location. The 616/617 have front sump oil pans. Since most modern Fords have front sumps, the Ranger probably does too. As to your power question, maybe I don't have to point it out here on a diesel forum, but diesels don't develop much horsepower.

Horsepower is a calculated value that is mathematically advanced when the torque peak is at a high RPM. The 616's made about 63 HP in the early version and 67 in the later version. The Normally Aspirated(NA) 617's made about 78 HP and the Turbo versions made a little over 100, maybe more like 115.

There are plenty of tweaks that can be done on the Turbo version, at the expense of engine life of course. The 123 car is close to 3,500 pounds in it's standard form and the 67 Horsepower with a manual transmission moves the car along quite well and can cruise all day long at 85MPH. I've done that 75 to 85 MPH cruising for many hundreds of thousands of miles in an earlier life. The same car with the MB automatic is a DOG to drive, however. Hope you find this rambling useful. Manual transmissions in many cases are cheaper and easier to rebuild, but that's a moot point, since unless abused, they never need rebuilding. I have driven many cars multiple hundreds of thousands of miles without ever doing ANYTHING to a manual transmission except change the lubricant every 100,000 miles or so.

That's one of the things I love about them, low maintenance. I have a car with over 300,000 miles which not only has ever had the manual transmission touched, but it still has the factory clutch. How many fluid and filter changes would that car have seen had it been equipped with an automatic? Скачать Driver Sony Vaio Windows 7. Give it to a sixteen year old kid, however, and it might need both in a few thousand miles, even if it were new, but driven properly, they are almost totally maintenance free. So, what I have learned is that transmission choice is as much opinion related as is color choice.

The VAST majority of Americans today prefer automatic transmissions. Go to Europe and you have a tough time finding automatic transmissions in cars. Of course, they are paying $8 a gallon for gas over there, so there's not much money left for auto frills and they need to save a fraction of an MPG wherever they can.maybe for this reasons manual-automated transmissions are having an increased popularity in europe and even the u.s. As they're basically a manual transmission with a sequential selective device such as that found on motorcycles with an automated clutch (as i don't like to use the clutch pedal i like this system) and a 'robot' to change the gears 'on-the-time' if the driver select the fully-automated mode. Mexican ford fiesta uses this kind of transmission, but it's a double-clutch one just like volkswagen's dsg, with one clutch activated to get a lower gear ready to be shifted and the other clutch ready to shift for a higher gear. Probably chrysler will replace some of their automatic transmissions for some of this kind soon. I just found this site and find it quite interesting.

I have personally logged close to a million miles in 123 Mercedes cars with 616 diesels and four speed transmissions and my family. Has driven them probably another several hundred thousand miles. No one besides myself ever put a wrench on these cars so I'm quite familiar with them. The 617/616 engine family are the diesels used from about 1977 to 1985. The engines were used in the 126 series chassis which were the big bodied cars such as the 300SD. They were also and much more commonly found in the 123 series cars that were the 240D and 300D. The 240 having the four cylinder 616 engine while the 300D having the five cylinder version.

Basically same engines. In all the 126 chassis cars and in the last four years, 82-85 of the 123 cars were turbocharged versions of the 617. The turbo versions recieved internal improvements to cope with the turbo. In US models manual transmissions were available and widely sold in the 240D cars from 77 to 83. The 240 model was dropped in the US lineup beginning 84. There were never any manual transmission 300D's in the US lineup, but were quite common in Europe with both four and five speeds. A few of them made it to the US as grey market cars.

There were NEVER, even in Europe, turbo 617's sold with a manual transmission. A few have been built by US enthusiasts with varying levels of success. The manual transmission from the 240D will indeed fit onto a 617 five cylinder engine, but there are a few things that one should be aware of: The early 123 cars, 77-to somewhere in the 80 model year, had a different manual transmission and starter than did the late cars.

They will interchange IF the adapter plate that corresponds to the transmission is used. In the 123 chassis, due to engine length, the transmission is moved further back in the chassis necessitating a custom driveshaft, but in the context of this thread or even this forum, custom driveshaft would be a given anyway. Additionally, the starters in the early and late versions are different. It's an achilles heel of these cars because the starters will interchange to the point of bolting in place, but there are slight dimensional differences that will wear the starter and flywheel ring gear teeth rapidly. This is not a typical MB engineering occurrence.

The manual transmissions are quite robust. I drove my first 240D almost 300,000 miles and my second to just over a half million miles without ever opening up the transmission. I changed the oil in it every 100,000 miles. I understand that they are not an easy rebuild, but with a shop press it can be accomplished, but parts are expensive. The 5 cylinder transmission is the same as the four and I fully expect that unless bang shifted like a drag racer, it would last forever behind a 617 or 616 MB diesel engine in whatever chassis situation it were properly installed into. I have lots of wrenching and interchangability knowledge for this family of cars, so feel free to PM or email me with any questions.

So if we swap out a manual mb tranz--or are doing a swap using a mb manual flywheel-we should be sure to use a 240d manual tranz starter rather than a 300d automatic starter?The various paddle shift transmissions still lose the simplicity and durability of a manual transmission with the clutch pedal. If that's what you like then that's what you should drive. For me, I'm not interested in driving, maintaining or repairing an automatic transmission of any description. Give me a handle and a clutch pedal.

That's just me and I have no problem with those who prefer anything otherwise whether it has a clutch pedal or not. To my knowledge the paddle shift transmissions are just electronic controlled transmissions which allows Mfg.'

S to use whatever switch arrangement they like. For the starter thing. No my point was not that an auto and manual starter are different. An early (77 to 80) is different than a late (81 to 85.) Within the year ranges the starters interchange between auto's and manuals. Hope this is useful.

My humble suggestion is that you stick with your manual transmission.even if it is broken fix it and it will still last you another generation. If you want an auto transmission car, its best to buy one that came with a factory fitted auto transmission. The reason i dont recommend the transplant is because, the auto transmission in these cars are controlled by vacuum modulators, so installing an auto transmission involves poking around with the vacuum system which always turns out to be a head ache if you dont have the correct diagrams, let alone the expertise. And on top of all that the drop in fuel efficiency by about 3 kilometers/liter. Messing around with the shifter assembly. Oh and most importantly its a bit slow.

I just saw your question about the cost of conversion. The person who wants to do the exchange is gaining out of the deal so he should pay you. I am about the check a potential w123 buy but have been informed by the seller that the transmission (4speed manual) has a humming noise. From my (somewhat limited) DIY experience it seems like a badly worn bearing in the tranny.

Could be input shaft bearing, main drive bearing counter shaft bearing.??? This could mean a neglected car which has not seen frequent oil changes. But of course this would need a physical examination. Can any of you tell me if you have had similar experience with your w123 trannys and what was the diagnosis and what was the cost involved? I am a bit worried because the owner informed me that he replaced the tranny from a donor car? Does this mean it is cheaper/smarter to do that rather than fix a couple of worn bearings?

Or there could be other issues lurking under?