Ford ranger with a mercedes 300TD?

[david85]

I was curious if anyone here knows how good the mercedes transmissions are in the late 70s early 80s?

It'll probably never happen but I'm thinking to use a mercedes 300TD in an OBS ford ranger. Wondering if I should use an adapter plate at keep the original wide ratio 5 speed or try and adapt a mercedes transmission. I think I could probably make up an adapter plate so that wouldn't be a problem.

Any info on the auto or more rare manual would be appreciated.

Also how tough are thes engines? I know they can deliver long service life, but in terms of durability and being worked harder, how would they hold up in a light pickup application?

 

[IH8MUDTOO]

been a few weeks since you posted the question, but the best example of an MB diesel swap is on the 4BTswaps forum. The guy's username is "someone" and he put an MB turbo-diesel into a 4Runner and used a home-fabbed plate and paid a little to get the flywheel machined and a bearing machined in order to use the Toyota tranny.

 

[The Warden]

FWIW AFAIK the manuals are fairly stout...I've never heard of one failing. That said, just about any manual you're going to find will be a 4 speed....a 5 speed meant to fit behind an OM617 exists, but it's VERY rare, and a 5 speed out of a 190D will not work (starter mounts on the other side, among other differences). For that reason, if you want a manual, I would keep the 5 speed that's in the Ranger...

As to the automatics....they're okay for an auto. I don't think they fail especially often, but I don't think they're any more bulletproof than other slushboxes on the road. Keep in mind that, even though it's a 4 speed, there's no overdrive gear.

One other thing to keep in mind, if you want to adapt an M-B tranny in along with the engine, is that the tranny output is different from anything else you'll see. It doesn't have a slip yoke or any sort of yoke for a U-joint...instead, it has a 3-fingered plate. It's connected to the driveshaft through a rubber donut that looks and behaves similar to a steering rag joint. IIRC people have made adapters to bolt to this and allow you to fit a U-joint, but it's another headache to deal with.

One last item of note about tranny mountings is that the 617 already has an adapter plate...so, it would be a relatively easy matter of removing that plate and having a machine shop make a replacement plate with the right holes on the engine side and the proper mounting points for the Ranger's tranny on the other side. At that point, the biggest issue will be in getting a clutch setup to work...honestly, I don't know how that would work. FWIW a flywheel for a 240D manual tranny will work on a 300D without issue, and will be MUCH easier to find than a 300D flywheel.

As to the engines...these engines were also used in G-wagens in the '70's and '80's, and a few people have swapped them into Unimogs and have been happy with them. I don't think I'd want one in an F-350 but I think it'd be a perfect power plant for a Ranger. FWIW I would try to gear it so that it's turning at 2000 to 2500 RPM at the speeds you most commonly travel at...being a bit closer to 2500 RPM would be a good thing, and you certainly don't want to cruise under 2000 as it'll lug the engine. I for one would LOVE to see what a turbo 617 does with a 5 speed behind it

Hope this helps a bit...

 

[david85]

They went through the trouble of making a 4 speed auto and its not overdrive?:***:

I guess if the engine is happy at 2500 maybe it was pointless.

Definately sounds like its not worth attempting to use any of the mercedes transmissions.

As it so happens, we now have the ability to make adapter plates so that wouldn't be a problem. Don't think I have the time for such a project any time soon though. Almost wonder if adapting a ford AOD would be the ticket.

Thanks for the info, guys.

 

[gonecrazyi]

What about a vw engine, maybe a 1.6 turbo motor. They tend to be reliable, they just tend to be a little more difficult to work on.

 

[The Warden]

They went through the trouble of making a 4 speed auto and its not overdrive?:***:

IIRC the basic tranny was designed in the early to mid '70's, when most people thought an overdrive gear was unnecessary. For that matter, how common were overdrive automatics before the mid '80's?

Definately sounds like its not worth attempting to use any of the mercedes transmissions.

As it so happens, we now have the ability to make adapter plates so that wouldn't be a problem. Don't think I have the time for such a project any time soon though. Almost wonder if adapting a ford AOD would be the ticket.

I agree that attempting to use an M-B tranny isn't worth the time. M-B trannies aren't terrible, but IMHO they're nothing to write home about, either. Getting the vacuum all happy would be a royal PITA, and adapting it into the Ford would just plain be more trouble than it's worth IMHO. I don't see why an AOD wouldn't work once the adapter plate's made and whatnot, although I'm not sure how much trouble you'd have adapting the torque converter....with that said, I want to see how a 617 will behave behind a 5 speed manual

BTW, in case you didn't know this already, these engines use a vacuum engine shut-off, so you'll want to either put a vacuum switch in the cab or find a way to adapt a vacuum switch into the key assembly. M-B did it by integrating a vacuum switch into the key assembly, so that vacuum's applied to the valve on the IP when the engine's shut off. In fact, there's a shut-off lever on the engine...if you lose your vacuum for any reason (dead pump, broken line, etc), that lever's the only way to shut the engine off other than cutting a fuel line

What about a vw engine, maybe a 1.6 turbo motor. They tend to be reliable, they just tend to be a little more difficult to work on.

Would a VW engine have enough power to comfortably move a Ranger? I'm not sure what their power output is. You'd also have to be mindful of the aluminum cylinder head...

 

[gonecrazyi]

Im not sure of how fast it would get it moving, but once up to speed my 1.6 had plenty of power to move the car(loaded with 5 guys) down the road at 80-85 with the ac on. This is with a stock 5 sp 1.6 turbo motor. I think they were rated at around 60 hp.

The aluminum head really isnt all the bad. A set of guages and a mindful driver usually saves that.

Over on vwdiesel.net, there are several members that have reliable 1.6's in the 150 hp range. Thats far more than the stock 90 hp 2.3.

 

[david85]

If I were to ever go through the trouble of another diesels swap there are 2 conditions that I will place on the engine of choice.

1) No aluminum head

2) No rubber band timing train, especially on an interference engine.

I can forgive other quirks or weaknesses, but those to are not negotiable no matter what reputation the engines might have.

Although at this rate, the 2.3 seems ready keep going indefinately even if it fails to meet those to requirements (bought it before I knew any better).

 

[The Warden]

For what it's worth, here's a torque/HP graph I found that covers both the n/a and turbo 617's in stock form...in fact, I think this graph came from an M-B factory shop manual (which explains why the numbers are in KW and n-m instead of ft-lbs and HP). The "OM617a" curves are for the turbo engine; the other's for the n/a engine.

And, FWIW, these engines hit the governor at 5400 RPM although the 617's I've run generally upshift at about 4500 RPM.

And, gonecrazy, just curious....do you have a graph or anything similar on a stock or semi-stock VW from that vintage? I'm just wondering how they compare....certainly, the M-B's a heavier engine for the power it puts out...

 

[gonecrazyi]

Ill have to take a look and see what I can find for dyno numbers. Im sure I can dig something up later.

 

[-=DeanstuD=-]

http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/1877713906.html

You must be registered for see images

Not affiliated, just thught it was fitting for the thread.