Ultimate Street Sleeper - Mercedes W124 'Superturbodiesel'
Discussion
VeeFource said:
Sorry to say you did better with the full stop. MT is a qualified Engineer, not an Opinioneer and went to the trouble of backing his reasoning up which he really shouldn't have to have done given his experience. Do you think Formula 1 teams build an engine from bits they find on the internet and then drive it about a bit to check? No because their clever enough to get it almost bang on with the theory in the first place and then do the fine tuning in the real world just to perfect it,
PHers like MT are worth their weight in gold on this site so it really beggars belief how poorly they're treated. One day you'll start a thread to resolve a problem with your car and all you'll get back is a load of tosh because all the guys that really know what their talking about will have b¥€€£&£d off thanks to people like you. Thanks for spoiling it for the rest of us too btw!.
Just to add; I'm all for a bit of shed engineering and experimentation! Just not when these people start proclaiming they've beaten physics and the real Engineers haven't a clue.
You added nothing there apart from opinion.PHers like MT are worth their weight in gold on this site so it really beggars belief how poorly they're treated. One day you'll start a thread to resolve a problem with your car and all you'll get back is a load of tosh because all the guys that really know what their talking about will have b¥€€£&£d off thanks to people like you. Thanks for spoiling it for the rest of us too btw!.
Just to add; I'm all for a bit of shed engineering and experimentation! Just not when these people start proclaiming they've beaten physics and the real Engineers haven't a clue.
Edited by VeeFource on Sunday 7th February 19:05
Max_Torque said:
Well you suspect wrong......
I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
Not that I mentioned you in particular. I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
Edited by Max_Torque on Sunday 7th February 19:45
However i'm certainly older being familiar with diesels like gardeners and AEC's as well as building race winning cars.
I don't want to turn this into a pissing match. My main source of info is experience (the hard way...) and my uncle who is a fellow of the ImechE, PhD specialising in high speed diesels as they were once called, he works for the biggest engine testing centre in the UK.
All I'm trying to say is that they (OM606) can be smoke free, they hold silly horse power reliabley and it has been done before. The abuse these things tolerate is unbelievable for 22:1 CR. I'm my experience of tuning engines this is the most impressive unit to date.
Max_Torque said:
Well you suspect wrong......
I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
Not that I mentioned you in particular. I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
Edited by Max_Torque on Sunday 7th February 19:45
However i'm certainly older being familiar with diesels like gardeners and AEC's as well as building race winning cars.
I don't want to turn this into a pissing match. My main source of info is experience (the hard way...) and my uncle who is a fellow of the ImechE, PhD specialising in high speed diesels as they were once called, he works for the biggest engine testing centre in the UK.
All I'm trying to say is that they (OM606) can be smoke free, they hold silly horse power reliabley and it has been done before. The abuse these things tolerate is unbelievable for 22:1 CR. I'm my experience of tuning engines this is the most impressive unit to date.
maxypriest said:
You added nothing there apart from opinion.
Out of interest, in what field of engineering do you work (viz your profile)?AFAICS, the lads who put the superturbodiesel together have a lot of fun doing something that most PHers on this thread do find impressive. Impressive as a feat of relatively low-tech hacking (and I don't mean that pejoratively - I love my local hackspace). But the results clearly lacks the finesse of mainstream auto-engineering: smokescreen, crazy dyno curves, and then OTT power claims.
If I took you, the OP and dieselpumpuk seriously I'd have a converted 190D in a heartbeat. Unless the car is an embarassing dog to drive because of that smoke and that power curve.
EskimoArapaho said:
Out of interest, in what field of engineering do you work (viz your profile)?
AFAICS, the lads who put the superturbodiesel together have a lot of fun doing something that most PHers on this thread do find impressive. Impressive as a feat of relatively low-tech hacking (and I don't mean that pejoratively - I love my local hackspace). But the results clearly lacks the finesse of mainstream auto-engineering: smokescreen, crazy dyno curves, and then OTT power claims.
If I took you, the OP and dieselpumpuk seriously I'd have a converted 190D in a heartbeat. Unless the car is an embarassing dog to drive because of that smoke and that power curve.
Mechanical engineer working in the railway sector.AFAICS, the lads who put the superturbodiesel together have a lot of fun doing something that most PHers on this thread do find impressive. Impressive as a feat of relatively low-tech hacking (and I don't mean that pejoratively - I love my local hackspace). But the results clearly lacks the finesse of mainstream auto-engineering: smokescreen, crazy dyno curves, and then OTT power claims.
If I took you, the OP and dieselpumpuk seriously I'd have a converted 190D in a heartbeat. Unless the car is an embarassing dog to drive because of that smoke and that power curve.
Gotta go, the wife has just served up a home made trifle.
EskimoArapaho said:
Out of interest, in what field of engineering do you work (viz your profile)?
AFAICS, the lads who put the superturbodiesel together have a lot of fun doing something that most PHers on this thread do find impressive. Impressive as a feat of relatively low-tech hacking (and I don't mean that pejoratively - I love my local hackspace). But the results clearly lacks the finesse of mainstream auto-engineering: smokescreen, crazy dyno curves, and then OTT power claims.
If I took you, the OP and dieselpumpuk seriously I'd have a converted 190D in a heartbeat. Unless the car is an embarassing dog to drive because of that smoke and that power curve.
Mechanical engineer working in the railway sector.AFAICS, the lads who put the superturbodiesel together have a lot of fun doing something that most PHers on this thread do find impressive. Impressive as a feat of relatively low-tech hacking (and I don't mean that pejoratively - I love my local hackspace). But the results clearly lacks the finesse of mainstream auto-engineering: smokescreen, crazy dyno curves, and then OTT power claims.
If I took you, the OP and dieselpumpuk seriously I'd have a converted 190D in a heartbeat. Unless the car is an embarassing dog to drive because of that smoke and that power curve.
Gotta go, the wife has just served up a home made trifle.
maxypriest said:
However i'm certainly older being familiar with diesels like gardeners and AEC's as well as building race winning cars.
Woooooooow, 'familiar', well why didn't you say so!maxypriest said:
I'm my experience of tuning engines this is the most impressive unit to date.
No, your Uncle's experience! Seems you've missed out on those genes, especially as you can't even spell 'reliably'.
maxypriest said:
Isn't it?!
All I did was correct someone and share my experiences of this engine.
Then get picked up for a I phone typo.
I don't like a slagging match any more than the next guy, but ignorance in the face of the blindingly obvious tops the list for me for what's bad about PH.All I did was correct someone and share my experiences of this engine.
Then get picked up for a I phone typo.
I somehow doubt it was a typo given 'e' is nowhere near 'l' or 'y' and it's not like it would have autocorrected to that is it.
Max_Torque said:
Well you suspect wrong......
I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
I used to go to the ARC events back in the early 90's. Only to spectate though, could never afford my own vehicle to compete in. I've been doing "Hands on" engineering since i built my first car at the age of 13, and back in 1995 (can i politely ask how old were you in 1995 btw??) i built and tuned this MSA Comp Safari event / championship wining Land Rover that was powered by an iveco 2.5 turbo diesel:
In the 21 years since then i've built a lot of other vehicles, both for myself and friends and working for high performance vehicle/engine specalists like Cosworth and Prodive.
And don't think i'm alone in this. The vast majority of the very good engineers i meet on a professional level tend to be car enthusiasts with all sorts of amazing projects and "Hands on" experience ;-)
Edited by Max_Torque on Sunday 7th February 19:45
Ignoring the numbers, I like the car - pretty bonkers looking power delivery and I like the fact it looks standard.
I don't buy the claimed power output mind, and I think some of the comments posted on this thread are amusing and infuriating in equal measure. Professional engineer gives reasoned opinion based on decades of experience, met with derision from people who's closest experience to powertrain engineering is a dodgy remap on their TDi with an optimistic dyno printout. As always, it's the empty vessels that make the most noise...
I don't buy the claimed power output mind, and I think some of the comments posted on this thread are amusing and infuriating in equal measure. Professional engineer gives reasoned opinion based on decades of experience, met with derision from people who's closest experience to powertrain engineering is a dodgy remap on their TDi with an optimistic dyno printout. As always, it's the empty vessels that make the most noise...
A fantastic car and a great conversion.
I take on board some of the scientific arguments regarding the figures, but either way and due to the bonkers factor of this W124, I will brush them to one side!
OM606 really are tough old units and are becoming more and more popular with these conversions.
Time to stock up on some cheap old E300 Turbodiesels?!
I take on board some of the scientific arguments regarding the figures, but either way and due to the bonkers factor of this W124, I will brush them to one side!
OM606 really are tough old units and are becoming more and more popular with these conversions.
Time to stock up on some cheap old E300 Turbodiesels?!
sixpistons said:
Ignoring the numbers, I like the car - pretty bonkers looking power delivery and I like the fact it looks standard.
I don't buy the claimed power output mind, and I think some of the comments posted on this thread are amusing and infuriating in equal measure. Professional engineer gives reasoned opinion based on decades of experience, met with derision from people who's closest experience to powertrain engineering is a dodgy remap on their TDi with an optimistic dyno printout. As always, it's the empty vessels that make the most noise...
Professional engineer can't measure an engines power.I don't buy the claimed power output mind, and I think some of the comments posted on this thread are amusing and infuriating in equal measure. Professional engineer gives reasoned opinion based on decades of experience, met with derision from people who's closest experience to powertrain engineering is a dodgy remap on their TDi with an optimistic dyno printout. As always, it's the empty vessels that make the most noise...
Max Torque may be very smart but he can't measure an engines power over the internet looking down his nose.
As for his calculations about pressure then I see it being poor reasoning that if a BMW 535d is doing 33psi pressure that this Mercedes can't do 38psi of pressure. It is WELL KNOWN that certain engines, usually diesels, can be pushed way beyond their stock power.
1.9 PD Golf engines can safely go to 320-330bhp on stock internals and that's cheap VW tat. You can probably push a bit more but then it gets risky - Infact from memory, Darkside Developments only blew up a PD engine at 430bhp. (these engines are 105, 115, 130, 140 or 150bhp and all share the same internals other than a few select models (eg the PD115) aside from turbo and injectors.
As I said the most frustrating thing for me is that this is clearly hating the little guy, especially when it comes to diesels. Someone comes up with an interesting car (certainly more interesting than a E92 M3 with the CSL pack) which has dyno proof of a lot of power, more than most other cars on here, and people can't just say "well done mate", there's always someone who has to say "I call custard", thinking they are smart/clever.
Then the usual band of arselickers follow suit going "yes, yes I agree with you, it is preposterous" because they look up to an individual smart poster (probably because of daddy issues at a younger age)
From the casual onlooker how does this look? They wouldn't want to post up and share their projects because people would assume it's BS.
The thing that REALLY gets me, is I guarantee, had this been a Ferrari F40, which has what, 470bhp, if someone said they'd change their turbos and it was now 800bhp with a dyno chart to proof, everyone would be wowing it, wanting to sleep with the OP, not calculating engine pressures at max BHP when compared to a Ferrari 458, or saying that it's actually 500bhp.
xjay1337 said:
Professional engineer can't measure an engines power.
Max Torque may be very smart but he can't measure an engines power over the internet looking down his nose.
As for his calculations about pressure then I see it being poor reasoning that if a BMW 535d is doing 33psi pressure that this Mercedes can't do 38psi of pressure. It is WELL KNOWN that certain engines, usually diesels, can be pushed way beyond their stock power.
1.9 PD Golf engines can safely go to 320-330bhp on stock internals and that's cheap VW tat. You can probably push a bit more but then it gets risky - Infact from memory, Darkside Developments only blew up a PD engine at 430bhp. (these engines are 105, 115, 130, 140 or 150bhp and all share the same internals other than a few select models (eg the PD115) aside from turbo and injectors.
As I said the most frustrating thing for me is that this is clearly hating the little guy, especially when it comes to diesels. Someone comes up with an interesting car (certainly more interesting than a E92 M3 with the CSL pack) which has dyno proof of a lot of power, more than most other cars on here, and people can't just say "well done mate", there's always someone who has to say "I call custard", thinking they are smart/clever.
Then the usual band of arselickers follow suit going "yes, yes I agree with you, it is preposterous" because they look up to an individual smart poster (probably because of daddy issues at a younger age)
From the casual onlooker how does this look? They wouldn't want to post up and share their projects because people would assume it's BS.
The thing that REALLY gets me, is I guarantee, had this been a Ferrari F40, which has what, 470bhp, if someone said they'd change their turbos and it was now 800bhp with a dyno chart to proof, everyone would be wowing it, wanting to sleep with the OP, not calculating engine pressures at max BHP when compared to a Ferrari 458, or saying that it's actually 500bhp.
ProTip: psi != barMax Torque may be very smart but he can't measure an engines power over the internet looking down his nose.
As for his calculations about pressure then I see it being poor reasoning that if a BMW 535d is doing 33psi pressure that this Mercedes can't do 38psi of pressure. It is WELL KNOWN that certain engines, usually diesels, can be pushed way beyond their stock power.
1.9 PD Golf engines can safely go to 320-330bhp on stock internals and that's cheap VW tat. You can probably push a bit more but then it gets risky - Infact from memory, Darkside Developments only blew up a PD engine at 430bhp. (these engines are 105, 115, 130, 140 or 150bhp and all share the same internals other than a few select models (eg the PD115) aside from turbo and injectors.
As I said the most frustrating thing for me is that this is clearly hating the little guy, especially when it comes to diesels. Someone comes up with an interesting car (certainly more interesting than a E92 M3 with the CSL pack) which has dyno proof of a lot of power, more than most other cars on here, and people can't just say "well done mate", there's always someone who has to say "I call custard", thinking they are smart/clever.
Then the usual band of arselickers follow suit going "yes, yes I agree with you, it is preposterous" because they look up to an individual smart poster (probably because of daddy issues at a younger age)
From the casual onlooker how does this look? They wouldn't want to post up and share their projects because people would assume it's BS.
The thing that REALLY gets me, is I guarantee, had this been a Ferrari F40, which has what, 470bhp, if someone said they'd change their turbos and it was now 800bhp with a dyno chart to proof, everyone would be wowing it, wanting to sleep with the OP, not calculating engine pressures at max BHP when compared to a Ferrari 458, or saying that it's actually 500bhp.
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff