Re: [diesel_mercedes] Dave here in s..e Ind. mb gen set.

 

Yeah, that's a lot of it.  Certainly, there's a marketing angle.  By the mid-'50s, Mercedes, and other diesel manufacturers, had been trying for nearly 20-years to make diesels cars more acceptable to the public.  An OHC engine, of any type, was considered pretty racy stuff when the OM621 replaced the OM636 in 1959, and helped to dispel the notion that diesels were slow, low speed engines suitable only for trucks and stationary applications.

To give an idea of the state of engineering in the US, both Chrysler and Studebaker were STILL selling cars with flatheads going into 1960.

(AND, one can still buy a brand-new pushrod-engined car right off the Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram lot today.  But you'd better hurry; the Jeep Wrangler's getting a new engine for 2012.)

Mark in Lakewood, CO

---

From: "Bobby Yates Emory" <liberty1@gmail.com>
To: "diesel mercedes" <diesel_mercedes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 2:45:46 AM
Subject: Re: [diesel_mercedes] Dave here in s..e Ind. mb gen set.

 

Brian, It may just engineering one - up - man - ship. It does make
it easier to put the intake on one side of engine and the exhaust on
the other. The valve train is lighter, so the valve springs can be
weaker, which reduces wear on the valve trian components. Small
increases for the increase in cost. That is why USA manufacturers
stayed with push rods so long. On gas engines, allows higher revs
(not much use on our 3000 rpm diesels). Bobby

On 6/28/11, briankk <briankk@att.net> wrote:
> How come Merc went to an OHC for their diesel engine?  What's the advantage?
> bk

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (15)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___