2.0 Liter OM604.915 or OM604.917
2.0 Liter OM604.915 or OM604.917
Any information regarding the availability of these engines would be appreciated. It seems that they were only available in certain European markets, but I'm having problems locating one. Wikipedia reports that they were available in Portugal and Germany, but I can find no examples in either country.
FYI - this is the vehicle that the engine would be used in....
![[Image: ChristinaSalt_zps2c79e0ad.jpg]](http://i468.photobucket.com/albums/rr44/Jetmugg/World%20of%20Speed%202014/ChristinaSalt_zps2c79e0ad.jpg)
Steve
I'm looking at the possibility of fitting a 2-liter version of the OM604 engine into my Dodge Rampage for a land speed record attempt. These engines appear to be somewhat uncommon, compared to the 2.2L version of the OM604. However, I need to have an engine with less that 2.015L for the racing class.
Any information regarding the availability of these engines would be appreciated. It seems that they were only available in certain European markets, but I'm having problems locating one. Wikipedia reports that they were available in Portugal and Germany, but I can find no examples in either country.
FYI - this is the vehicle that the engine would be used in....
Steve
The standard OM604 has an 89mm bore and 86.6mm stroke
Does sleeving the engine and a custom crankshaft count as displacement change ??
If so you will probably be able to use an OM601 2.0 crankshaft to reduce the stroke to 84mm and resleeve the engine to fit standard 87mm OM605/606 turbo pistons. Use OM605/606 turbo con rods too.
That will make a 2.0 liter engine with internals just as strong as OM605/606.
I haven't been able to find any of these engines and i live in Europe.
The standard OM604 has an 89mm bore and 86.6mm stroke
Does sleeving the engine and a custom crankshaft count as displacement change ??
If so you will probably be able to use an OM601 2.0 crankshaft to reduce the stroke to 84mm and resleeve the engine to fit standard 87mm OM605/606 turbo pistons. Use OM605/606 turbo con rods too.
That will make a 2.0 liter engine with internals just as strong as OM605/606.
(09-23-2014, 01:07 PM)Petar That will make a 2.0 liter engine with internals just as strong as OM605/606.
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
Wow! That'd be sick!!!
(09-23-2014, 01:07 PM)Petar That will make a 2.0 liter engine with internals just as strong as OM605/606.
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
The sleeving/destroking looks plausible, albeit expensive.
I was hoping to find a complete 2 liter OM604, but they seem to be especially rare.
STeve.
This is a fascinating topic... Consider this combination of parts, and let me know if there's anything prohibitive.
1) Use the 2 liter OM601 block and crankshaft (87mm bore x 84 mm stroke)
2) Use the OM604 DOHC cylinder head. I am not 100% on this, but believe that it may bolt to the OM601 block
3) Use the connecting rods and pistons from an OM606
This would avoid the need to re-sleeve the larger bore OM604 block.
In the USA, however, the 2.0L OM601 block is not available either, but is more readily importable from Europe than the super-rare small bore OM604 block.
Steve.
How about using a 2 liter OM601 block instead of the OM604 block?
Is it possible to bolt the OM604 cylinder head onto the OM601 block?
Steve.
The sanctioning body does not care how the displacement is achieved.
The sleeving/destroking looks plausible, albeit expensive.
I was hoping to find a complete 2 liter OM604, but they seem to be especially rare.
STeve.
This is a fascinating topic... Consider this combination of parts, and let me know if there's anything prohibitive.
1) Use the 2 liter OM601 block and crankshaft (87mm bore x 84 mm stroke)
2) Use the OM604 DOHC cylinder head. I am not 100% on this, but believe that it may bolt to the OM601 block
3) Use the connecting rods and pistons from an OM606
This would avoid the need to re-sleeve the larger bore OM604 block.
In the USA, however, the 2.0L OM601 block is not available either, but is more readily importable from Europe than the super-rare small bore OM604 block.
Steve.
How about using a 2 liter OM601 block instead of the OM604 block?
Is it possible to bolt the OM604 cylinder head onto the OM601 block?
Steve.
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
Was it possibly from some kind of van? The only OM604 I know of over here is the 2.2 typically in a w202 c-class with the unreliable Lucas IP.
Installed:
OM606/722.6, big IC, W220 brakes.
Planned:
DIY manifold, compound, 722.6 controller, built IP.
[i]Less rust.. [/i]
I need to spend some time with the EPC, tracking part#'s and applications for the 604.915 and 604.917 engines.
As far as I can tell, the Mercedes "Vito" small vans never got the 2-liter version. I think those engines were OM601 4-bangers, often as 2.3 liter engines. That much I learned from German Ebay.
Steve.
(09-23-2014, 11:43 PM)benzguy 1) i have seen in California two 190D's with the 2.0 liter engine 2) I never seen an OM604 3) I have connecting rods and pistons from a OM606 any thing is possible with money and patience Nice Dodge Rampage with luck Steve I hope you find the OM 604 2.0
Thank you. I still need to figure out if the OM604 cylinder head will bolt to an OM601 block. The pistons and rods should interchange from the OM606, as noted.
Steve.
The same Lucas IP was fitted to the 2 liter versions of the 604, which were reportedly installed in both C class W202's, and E class W210's, during the years of 1996-1998, only for certain markets. One of those markets is reported to be Portugal.
I need to spend some time with the EPC, tracking part#'s and applications for the 604.915 and 604.917 engines.
As far as I can tell, the Mercedes "Vito" small vans never got the 2-liter version. I think those engines were OM601 4-bangers, often as 2.3 liter engines. That much I learned from German Ebay.
Steve.
(09-23-2014, 11:43 PM)benzguy 1) i have seen in California two 190D's with the 2.0 liter engine 2) I never seen an OM604 3) I have connecting rods and pistons from a OM606 any thing is possible with money and patience Nice Dodge Rampage with luck Steve I hope you find the OM 604 2.0
Thank you. I still need to figure out if the OM604 cylinder head will bolt to an OM601 block. The pistons and rods should interchange from the OM606, as noted.
Steve.
(09-23-2014, 02:36 PM)Jetmugg The sanctioning body does not care how the displacement is achieved.
The sleeving/destroking looks plausible, albeit expensive.
I was hoping to find a complete 2 liter OM604, but they seem to be especially rare.
STeve.
Not sure how expensive this would be but you would need to:
1) Import a complete OM604 minus crank, rods and pistons.
2) Import an OM601 2.0 crankshaft, 84mm stroke
3) Buy 4 OM606 pistons and connecting rods
4) Install and plumb a turbocharger.
Quote:This is a fascinating topic... Consider this combination of parts, and let me know if there's anything prohibitive.
1) Use the 2 liter OM601 block and crankshaft (87mm bore x 84 mm stroke)
2) Use the OM604 DOHC cylinder head. I am not 100% on this, but believe that it may bolt to the OM601 block
3) Use the connecting rods and pistons from an OM606
This would avoid the need to re-sleeve the larger bore OM604 block.
In the USA, however, the 2.0L OM601 block is not available either, but is more readily importable from Europe than the super-rare small bore OM604 block.
Steve.
How about using a 2 liter OM601 block instead of the OM604 block?
Is it possible to bolt the OM604 cylinder head onto the OM601 block?
Steve.
OM601 2.0 and 2.2 blocks should be the same 87mm bore, the difference is in the crankshaft.The 2.2 is stroked to 92.4mm versus the 2.0's 84mm stroke.
I don't think the OM604 head will bolt up to the OM601 block, I could be wrong but i have never seen an OM606 head on a 603 and they are pretty much the same engines but with two cylinders more.
The standard OM601 doesn't have oil squirters for piston cooling so you would need to modify the block and install them.
How much power are you aiming for ? Consider this combination of parts
1) Standard OM601 87mm bore block, with added oil squirters.
2) OM603 pistons
3) OM606 rods (You can use the 603 rods too, but the 606 rods are stronger)
4) OM601 2.0 crankshaft
This engine will be slightly less powerful than the OM604 but you would be able to find all parts locally except the crankshaft.
About the 2.0 OM604 i am unsure whether the outside diameter of the cylinder sleeves is the same between the 87 and 89mm bore if it is you can use standard OM606 sleeves if not you will have to get some custom sleeves
(09-23-2014, 02:36 PM)Jetmugg The sanctioning body does not care how the displacement is achieved.
The sleeving/destroking looks plausible, albeit expensive.
I was hoping to find a complete 2 liter OM604, but they seem to be especially rare.
STeve.
Not sure how expensive this would be but you would need to:
1) Import a complete OM604 minus crank, rods and pistons.
2) Import an OM601 2.0 crankshaft, 84mm stroke
3) Buy 4 OM606 pistons and connecting rods
4) Install and plumb a turbocharger.
Quote:This is a fascinating topic... Consider this combination of parts, and let me know if there's anything prohibitive.
1) Use the 2 liter OM601 block and crankshaft (87mm bore x 84 mm stroke)
2) Use the OM604 DOHC cylinder head. I am not 100% on this, but believe that it may bolt to the OM601 block
3) Use the connecting rods and pistons from an OM606
This would avoid the need to re-sleeve the larger bore OM604 block.
In the USA, however, the 2.0L OM601 block is not available either, but is more readily importable from Europe than the super-rare small bore OM604 block.
Steve.
How about using a 2 liter OM601 block instead of the OM604 block?
Is it possible to bolt the OM604 cylinder head onto the OM601 block?
Steve.
OM601 2.0 and 2.2 blocks should be the same 87mm bore, the difference is in the crankshaft.The 2.2 is stroked to 92.4mm versus the 2.0's 84mm stroke.
I don't think the OM604 head will bolt up to the OM601 block, I could be wrong but i have never seen an OM606 head on a 603 and they are pretty much the same engines but with two cylinders more.
The standard OM601 doesn't have oil squirters for piston cooling so you would need to modify the block and install them.
How much power are you aiming for ? Consider this combination of parts
1) Standard OM601 87mm bore block, with added oil squirters.
2) OM603 pistons
3) OM606 rods (You can use the 603 rods too, but the 606 rods are stronger)
4) OM601 2.0 crankshaft
This engine will be slightly less powerful than the OM604 but you would be able to find all parts locally except the crankshaft.
About the 2.0 OM604 i am unsure whether the outside diameter of the cylinder sleeves is the same between the 87 and 89mm bore if it is you can use standard OM606 sleeves if not you will have to get some custom sleeves
Thank you very much for posting. I think that a usable solution will be the result of these discussions. With regards to your first proposal - importing the entire 604 engine is certainly possible. If I can achieve a 2-liter displacement without sleeving a block, that is my strong preference. The cost to machine and sleeve an 89mm bore block down to 87mm would be substantial. I don't think there are any "standard" sleeves. If I can avoid sleeving a block (custom machine work), that would save me plenty of $$$.
Since this is for a racing application, I would also like to utilize the 4-valve head. Although I could make good power with the 2-valve head, knowing that there is a 4-valve head available means that I would want to take every advantage possible.
THANK YOU very much for reminding me that the 2.2L and 2.0L OM601's both used the same 87mm bore. My mind hadn't absorbed that information yet. In that case, the 2.0L crankshaft is the key to getting the displacement right. In the USA, OM603 and 606 engines are available for pistons and rods.
I know that it's possible to achieve 100 HP per cylinder on the OM60X series of engines. With that in mind, a 400HP 2-liter version would be my ultimate goal. I would like to give the current G/DT land speed record of 129.xx mph a big increase.
Steve.
Petar:
Thank you very much for posting. I think that a usable solution will be the result of these discussions. With regards to your first proposal - importing the entire 604 engine is certainly possible. If I can achieve a 2-liter displacement without sleeving a block, that is my strong preference. The cost to machine and sleeve an 89mm bore block down to 87mm would be substantial. I don't think there are any "standard" sleeves. If I can avoid sleeving a block (custom machine work), that would save me plenty of $$$.
Since this is for a racing application, I would also like to utilize the 4-valve head. Although I could make good power with the 2-valve head, knowing that there is a 4-valve head available means that I would want to take every advantage possible.
THANK YOU very much for reminding me that the 2.2L and 2.0L OM601's both used the same 87mm bore. My mind hadn't absorbed that information yet. In that case, the 2.0L crankshaft is the key to getting the displacement right. In the USA, OM603 and 606 engines are available for pistons and rods.
I know that it's possible to achieve 100 HP per cylinder on the OM60X series of engines. With that in mind, a 400HP 2-liter version would be my ultimate goal. I would like to give the current G/DT land speed record of 129.xx mph a big increase.
Steve.
600hp 606's have been rumored, shoot even with 250-300hp from a 2L you would be cranking.
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
Simpler=Better
09-24-2014, 09:59 AM #10You need to bajoose those headlights!
600hp 606's have been rumored, shoot even with 250-300hp from a 2L you would be cranking.
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
I have already run above the 2L record with my 1.5L VW engine. However, I still want to build a very strong 2L engine. I think the MB OM60X series has more power potential than the readily available VW diesels. The possibility of making 400HP from a 2L OM604 is too much to resist. I have to explore it fully before giving up on the notion.
Steve.
I'm not sure what bajoose means. I would like to cover the headlights, but it is only allowed with factory Mopar Performance covers (P4286820 or P4286821), which are extremely difficult to find. I have been looking for 2+ years, and have not found a single set of them, at any price.
I have already run above the 2L record with my 1.5L VW engine. However, I still want to build a very strong 2L engine. I think the MB OM60X series has more power potential than the readily available VW diesels. The possibility of making 400HP from a 2L OM604 is too much to resist. I have to explore it fully before giving up on the notion.
Steve.
(09-24-2014, 11:16 AM)Jetmugg I am beginning to wonder if MB perhaps used OM601 blocks with OM604 heads to produce the 604.915 and 604.917 engines.
Jeemu reported that he was working on such a hybrid, but he has not posted in some time.
Steve.
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
Duncansport
09-24-2014, 12:27 PM #13(09-24-2014, 11:16 AM)Jetmugg I am beginning to wonder if MB perhaps used OM601 blocks with OM604 heads to produce the 604.915 and 604.917 engines.
Jeemu reported that he was working on such a hybrid, but he has not posted in some time.
Steve.
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
Simpler=Better
09-24-2014, 12:32 PM #14any reason you can't take a 603, deck the block, and install shorter rods?
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
(09-24-2014, 12:32 PM)Simpler=Better any reason you can't take a 603, deck the block, and install shorter rods?
I think I just got lost. Installing shorter rods and a decked block on an OM603 will not yield a 2 liter engine.
Steve.
[/quote]
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
[/quote]
This is encouraging.
Jeemu was saying that some extra holes needed to be drilled in order to accommodate the differences in the water passages.
I have already located a 2.2L OM601, but haven't pulled the trigger on spending the money yet.
(09-24-2014, 12:32 PM)Simpler=Better any reason you can't take a 603, deck the block, and install shorter rods?
I think I just got lost. Installing shorter rods and a decked block on an OM603 will not yield a 2 liter engine.
Steve.
[/quote]
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
[/quote]
This is encouraging.
Jeemu was saying that some extra holes needed to be drilled in order to accommodate the differences in the water passages.
I have already located a 2.2L OM601, but haven't pulled the trigger on spending the money yet.
(09-24-2014, 12:46 PM)Jetmugg(09-24-2014, 12:32 PM)Simpler=Better any reason you can't take a 603, deck the block, and install shorter rods?
I think I just got lost. Installing shorter rods and a decked block on an OM603 will not yield a 2 liter engine.
Steve.
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
[/quote]
This is encouraging.
Jeemu was saying that some extra holes needed to be drilled in order to accommodate the differences in the water passages.
I have already located a 2.2L OM601, but haven't pulled the trigger on spending the money yet.
[/quote]
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
Simpler=Better
09-24-2014, 02:49 PM #16Sorry, had a brain fat. For some reason I though shortening the block would reduce the stroke
(09-24-2014, 12:46 PM)Jetmugg(09-24-2014, 12:32 PM)Simpler=Better any reason you can't take a 603, deck the block, and install shorter rods?
I think I just got lost. Installing shorter rods and a decked block on an OM603 will not yield a 2 liter engine.
Steve.
I have a 602 and 605 engine i can tell you most of the parts are interchangeable. The 605 head easily fits on the 602 block so long as you have to correct pistons. The major difference i noticed is that the water outlets between the cylinders are different between the two.
I would think the same would be mostly true for the 604. EPC shows a lot of similar parts between the two. I would think finding yourself a 601 and some 606/605 rods and pistons and a 604 head would net you a 2.0 604. Wont be so cheap though...
[/quote]
This is encouraging.
Jeemu was saying that some extra holes needed to be drilled in order to accommodate the differences in the water passages.
I have already located a 2.2L OM601, but haven't pulled the trigger on spending the money yet.
[/quote]
Newbie-read this: Cheap Tricks
617.952-220k-Getting built up
larsalan I guess I need to look at this stupid ass drip shit. What you have to like mess with those elements on the pump? What a fucking hassle. then use some wire to hold the throttle open or some shit?
http://www.w124performance.com/service/w...-9272A.pdf
http://www.w124performance.com/service/w...-9273A.pdf
Note that the first doc says that outside diameter of the cylinder sleeve for the 604.910 / 912 (2.2 liter) is 91.5mm
On the other hand 604.915/917 (2.0 liter) and 605/606 engines have sleeves with 90mm external diameter.
So you would need to have some custom sleeves made with 91.5 outside and a bit under 87mm inside diameter
If you could fit the OM604 head on a 601 block that would be great and save you from much trouble.
OM604/5/6 engines are all sleeved from factory i think.Here's what i found
http://www.w124performance.com/service/w...-9272A.pdf
http://www.w124performance.com/service/w...-9273A.pdf
Note that the first doc says that outside diameter of the cylinder sleeve for the 604.910 / 912 (2.2 liter) is 91.5mm
On the other hand 604.915/917 (2.0 liter) and 605/606 engines have sleeves with 90mm external diameter.
So you would need to have some custom sleeves made with 91.5 outside and a bit under 87mm inside diameter
If you could fit the OM604 head on a 601 block that would be great and save you from much trouble.
have u found the 604 engine yet?
i may look around and under the first stone i´ll find one 2.0 604.
a lot 124 200D and 202 200C´s were sold in here, actually was the most famous MB car of the 90thies.
the 220thies were the same but the 220´s CDI.
i´ve seen a few in a place.
604.8xx is the 2200cc u´re talking about in the begining , that is a sprinter/Vito engine. not sedan.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
hy there ,
have u found the 604 engine yet?
i may look around and under the first stone i´ll find one 2.0 604.
a lot 124 200D and 202 200C´s were sold in here, actually was the most famous MB car of the 90thies.
the 220thies were the same but the 220´s CDI.
i´ve seen a few in a place.
604.8xx is the 2200cc u´re talking about in the begining , that is a sprinter/Vito engine. not sedan.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
The W202 cars with OM604.915 or 0M604.917 should be the correct application as-delivered in Portugal, Greece, and some other European countries.
Here in the USA, we never got the OM604. In the W201 cars, we got either a 2.2L OM601 or a 2.5L OM602. We did not get any diesels in W202 chassis.
It gets confusing, as MB supplied different models to different countries. I have a difficult time keeping track. The 2.2L OM604 was available in Germany and UK in sedans. Apparently, in Portugal, the same sedans got the 2.0L version (presumably due to high registration costs for larger engines).
I am trying to keep my options open. If you see any 2.0 604's, I would still be interested.
Steve.
Thank you for the response. I have not found a complete 2 liter OM604 (604.915 or 604.917). I think there is a way to assemble a 2 liter version using a combination of OM601 and OM604 parts. I have a friend in Northern Europe investigating this possibility.
The W202 cars with OM604.915 or 0M604.917 should be the correct application as-delivered in Portugal, Greece, and some other European countries.
Here in the USA, we never got the OM604. In the W201 cars, we got either a 2.2L OM601 or a 2.5L OM602. We did not get any diesels in W202 chassis.
It gets confusing, as MB supplied different models to different countries. I have a difficult time keeping track. The 2.2L OM604 was available in Germany and UK in sedans. Apparently, in Portugal, the same sedans got the 2.0L version (presumably due to high registration costs for larger engines).
I am trying to keep my options open. If you see any 2.0 604's, I would still be interested.
Steve.
same bearing size. Mercedes used diesel crancks in the early amg petrol models m103/m104 3.4l and 3.6l engines, they tok it from 3.5sdl om603.But you have to make som custom rods and maybe add som material to the cranck, it should not be any problem where you live
Get your hands on a m111 78.7mm stroke cranck from 1.8 or a 2.0 mercedes c class or e, i belive it will bolt right inn the om604 same bearing size. Mercedes used diesel crancks in the early amg petrol models m103/m104 3.4l and 3.6l engines, they tok it from 3.5sdl om603.
But you have to make som custom rods and maybe add som material to the cranck, it should not be any problem where you live
do u have any cylinder nr restriction? if not would be easyer to use a 605. maybe in the states u can custom made a crankshaft, cheaper than changing a lot of things. 5 cyl dont have balance issues
, 5 cyl are one cylinder more powerful, reduced stroke alow increased rpm, power stroke is at 144º and so on.regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
i´ll find one for u!!! as i said there are a lot in here. do u want it runing or scrap?
do u have any cylinder nr restriction? if not would be easyer to use a 605. maybe in the states u can custom made a crankshaft, cheaper than changing a lot of things. 5 cyl dont have balance issues , 5 cyl are one cylinder more powerful, reduced stroke alow increased rpm, power stroke is at 144º and so on.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
The class I'm building for has a 2.015 L maximum displacement. The engine needs to fit in the Dodge Rampage depicted above, and it must remain front-wheel-drive. These vehicles were originally fitted with Chrysler 2.2L four cylinder engines mounted transversely. I'm afraid that the 5-cylinder MB engines will be too long to fit correctly under the hood of this little truck.
Thank you very much for the offer of finding a 2-liter 604 in Portugal. I would want one in running condition if possible, although it may not be absolutely necessary. I will discuss this option with the engine builder to see if this is a favorable economic choice.
Steve.
I am really hoping to use as many "factory" MB parts as possible. Custom crankshafts, custom rods, custom pistons, etc are all extremely expensive when compared to actual MB parts, even if they have to be shipped around the world.
The class I'm building for has a 2.015 L maximum displacement. The engine needs to fit in the Dodge Rampage depicted above, and it must remain front-wheel-drive. These vehicles were originally fitted with Chrysler 2.2L four cylinder engines mounted transversely. I'm afraid that the 5-cylinder MB engines will be too long to fit correctly under the hood of this little truck.
Thank you very much for the offer of finding a 2-liter 604 in Portugal. I would want one in running condition if possible, although it may not be absolutely necessary. I will discuss this option with the engine builder to see if this is a favorable economic choice.
Steve.
(09-30-2014, 10:19 AM)Jetmugg I am really hoping to use as many "factory" MB parts as possible. Custom crankshafts, custom rods, custom pistons, etc are all extremely expensive when compared to actual MB parts, even if they have to be shipped around the world.
The class I'm building for has a 2.015 L maximum displacement. The engine needs to fit in the Dodge Rampage depicted above, and it must remain front-wheel-drive. These vehicles were originally fitted with Chrysler 2.2L four cylinder engines mounted transversely. I'm afraid that the 5-cylinder MB engines will be too long to fit correctly under the hood of this little truck.
Thank you very much for the offer of finding a 2-liter 604 in Portugal. I would want one in running condition if possible, although it may not be absolutely necessary. I will discuss this option with the engine builder to see if this is a favorable economic choice.
Steve.
http://www.finn.no/finn/car/used/object?...rough=true
Found one in norway 1480.58 USD newly listed 29. sep 2014 11:41, They are showing up sometimes, only one 604 2.0L registered in finn.no database. if you are going for 604 2.2L they are everywhere.
http://www.finn.no/finn/torget/annonse?f...em51169472
Sorry found yet annotherone in the market Place
bare engine, only 100$ 
(09-30-2014, 10:19 AM)Jetmugg I am really hoping to use as many "factory" MB parts as possible. Custom crankshafts, custom rods, custom pistons, etc are all extremely expensive when compared to actual MB parts, even if they have to be shipped around the world.
The class I'm building for has a 2.015 L maximum displacement. The engine needs to fit in the Dodge Rampage depicted above, and it must remain front-wheel-drive. These vehicles were originally fitted with Chrysler 2.2L four cylinder engines mounted transversely. I'm afraid that the 5-cylinder MB engines will be too long to fit correctly under the hood of this little truck.
Thank you very much for the offer of finding a 2-liter 604 in Portugal. I would want one in running condition if possible, although it may not be absolutely necessary. I will discuss this option with the engine builder to see if this is a favorable economic choice.
Steve.
http://www.finn.no/finn/car/used/object?...rough=true
Found one in norway 1480.58 USD newly listed 29. sep 2014 11:41, They are showing up sometimes, only one 604 2.0L registered in finn.no database. if you are going for 604 2.2L they are everywhere.
http://www.finn.no/finn/torget/annonse?f...em51169472
Sorry found yet annotherone in the market Place
bare engine, only 100$
(09-30-2014, 04:02 PM)Jetmugg WOW - nice finds! I thought the 2 liter 604's were only 1996-1998, but my previous information may not have been correct.
The bare engine for $100 would be a great bargain - even if it's only a boat anchor.
Steve.
No the 604 2.0L were only from 08/1993(94) to 06/1996(97) and 2.2 liter from 08/1993(94)-05/1999(99)
the later 2.2L om604 from 06/1997 - 05/1999 are special ordered taxi spec because of cdi engine from 95
(09-30-2014, 04:02 PM)Jetmugg WOW - nice finds! I thought the 2 liter 604's were only 1996-1998, but my previous information may not have been correct.
The bare engine for $100 would be a great bargain - even if it's only a boat anchor.
Steve.
No the 604 2.0L were only from 08/1993(94) to 06/1996(97) and 2.2 liter from 08/1993(94)-05/1999(99)
the later 2.2L om604 from 06/1997 - 05/1999 are special ordered taxi spec because of cdi engine from 95
it is a real candidate for what u need, not a heavy and slow MB rear axel drive wich will last ages but short burst , that is my opinion now that i understood what u want to do!!!
any how i´ve been busy working and did not had time to check about your 604.
by monday i hope to have a answear for u.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
for a front drive wheel small car like that, why dont u consider a VW/AUDI engine, like the ones we find in europe in the model A3, Seat Ibiza, and vw golf IV, they are 4 cyl, 2000cc, bosch VE IP wich is a lot easier to tweek, some are known to ride under the 10 sec mark, at least i know of one wich makes 9.3 very often.
it is a real candidate for what u need, not a heavy and slow MB rear axel drive wich will last ages but short burst , that is my opinion now that i understood what u want to do!!!
any how i´ve been busy working and did not had time to check about your 604.
by monday i hope to have a answear for u.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
the thing is one wont fit a 606 in a 4ton truck, usually u fit a cummins 5.5
, despite the 606 is able to deliver the same hp.regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
no! no! they have not , the thing is usually people fits them in what u call sedans, 2t cars, for a one ton car a vw/audi is a far better option belive me!! not even the black smoke 203, will be able to make it below the 10sec mark. and many vw/audi engines have done it!!
the thing is one wont fit a 606 in a 4ton truck, usually u fit a cummins 5.5 , despite the 606 is able to deliver the same hp.
regards
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
There is a considerable difference between a drag race and a land speed record attempt.
The static weight of the vehicle is important for 1/4 mile drag racing, but will not be the determining factor in a 3 mile, or 5 mile long land speed attempt. Many high-powered LSR vehicles have weight intentionally added to improve traction. Weights of 3T are not uncommon for coupes and sedans on the salt. Even roadsters can weigh more than this.
For land speed racing attempts, equilibrium will be reached between the vehicle's ability to apply power to the salt surface and aerodynamic drag.
For the same vehicle (the Dodge Rampage depicted above), more absolute power = higher top speed. The rules do not allow for any aerodynamic modifications to the stock body. Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Steve.
Power to weight ratio isn't really a big factor for land speed racing vehicles. It's the absolute power that wins the race for top speed.
There is a considerable difference between a drag race and a land speed record attempt.
The static weight of the vehicle is important for 1/4 mile drag racing, but will not be the determining factor in a 3 mile, or 5 mile long land speed attempt. Many high-powered LSR vehicles have weight intentionally added to improve traction. Weights of 3T are not uncommon for coupes and sedans on the salt. Even roadsters can weigh more than this.
For land speed racing attempts, equilibrium will be reached between the vehicle's ability to apply power to the salt surface and aerodynamic drag.
For the same vehicle (the Dodge Rampage depicted above), more absolute power = higher top speed. The rules do not allow for any aerodynamic modifications to the stock body. Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Steve.
raysorenson
10-06-2014, 08:19 PM #31The VAG stuff won't rev out like an IDI Merc. Ignoring the RPM/horsepower relationship, peak HP below 4000 rpm has got to make gearing difficult for land speed attempts.
(10-06-2014, 03:33 PM)Jetmugg Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Slightly off topic:
Is there any class differentiation between 4-stroke and 2-stroke diesel engines?
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
(10-06-2014, 03:33 PM)Jetmugg Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Slightly off topic:
Is there any class differentiation between 4-stroke and 2-stroke diesel engines?
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
It also puts on quite a smoke show!
Steve.
There is not any differentiation between 2 and 4 stroke diesels. There was a guy with a Ford F250 running a 12 cylinder Detroit (I believe) 2-stroke Diesel. It's the #1292 truck, and that thing is a jaw-dropper. It's an extended cab F250 that has a complete "flop top", like a funny car. The truck's body is hinged at the rear bumper, and the whole body tilts up to give access to the engine and driver's compartment.
It also puts on quite a smoke show!
Steve.
(10-07-2014, 07:21 AM)Jetmugg There was a guy with a Ford F250 running a 12 cylinder Detroit (I believe) 2-stroke Diesel. It's the #1292 truck, and that thing is a jaw-dropper. It's an extended cab F250 that has a complete "flop top", like a funny car. The truck's body is hinged at the rear bumper, and the whole body tilts up to give access to the engine and driver's compartment.Impressive! 220MPH @ 14,000lbs?! Boeing 737 tires?! What?!
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
(10-07-2014, 07:21 AM)Jetmugg There was a guy with a Ford F250 running a 12 cylinder Detroit (I believe) 2-stroke Diesel. It's the #1292 truck, and that thing is a jaw-dropper. It's an extended cab F250 that has a complete "flop top", like a funny car. The truck's body is hinged at the rear bumper, and the whole body tilts up to give access to the engine and driver's compartment.Impressive! 220MPH @ 14,000lbs?! Boeing 737 tires?! What?!
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD - 160k
'06.5 VW Jetta TDI - 230k
'82 MB 300TD - 116k (motor going to raysorenson)
'81 MB 300TD - 195k (parting out)
'71 Jeep DJ5 - diesel conversion project
(10-06-2014, 03:33 PM)Jetmugg Power to weight ratio isn't really a big factor for land speed racing vehicles. It's the absolute power that wins the race for top speed.
There is a considerable difference between a drag race and a land speed record attempt.
The static weight of the vehicle is important for 1/4 mile drag racing, but will not be the determining factor in a 3 mile, or 5 mile long land speed attempt. Many high-powered LSR vehicles have weight intentionally added to improve traction. Weights of 3T are not uncommon for coupes and sedans on the salt. Even roadsters can weigh more than this.
For land speed racing attempts, equilibrium will be reached between the vehicle's ability to apply power to the salt surface and aerodynamic drag.
For the same vehicle (the Dodge Rampage depicted above), more absolute power = higher top speed. The rules do not allow for any aerodynamic modifications to the stock body. Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Steve.
i got your point, well who i´m i to insist on the vw/audi thing, go ahead with 4 cyl MB.
i´ll see if i can find u a decent engine at an afordable price, lets say shiping cost
, the rest u can find there in the US, like bearing caps and rings lalala, so that u can rebuild the damm thing to your intentions, lol u going to need a IP, do u have MB vito in the 2.2 TD version up there?
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
(10-06-2014, 03:33 PM)Jetmugg Power to weight ratio isn't really a big factor for land speed racing vehicles. It's the absolute power that wins the race for top speed.
There is a considerable difference between a drag race and a land speed record attempt.
The static weight of the vehicle is important for 1/4 mile drag racing, but will not be the determining factor in a 3 mile, or 5 mile long land speed attempt. Many high-powered LSR vehicles have weight intentionally added to improve traction. Weights of 3T are not uncommon for coupes and sedans on the salt. Even roadsters can weigh more than this.
For land speed racing attempts, equilibrium will be reached between the vehicle's ability to apply power to the salt surface and aerodynamic drag.
For the same vehicle (the Dodge Rampage depicted above), more absolute power = higher top speed. The rules do not allow for any aerodynamic modifications to the stock body. Underhood, however, just about anything is OK, as long as it burns diesel fuel.
Steve.
i got your point, well who i´m i to insist on the vw/audi thing, go ahead with 4 cyl MB.
i´ll see if i can find u a decent engine at an afordable price, lets say shiping cost
, the rest u can find there in the US, like bearing caps and rings lalala, so that u can rebuild the damm thing to your intentions, lol u going to need a IP, do u have MB vito in the 2.2 TD version up there?
FD,
Powered by tractor fuel
For anyone interested, here's a brief article about the #1292 Ford truck with the 12 cylinder 2-stroke diesel and 737 tires...
http://bangshift.com/bangshiftxl/bangshi...it-diesel/
Barrote - Thank you very much for your offer. I think I have the situation taken care of, by way of a 604 cylinder head and a 2.0L OM601 bottom end, but it is not 100% complete yet - still in development.
For anyone interested, here's a brief article about the #1292 Ford truck with the 12 cylinder 2-stroke diesel and 737 tires...
http://bangshift.com/bangshiftxl/bangshi...it-diesel/
1 Guest(s)
1 Guest(s)