It's time to get crazy - Page 2 - MBWorld.org Forums

Feb 15, 2011 | 03:59 PM

#26

TruTaing

Moderator Alumni

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 3,255

Likes: 22

From: Seattle

w203 m112

I was following this on the xf forums! Glad to see its made its way over here, but I would still LOVE to see someone stuff an m113k into a standard w203 or better yet id like to see that 6.2L v8 m156 with matching 7 spd in a standard w203 :x

Anyone know the weights of the following motors:

M112
M112k
M113
M113k
M156

Just curious to see the weight differences between the motors.

Feb 15, 2011 | 04:08 PM

#27

mskembo

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Sep 2010

Posts: 1,089

Likes: 6

From: Salt Lake City, UT

2010 Mercedes-Benz E350

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruTaing

I couldn't find them listed by engine model, but I found an older list. From Here. It's a decent starting point. I would assume that due to advances in metallurgy, and the increased complexities the engine weight is similar, if not a little less. Considering what these numbers say, I'd bet you can guess within 50lbs what a M112 or M113 weighs. Add 30+lbs for the supercharger and necessary accouterments.

Mercedes SOHC V8 alum. 452 (2)
Mercedes SOHC V8 iron 540 (2)
Mercedes 5.6L V8 467 (57) 1987
Mercedes OM 615 Diesel 447 (16)
Mercedes M291 flat-12 374 (66) with starter, alt, exh, no clutch
Mercedes 500I V8 305 (46) 1994 pushrod Turbo Indy motor (Penske)
Mercedes/Ilmor Indy V8 273 (57, 60) 72 deg V Turbo Indy motor
Mercedes/Ilmor DOHC V8 280 (89) 1995 IC 108 model, no clutch

Feb 15, 2011 | 07:55 PM

#28

samaritrey

Super Moderator

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 5,295

Likes: 22

From: VA

THE C350

Quote:

Originally Posted by eesjunin

no all na? he he and what might that be? So C63 no SC and E63 SC?

na = naturally aspirated
all the 63s are Naturally aspirated

Feb 15, 2011 | 08:45 PM

#29

W203E35

Thread Starter

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2009

Posts: 5,537

Likes: 8

2006 C350 Sport 6MT

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy

M3s are pretty nice, I agree.

That was a good one

Feb 15, 2011 | 09:36 PM

#30

W203E35

Thread Starter

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2009

Posts: 5,537

Likes: 8

2006 C350 Sport 6MT

An E55k engine swap will crap on a C55 with a Kleemann Kompressor any day. You'll surprise a lot of C63s as well. The sleeper looks is definitely more worth it too

Feb 28, 2011 | 05:34 PM

#31

BHeart

Member

Joined: Jan 2011

Posts: 133

Likes: 0

C55 AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by mskembo

Speaking from a place of complete ignorance (when it pertains to MB performance) The hottest W203 ever made was the C55, so taking a W203 and putting a 55K engine in is like taking a C55 and putting a Kleeman supercharger on it, but instead of pushing that stock C55 engine harder than it was intended you are using an engine that was designed and built with the Kompressor calculated into the equation. Also, it's really about the same amount of money since the Kleeman supercharger kit is roughly $10K.

As to dropping a V10 or V12 into a W203... sorry I need some alone time.

This sparked a new question for me (which knowing this crowd of great minds has probably already been answered). But has anybody done side by side comparsion (initial hp/tq output, and then maintainability/reliability over lets say 50-100K mi) between a 55K stock engine and a NA modified Kleeman??? Just curious

Reply Subscribe