Mercedes SLK World banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Turbo stroker M111

16K views 32 replies 6 participants last post by  alfasportivo  
#1 ·
For those of you looking to squeeze more from your 230 Kompressor cars that waver on the more extreme side of modifications you may enjoy this thread.

So I've been away for far too long and I'm trying to get back into the swing of things, I'm starting to feel content in getting back to helping all you guys where I can. Unfortunately due to being away for so long my previous threads have been closed which is totally understandable as people often come and go on these kind of platforms.

For those of you that don't know me I like to squeeze all the power out of the mercedes 2.3 Kompressor M111 engines and have blown many up in the pursuit of power, but these engines are very capable far more so than mercedes let them be.

I will be doing a build series both written and accompanied by videos, if it's still ok with the forum admins


This will be both a instructional and entertaining series but it's took two years to get here unfortunately.
 
Discussion starter · #3 ·
Exciting project! Hope to see some of the car soon!
One problem with the video is your voice is very low compared the volume of your Outro music. I think I permanently damaged my hearing.
Sorry about that, not sure what the video app did there everything was leveled out, in post however I've just gone back and watched the uploaded version and cringed at the volume difference Apologies for that.
 
Discussion starter · #6 ·
I think with this engine I'm going to stick with a 722.6 from a 320 CDI as we have a controller for that transmission and it should take the torque. This whole engine though is a educated gamble, I'm hopeful it will work but I also found possibly the cause of the repetitive failures of the silks engine and it was a massive facepalm moment, initially we had found a failed injector of the first tear down but I spotted something that I will explain in a later video.. if this was the case the stock engine is far more capable than we thought.
 
Discussion starter · #8 ·
For anyone interested in it, this is my take on what I believe was happening with the repetitive engine failures on our turbo SlK. I find it easy to explain in video but I believe it would be very plausible for this to have been the culprit..

And if so what a facepalm moment it is 🤦


Sometimes it can be the simple things, certainly would have helped if I had seen this two years ago 🤣
 
Discussion starter · #10 ·
Now I was not expecting to see a video of the cause.

I was expecting an Alex and Ben photo....sorry.
Pahaha, well we were the cause of its demise can't lie there 🤣
 
Discussion starter · #12 ·
Yes but is that throttle body in the stock orientation? Never seen a tb mounted like that.
No it's not standard orientation, unfortunately I didn't mount the throttle body if I had seen this years ago we wouldn't have had half the problems. I've never seen a throttle body mounted like this either, live and learn
 
Discussion starter · #13 ·
After a lot of hard pushing, shoving, dragging and lifting the engines are finally in their new home, took a fair bit to get them here but it is done.
Image
Image
Image
Image
next job get the M111 mounted on the stand and get started tearing it down, if I can I will do as much as I can to do instructional on locking cam timing and re timing the engine, using a different crankshaft will make timing the engine a little interesting so we will just have to see how this goes.
 
Discussion starter · #14 ·
It begins, I finally found some bolts to mount it to the engine stand. The next follow up will be locking the timing and pulling that head off this will be fun...

 
Discussion starter · #16 ·
Slowly getting there on the tear down, so far this is the worst M111 disassembly I've had things stuck tools breaking great fun honestly 🤣...my suffering makes for good viewing


I genuinely had to set my sawzall to the timing chain guide pin/dowl first time for everything, just aswell this is a total tear down.
 
Discussion starter · #17 ·
For those of you looking to see how this is going, I've finally got the majority of the engine torn down ready. Crank and front cover need to come out the block but it's taken me a week of an our and a bit every night to get to this point with filming too. Good fun and all but geez this engine made me work for it, anyway for those of you following here it is... Possibly my longest video yet


Hope you guys are enjoying this, please remember not everything I do is by the book but it's done to get the job done on my own projects, in my profession everything is done mostly the right with the odd exception to the rule 😉
 
Discussion starter · #19 ·
Bugger, the oil pump location at the front prevents conversion to a rear sump which is needed to clear the front Xmember of a lot of project cars. This is so the engine may be mounted as far back as possible for weight distribution purposes.
Yeah the engine is a little like a Saab b204 in a way tough but has so many things that make it awkward especially mounting in JDM cars, however the M104 is done the same way but because of its length the front sump can be a benefit.

Unfortunately like you say the oil pump on the M111 is inconvenient and due to its size there is no work around unless you go dry sump.
 
Discussion starter · #20 ·
How the Rod bearings look from the 241,000 mile doner engine, not bad for the milage in my opinion.
 
Discussion starter · #21 ·
It fits! So the OM601 crank definitely fits within the M111 block, next to check is the rod to block clearance given the more extreme rod angle from the longer stroke.

 
Discussion starter · #22 ·
On this engine one thing I may not have mentioned is the valve cover I want to use, to keep things cleaner I will be using a valve cover from a N/a engine in this case a W202 C180 valve cover..

 
Discussion starter · #23 ·
Here I explain the differences between the Om601 crank and M111 crank and what it will do for the engine, I would love to get the crank lightened and knife edged but unfortunately due to the budget that's not on the cards for this build.

 
Discussion starter · #24 ·
Not so much a big part of the build, but this shows a choice of valve covers the differences in depth and the reasons we use the N/a valve covers, I'm trying to do informative stuff along side the fun stuff with this build.


I'm learning as I go that means certain processes what parts will and won't fit and in this case the rods are just too narrow on the big end to make work, however there is hope in the form of M102 rods and possibly m104 pistons, but if I have to switch to a 2.0 block to have a greater choice of pistons I will consider that too. The issue with the M111 is the lack of meat left on the bone the 2.3 really doesn't have a lot left to go at with regards to overbore so piston choice is limited. But I'm still doing homework so we shall see .
 
Discussion starter · #26 ·
Alex, look at left overs as a starter pack for the next project.
Or open a parts shop with staff discount ;)
Left overs 🤣 mate I'm practically a breakers yard, price of M111s has gone through the roof though having a lot of difficulty getting them.

Just means the M104 project will end up being ran along side this one 🤣 I like turbos 😆

Also I've linked the forum in the video descriptions hopefully that will bring some more members 👍
 
Discussion starter · #27 ·
Here's a curve ball for everyone, these later M111s 97 onwards have some interesting secrets....


So they actually use M104 2.8 connecting rods so the m111 and m104 both share the (rounded up) 149mm center to center rod length.

A M102 uses the same style of rod but is 144/5mm

My BMW rods that are too slim are 145mm

So although the engine would not be forged in anyway unfortunately the M102/103 rods would fix my problem and would still hold 400hp reliably but I need to acquire a set first to check small end measurements, however I'm confident this is the solution.

In other news I found the M104 2.8 and 3.2 are the same engines with a different stroke (hence the 2.8 using longer rods) the 3.2 uses the shorter m102/103 rods, this was not good for me to find out I now have a om606 crankshaft on the way (also ironically stamped with 104) and am in negotiations for a set of four m102 rods and 6 m103 rods. I'm like a mad scientist in a scrap yard I love this Mercedes mechano sets 😆
 
Discussion starter · #28 ·
A bit more tinkering time today, moved up the rotating assembly to see where the pistons would sit with shorter rods compared to stock rods with the Om601 Crank.


I'm next going to reinstall the stock crank for measurements again, so basically the stock rod puts the piston over deck height by about 1mm and the M102 rod puts the piston at 4mm below deck height, if I remember right the stock m111 2.3k is somewhere between 3-4mm but I will clarify this.

So at this point I'm going to retract the "forged" statement from this build because actually this junk yard mechano set Mercedes has provided me with is more than capable of the power levels that I would like to make, that said I may get some Arp rod bolts just to make sure.

I will be doing a full video on the differences between the M104, M103,M102 and M111 rods shortly to try and explain the differences so if any of you guys want to try your luck with a budget stroker build you know exactly what you need to do to achieve it.

I will also soon have another project underway all being well.
Image
Thats not a 4cylinder crank 😉
 
Discussion starter · #30 ·
Take cover!

Has Alex gone to the Teutonic dark side?
Will Stroker twin have the
Alex-M3-Eleven badge?
Honestly mate I've gone mad, I think the petrol fumes have got to me 🤣

I've been doing too much homework and really got to a point of realising just how rediculously interchangable parts are between all these 80-90s mercedes engines are. That crank is a Om606 crank stamped 104, the rods are M103 rods Stamped 102 my 2.8 M104 is the same as the 3.2 bar crank and rods M102/103 rods are apparently a different metallic compound to m111 m104 rods, the change in compound I'm told was 91/92 which is backed up by the M103 being able to make nigh on 800hp on stock components. The M103 uses the M102 rods that are 145mm instead of the 149mm rods used on the m111/104 so perfect for my strokers also the shorter length also makes them more stable at higher RPMs and somewhat stronger against torsional forces.

So I will have a M111 2.4 and a M104 3.2 that started a 2.8 again should be stable for 6-700 with a girdle (probably spelled that wrong)

That was a whole lot of useless information for you Myk I've completely lost my mind ( mad scientist laugh)

Next up reach Allen millyards level of sheer engineering insanity.... Cl65 twin turbo V12 motorcycle? 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.