Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here is an engine question: Are the M112 and M113 engines the same whether in an ML, G or one of the passenger cars? Do the engines destined for the 4x4's have different cams or other parts for more torque?
 

·
Coupe/Convertible Forums Moderator
CURRENT: 2011 SL550 FORMER: C300, ML350, CLK550 Cabriolet, C240, ML320, 300TD
Joined
·
21,818 Posts
Not too sure about the V8 M113, but the V6 M112 has alot of variations (2.4, 2.8, 3.2 & 3.7) but they are more or less the same in (for example) an E320 & ML320.
They do tune the engines differently. For example, the ML320 engine is tuned to provide lower overall HP, but increased low-end torque as compared to the E320. This is primarily accomplished by changing the control of the variable intake path vanes.

- RODNEY
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Thanks for the info guys. Rodney what sort of torque differences are we talking 5% 10%? If I got an engine from a passenger car do you think I could compensate with other mods like exhaust, chip etc? My understanding is that the variable intake manifold has the intake ducts and flaps that are controlled by the computer depending on the needs of the engine. Are these variable intake manifolds different? or are the chips programmed to handle the demand differently between pass cars and the 4x's?
 

·
Coupe/Convertible Forums Moderator
CURRENT: 2011 SL550 FORMER: C300, ML350, CLK550 Cabriolet, C240, ML320, 300TD
Joined
·
21,818 Posts
As an example:

E320: 221hp @ 5600RPM, 232lb-ft @ 3000-4800RPM
ML320: 215hp @ 5600RPM, 233lb-ft @ 3000-4500RPM

E430: 275hp @ 5750RPM, 295lb-ft @ 3000-4500RPM
ML430: 256hp @ 5500RPM, 288lb-ft @ 3000-4500RPM

Of course these “maximum output� figures only give part of the picture. The torque curves of the ML engines tend to be more convex, giving them better low-end torque than the E. While maximum HP is lower on the ML, again, its curve is flatter. Other things to note is that with the ML320, one goal was to give it a very low crawl speed, which meant high but controllable torque at low RPM. For the ML430, one goal was to provide gas mileage so that the meager 18-gallon tank would get you between gas stations.

My understanding is that the intake path on the ML320 engine is physically longer than that on the E320, which gives it increased torque. Both still use the butterfly-controlled dual-path format so that at low speeds, torque is maximized while at high speeds, HP is maximized.

If you were to put a sedan engine in an ML, my guess is that you’d see a marginal decrease in low-end power, a marginal increase in high-end power, and an overall decrease in MPG (when compared to a stock ML). Most of these “problems� could be compensated by altering the ECM programming, but then you’d need someone capable of cracking into ME 2.8, which is not an easy task.

- RODNEY
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Rodney,

Thanks for the detailed info. I think this is enough of a difference that I should focus on finding an ML engine both for the low end torque and mileage.

Thor
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top