wiring harness fix
03-21-2006, 08:51 AM
#26
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Berkshire England
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E320 Coupe
Jim's500E
The engine output of the 104 3.2 engine was higher, in terms of bhp per litre, than both the 4.2 V8 and the 5.0 V8 and is a superb engine.
The reason for changing the in-line 6 for the V6 in the 210 was basically vanity.
As you know the in line 6 is a long engine and they wanted to build future cars with lower sloping bonnet lines at the front (as you see in today's cars).
The in-line 6 would have prevented this, as there would have to be a bulge in the bonnet (hood) to accommodate the long engine. The V6 is only 3 cylinders in length.
Normally you would expect a manufacturer to improve on the performance of it's next generation engines, but on this occasion it was in many ways a backward step.
No more power.
No more torque.
It needed double the spark plugs, and each plug was much more expensive.
The engine only had one overhead cam per bank.
And of course the a V6 engine is not intrinsically balanced like a straight 6 is, so they had to build-in a harmonic balancer system, which has caused lots of problems.
Anyway at last there is a new V6 engine out now, and it is much better, reverting back to 4 valves per cylinder and twin overhead cams etc etc, and this should have been the replacement engine all along.
Regards
The engine output of the 104 3.2 engine was higher, in terms of bhp per litre, than both the 4.2 V8 and the 5.0 V8 and is a superb engine.
The reason for changing the in-line 6 for the V6 in the 210 was basically vanity.
As you know the in line 6 is a long engine and they wanted to build future cars with lower sloping bonnet lines at the front (as you see in today's cars).
The in-line 6 would have prevented this, as there would have to be a bulge in the bonnet (hood) to accommodate the long engine. The V6 is only 3 cylinders in length.
Normally you would expect a manufacturer to improve on the performance of it's next generation engines, but on this occasion it was in many ways a backward step.
No more power.
No more torque.
It needed double the spark plugs, and each plug was much more expensive.
The engine only had one overhead cam per bank.
And of course the a V6 engine is not intrinsically balanced like a straight 6 is, so they had to build-in a harmonic balancer system, which has caused lots of problems.
Anyway at last there is a new V6 engine out now, and it is much better, reverting back to 4 valves per cylinder and twin overhead cams etc etc, and this should have been the replacement engine all along.
Regards
03-21-2006, 01:52 PM
#27
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jim's500E
That's good info to hear 
....one would think they got it right now after all the trouble and complaints MB had on them materials they used originally.
The M119 upper harness has close to 20 connectors...how many on the 3.2 24? In my mind it have have to be double the connectors to justify double the price. And didn't the W210 use the 'old' M119 motor for some of its early V8s? Seeing in how the M119 was used for 10+ years and the 3.2 M104 for not nearly as long, you decide which is the better motor, putting power and torque aside. Funny, but a friend has a 210 with the almost the exact same M119 as mine...it was prepeared by RennTech for the 1997 One Lap of America.
Anyway, considering a 3.2 M104ed W124 is worth maybe 7-9$ USD...I sure would be pissed if I bought one and found out it needed a part that cost over 10% of its residual value for it to run right...
but, hey , that's just me.
....one would think they got it right now after all the trouble and complaints MB had on them materials they used originally.The M119 upper harness has close to 20 connectors...how many on the 3.2 24? In my mind it have have to be double the connectors to justify double the price. And didn't the W210 use the 'old' M119 motor for some of its early V8s? Seeing in how the M119 was used for 10+ years and the 3.2 M104 for not nearly as long, you decide which is the better motor, putting power and torque aside. Funny, but a friend has a 210 with the almost the exact same M119 as mine...it was prepeared by RennTech for the 1997 One Lap of America.
Anyway, considering a 3.2 M104ed W124 is worth maybe 7-9$ USD...I sure would be pissed if I bought one and found out it needed a part that cost over 10% of its residual value for it to run right...
but, hey , that's just me.
I think they are both great engines, each with there own set of problems. Hey, wife willing there may be a 500E in my future. 
