This thread is in moderation, please PM me for details.

(06-27-2009 05:39 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  722.4 (W4A020)- 145lb/ft
...

This is interesting. I wonder if they were referring to w201 installed 722.4. The '85 Cali w123 with a 617 and a w124 with a 603 engine also had this trans and they had higher torque ratings.

The trans I am going to install in my '84 CD is out of a '82TD, the # on the pass side of the case is 126 270 2801 722.303 02 328118. When I tore the car for parts I found out the engine had problems but that had put in a fresh trans.

(06-29-2009 10:04 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  This is interesting. I wonder if they were referring to w201 installed 722.4. The '85 Cali w123 with a 617 and a w124 with a 603 engine also had this trans and they had higher torque ratings.

I know, it doesn't make much sense to me either. I'm just going off the information I've gathered. The bit about the W4A0x0 torque capacity rating came from one of the Finns so I'm inclined to believe it.

(06-27-2009 05:39 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  722.0 (W3A040)- 290lb/ft
722.1 (W4B020 or W4B025)- 145/180lb/ft
722.2 (W4B025)- 180lb/ft
722.3 (W4A040)- 290lb/ft
722.4 (W4A020)- 145lb/ft
722.5 (W5A030)- 216lb/ft
722.6 (W5A580)- 578lb/ft

Well, my 79 300SD is about screwed (722.1), my wagon should be alright for a little while (722.3), and my CDI has plenty of room to go (722.6)! Now I know why the SD cuts back power in first gear....

Wow, thats good info.
I never knew there were so many differences on W123's. The more I learn about them the more I see how different they are year to year.
I can't wait to look at what trans I have, in the car and others lying around.
I guess stall speeds never changed though.

(07-02-2009 11:28 PM)GileadGarage Wrote:  I guess stall speeds never changed though.

The '85 torque converter has like 2400rpm stall speed, right?

Will the '85 722.4 torque converter slide right into the '84 722.3 trans, I was wondering if the pump and input shafts were still the same?

(07-03-2009 09:40 AM)Motorhead Wrote:  Will the '85 722.4 torque converter slide right into the '84 722.3 trans, I was wondering if the pump and input shafts were still the same?

No.

I know I am going to end up with a converter being made, any other options out there?

Did I read correctly somewhere else here, that one could put 722.6 guts into older cases?

Is there any turn:psi to the .3 modulator adjustment?



EDIT: Just got a fast e-mail response from Sun Valley Mercedes

Quote:One turn is approximately 10 P.S.I.

Is there any turn:psi to the .3 modulator adjustment?



EDIT: Just got a fast e-mail response from Sun Valley Mercedes

Quote:One turn is approximately 10 P.S.I.

EDIT 2: More info found.
   

I know some people are against free downloads but I'm not giving this away. I'm simply telling you where it is.
It's a non-factory service manual for the 722 trans. 100+ pages in pdf. Enjoy.
http://xxxxxxxxxxx/722-3%20722-4.pdf

(10-16-2009 04:13 PM)mcb Wrote:  I know some people are against free downloads but I'm not giving this away.

Sorry, its copyrighted material.

You can purchase the book mcb linked to here: http://atsg.com/cart/products/Mercedes_7...104-3.html

Where can I purchase a 722.1x manual?
Peter

I have a 95 e300d and was wondering which transmission I have I plan to turbo my na606 and am worried about the trans.

I'd like to see a list in this thread of the inputs needed for each transmission to function correctly. And whether electronically or mechanically controlled.
Especially the later ones- 722.5 and up. This would be helpful for anyone doing 603 swaps and possibly for someone (maybe me?) who might try a "franken 5-speed" auto box

(07-14-2009 04:37 PM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  Is there any turn:psi to the .3 modulator adjustment?

EDIT: Just got a fast e-mail response from Sun Valley Mercedes

Quote:One turn is approximately 10 P.S.I.

Hello

Is it one complete turn(360 degrees) you mean?
Do i only need to loosen those 2 bolts and turn it with the clock to get a little harder shift?

Best regards

(08-04-2010 09:36 AM)BRABUS Wrote:  Is it one complete turn(360 degrees) you mean?

Quote:Do i only need to loosen those 2 bolts and turn it with the clock to get a little harder shift?

There is only a rubber cap over the t-bar.

I found a good picture showing the case differences from the 722.3 and 722.4
   

Where can i get a 722.6?

On 722.6 the 580 should name the max. torque in Nm directly AFAIK.

I´ve talked to an MB Transmission technican today, and must say, that the information posted here is unfortunately false.

The torque which those trannys can handle is NOT validated through the last 2 numbers of the W5A/B... numbers.

There are so many different variances of all aof those transmissions, like 722.1/2/3/4/5/6xx which all have different torque ratings.

So there are per example 722.5 transmissions which are rated up to 1080Nm coming in the 12Cylinder AMG engines, and 722.9 transmissions rated up to 735Nm.

The 722.4 per example is an fully hydraulic actuated transmission (besides 2 soleniods), with brake bands, 722.5 is actually an 722.4 but extended with an 5th gear which is electronically controlled. 722.6 is fully electronic controlled without brake bands but friction discs.

722.623 has per example the above stated 580Nm torque handling capacity, but there are also 722.6xx transmissions rated to only 330Nm...

Regards, Alex

Very interesting info.

majesty78

"The 722.4 per example is an fully hydraulic actuated transmission (besides 2 soleniods), with brake bands, 722.5 is actually an 722.4 but extended with an 5th gear which is electronically controlled."

Can you ask MB Transmission technican about 722.3 and 722.4, what max input torque for this transmissions? 1080 Nm as a 722.5 transmissions? Sorry for bad English.

Thank you so much.

Good news! I found a transmission specialist who is experienced with the mercedes 722 series trannys, and has the knowledge to and a source for parts to upgrade my 722.3 to handle , oh say, 400hp.......bad news! it will cost between 4500 and 6000 dollars to actually do it......ok, so my 300sd is an 85 federal model...are there ANY other transmissions that are direct bolt ons that will handle a REASONABLE amount of power, say 300 hp? what about a 722.4? any suggestions? this whole darn thing would sure be a lot easier if a trans from say, a 500sel would just bolt right up..but NOOOOO, and yes, i do have the goods to make that kind of power ready to go, but it won't do any good if the tranny can't play nice....thanks guys!! hope your all havin as much fun as I am with this stuff

Nope. Everything post-1985 is left side starter that would require major fabrication to make fit. Gut-swapping is pretty much the only option unless you swap in a 603/606. The 450SEL 6.9 had 400lb/ft torque and right hand starter, but it was a 3-speed.

(09-05-2010 03:44 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  I found a good picture showing the case differences from the 722.3 and 722.4

what one is the 722.3? i take it its the bigger one so it has more room for bigger clutches. i just wanna make sure, im looking to buy a 300sd and tune up the engine alittle i just dont wanna end up with a trans thats gunna blow up right away

722.4 is the smaller one made for the W201 series and its small engines.

My parts guy shared that the 722.4 came on a 1991-93 300SL, and led me to believe that this was an all hydraulic 5 spd. Can this be true?

(01-03-2011 07:41 PM)krashappy Wrote:  My parts guy shared that the 722.4 came on a 1991-93 300SL, and led me to believe that this was an all hydraulic 5 spd. Can this be true?

I think your describing a 722.5
It's hydraulic 1-4th gears but I think it has an electronic actuator to go from 4th to 5th. It mates up to the om60x motors.

2 corrections:

1) Torque is measured in force*distance, lb/ft is not a unit of torque.
2) The 722.4 spec of 145 ft*lb above is bogus (if it's actually supposed to be in ft*lb). My OM602 makes 168 ft*lb of torque stock through it's 722.4.

(01-20-2011 07:05 PM)OM617a Wrote:  False.
FYI; Pounds is a unit of force and a foot is a unit of distance.

? my problem wasn't with the units of force and distance, but with the division rather than multiplication. lb*ft (pounds multiplied by feet) is a unit of torque, lb/ft (pounds divided by feet) is not.

(01-20-2011 07:05 PM)OM617a Wrote:  Incorrect. Its common for manufacturers to underspec equipment.

I don't think Mercedes would spec their own transmissions significantly lower than the engines they use with them. I'd expect them to be able to handle more then the specs say, but not for their own specs to show the transmissions unsuitable for the applications they sell them in.

(01-21-2011 08:21 AM)OM617a Wrote:  

(01-20-2011 07:12 PM)casioqv Wrote:  ? my problem wasn't with the units of force and distance, but with the division rather than multiplication.

Your problem is that you don't understand how the English language is used in this context..

Casioqv is correct. Torque is measured as force*distance. Not force/distance

(01-21-2011 08:21 AM)OM617a Wrote:  Your problem is that you don't understand how the English language is used in this context.

This isn't English, it's math. Mathematics is a language by itself, with clearly defined standardized rules. I've taken several physics courses taught by professors whom spoke *zero* English and fully understood the lectures from the mathematics alone.

(01-21-2011 08:21 AM)OM617a Wrote:  Then don't look at the specs.

No competent engineer would design a car with a transmission spec'd far below the engines they used with them. It violates the most basic principle of engineering "CYA."

The information in this thread is verifiably incorrect, and it should be un-stickied in my opinion.

I'm not interested in convincing or arguing with you any further, but subsequent readers can use their own judgment to make a decision on weather to believe and use this information.

(01-21-2011 10:48 AM)Syncro_G Wrote:  Casioqv is correct. Torque is measured as force*distance. Not force/distance

Incorrect, you both have failed to understand that lb/ft is a term used as a description of torque.
Please stop polluting my thread with your useless posts.

---

(01-21-2011 04:56 PM)casioqv Wrote:  No competent engineer would design a car with a transmission spec'd far below the engines they used with them.

Nobody suggested an engineer did anything of the sort, bean counters are in control of final assembly.

Quote:and it should be un-stickied in my opinion.

The solution is simple, STOP READING THE THREAD.
Those that want accurate information may continue to view this thread.

Quote:I'm not interested in convincing or arguing with you any further

Yes, please run away.

(01-23-2011 11:14 AM)ForcedInduction Wrote:  Incorrect, you both have failed to understand that lb/ft is a term used as a description of torque.

Incorrect. It is lb*ft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

Guess you can't win em all.

What is the difference between a 722.303 ('80 300SD) and a 722.315 ('82 300D Turbo)?

(04-25-2011 10:47 PM)Captain America Wrote:  What is the difference between a 722.303 ('80 300SD) and a 722.315 ('82 300D Turbo)?

Actually a 1980 300SD had the 722.120 transmission. The 1981 had the 722.303..... Details, details.

The difference between the .303 and .315 is the tail. .303 is setup for the electronic speedo and the .315 is setup for a mechanical speedo.

Tail swap is straight forward. So for your swap, use the better trans.


.

(04-26-2011 03:02 AM)DeliveryValve Wrote:  

(04-25-2011 10:47 PM)Captain America Wrote:  What is the difference between a 722.303 ('80 300SD) and a 722.315 ('82 300D Turbo)?

Actually a 1980 300SD had the 722.120 transmission. The 1981 had the 722.303..... Details, details.

The difference between the .303 and .315 is the tail. .303 is setup for the electronic speedo and the .315 is setup for a mechanical speedo.

Tail swap is straight forward. So for your swap, use the better trans.


.

Nice catch DV! Thank you sir! My mistake haha I have too many Benzo's!

---

Is there a way to get the trans info back up?

much info but not sure yet how much
the transmission can really handle

i think the strongest automatic 722.6 is the 722.649 this is connected
to the 65 amg and handle 1000nm

is there some how now what is the differents between the

722.6xx series for expample what is the differents between the
722.608 300 td diesel
722.623 some v8 petrols
722.649 e65 amg,s

i though it will only be the torque converter and some differents
in shifting?? why ?

i found this on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G-Tronic

here is standing that a the 5g-tronic (722.5 and 722.6) can handle

""796lb/ft"" this 1079 nm

Internals are different, stronger boxes have different friction discs or more of them to handle higher torque, different planetary gears and i guess also different torque converter.

is there anywhere some documentation
about the 722.6 serie transmission

i found 722.3 and 722.4

but not 722.5 or 722.6

722.0 (W3A040)- 290lb/ft
722.1 (W4B020 or W4B025)- 145/180lb/ft
722.2 (W4B025)- 180lb/ft
722.3 (W4A040)- 290lb/ft
722.4 (W4A020)- 145lb/ft
722.5 (W5A030)- 216lb/ft
722.6 (W5A580)- 578lb/ft

(09-09-2010 03:38 AM)majesty78 Wrote:  I´ve talked to an MB Transmission technican today, and must say, that the information posted here is unfortunately false.

The torque which those trannys can handle is NOT validated through the last 2 numbers of the W5A/B... numbers.

There are so many different variances of all aof those transmissions, like 722.1/2/3/4/5/6xx which all have different torque ratings.

So there are per example 722.5 transmissions which are rated up to 1080Nm coming in the 12Cylinder AMG engines, and 722.9 transmissions rated up to 735Nm.

The 722.4 per example is an fully hydraulic actuated transmission (besides 2 soleniods), with brake bands, 722.5 is actually an 722.4 but extended with an 5th gear which is electronically controlled. 722.6 is fully electronic controlled without brake bands but friction discs.

722.623 has per example the above stated 580Nm torque handling capacity, but there are also 722.6xx transmissions rated to only 330Nm...

Regards, Alex

Hi,sorry for my english,I'm automatic transmission rebuilder and mercedes fanatic.Alex,sorry but your technician is no very good.722.5 never was coupled with V12 only 722.3 and 722.6 .722.5 is no 722.4 with OD,but 722.3 with electronicaly aktivated OD,like chrysler transmissions.Most problems in 722.5 is OD,it is cause why rated torque for 722.5 is smaller when for 722.3. The 722.3 is very best transmission in mercedes,if this transmission was with 6.0 v12 and 7.2 v12 it can handle much power.this year in my shop was an W140 7.2 Koenig all internals frictions,steel,bands,planetary was standart,not tuning ,but this engine is
up to 405 kw / 550 HP / 760 nm rated.The 722.4 is "-zoom"copy of 722.3
all clutch packs ,bands is smaller in diameter,inner plate career was aluminium,but valve body is same,oil pump is bearing style,governor helical gears plastic.722.3 and 722.4 is all hydraulik controlled only kickdown is activated with solenoid like in THM400,and 722.5 added solenoid for OD. The 722.6 is the best 5 speed in world (its my opinion,like MB is the best),if you want much torque is no need to upgrade you 722.3 for "cost between 4500 and 6000 dollars to actually do it" is very expensive, best way is to add an controller to 722.6 ,you can bolt on all bellhousings without problems(if you have 722.6 from an s500 you can bolt on bellhousing from l6 and bolt to you 606.912 add fuel ).If this trans work with 6.1 hemi with 606 will too.

HI All
Just picked up a 722.5 Trans (in need of a rebiuld) was thinking about installing it in my 1987 190DT.
Have plans upon swapping in the diff from a 190e16V. Either the 3.07 or 3.27
I think the lower gear ratio combined with an overdrive gear it should perform much better.
Have the 16v sway bars and front brakes with drilled rotors on all 4 corners with 6X16 AMG Penta wheels (1986 vintage) 205/55/16.

Some issues:
converting trans to a speedo cable and controlling 5 gear lock up (maybe a floor shifter with the "B" gear lock up and a push botton switch for overdrive?)

Any advice?

All So:

WTB a set of injectors for the OM602 (with threads on the bottom) and an IP pump (both need to be at a reasonable price I am car poor - have too many of those thangs!!!)

hi denkoleso!

thanks for that info!

so is there any other option for a manual 5 or 6 speed that can hold 750NM of my 606 turbo? i had 3 717.433 that is not a good option
what abaut a 716 6 speed manual? is there a good option that hold more torque?

thx

(11-24-2011 01:42 PM)tinchariot Wrote:  HI All
Just picked up a 722.5 Trans (in need of a rebiuld) was thinking about installing it in my 1987 190DT.
Have plans upon swapping in the diff from a 190e16V. Either the 3.07 or 3.27
I think the lower gear ratio combined with an overdrive gear it should perform much better.
Have the 16v sway bars and front brakes with drilled rotors on all 4 corners with 6X16 AMG Penta wheels (1986 vintage) 205/55/16.

Some issues:
converting trans to a speedo cable and controlling 5 gear lock up (maybe a floor shifter with the "B" gear lock up and a push botton switch for overdrive?)

Any advice?

All So:

WTB a set of injectors for the OM602 (with threads on the bottom) and an IP pump (both need to be at a reasonable price I am car poor - have too many of those thangs!!!)

which om602 do you have? 2.5 n/a , 2.9 n/a or 2.9 turbo