Mike S
Sponsor - AutoHomeUSA
Yes I did. Also sold my original 40 years ago. I occasionally regret doing so, but I do like my 80. But the 80 may end up going sold, and I am considering a GWagen as a semi-civilized replacement.
LWB G Wagen - advise me
- Thread starter Mike S
- Start date
Yes I did. Also sold my original 40 years ago. I occasionally regret doing so, but I do like my 80. But the 80 may end up going sold, and I am considering a GWagen as a semi-civilized replacement.
39Ronin
Adventurer
A 617 motor can be tuned for sure. More fuel, more air, more power, more heat, shorter engine life, that's how it goes. Not saying it is wrong, but if you want more power using more fuel, then why is it better than a gasser. The diesel by virtue of it's flat torque curve is much harder on transmissions, transfer cases, and driveline components compared to the sine wave power output of a gasoline motor. Not only do high output diesel motors have a shorter engine life, they compromise the reliabilty aspect that is inherent to the ignition free diesel engine design.
I melted a piston on a turboed 617 motor. The 617 engines lack the piston oil cooling ofthe 617a motors it's true, but it begs the question of why the Mercedes design team put a 617 motor in a heavy SUV when the 617a motor had been proven in the sedan models already. The answer boils down to reliability. Read Gary Stroh's book on his trip through Latin America in his naturally aspirated 300GD. Slow as hell, in low range over the high passes in Chile and Peru, but reliable as hell too. You hear people talk about the 300GD as the holy grail of Gwagens and as soon as they buy one, the shock of the first highway grade make them start talking about engine conversions.
I pulled big stumps with my 300GD on low range using both lockers, now I do the same with a G500 +/- the lockers. Both are great work trucks, the G500 is just not generally regarded as such because of it's luxury appointments and high price tag. IMHO, it is much easier to create a utilitarian high performance vehicle out of a G500 than a high performance utilitarian vehicle out of a 300GD, although both are possible.
I think you are on the right track but keep in mind the G was commissioned for military use, they were going to be driven in a convoy with larger slower trucks or travelling over rough terrain and therefore didn't need to be speed machines. The turbo was the part of the engine that they thought was unreliable at the time. It was the keep it simple stupid mentality that just carried over to the civilian version. If Mercedes new that their turbo engines in the sedan would last well over a million km's then they may have put it in the civilian G. The 617A was very conservatively tuned from the factory, I would tune it in moderation and will still expect to get 700,000 Km's it is still more life than a gasser engine.
Last edited:
Mike S
Sponsor - AutoHomeUSA
I have no complaints about the 80 at all. Wish it could get 20 MPG, but no gas powered Landcruiser does. It is pretty 'built' and I was thinking that a close-to-stock LWB GWagen would do what I need done, and be a little different.
zimm
Expedition Leader
things may be different with the later g's, but anything with the 4 speed isnt going to any more civilized than 80, in fact i think less so. the 80 may the pinnacle of solid axle suv... where as the G is great job of putting a dress on the german war machine.
the g rides harder. it has less body roll, but you lose softness and articulation. i guess it will depend on the condition of your local streets. in PA, the 80 is a better choice for roads. suspension modifications are very limited too. there are more comprehensive kits available for even the 100 series. i havent seen much that addresses the geometry with the lift for the g's, and shaft repairs and much more spendy. 35's can apparently cause wheel bearing issues you just dont see on the LC axles.
the gearing in the toyota seems better thought out too, but that wont mean poo if you get something with an od and v8. in fact i think the 3.2 i6 would be just cheeky if it wasnt straddled with the 4 speed. its a bit shy on low end tourque compared to the toyo i6 youre used to, but it revs much better. think of a 90's defender v8 power band, but with the actual horses advertised (rover lies, methinks)
now, if youre NOT looking for improved space or offroad performance (its tough to beat an ARB equipped 80), but you want to feel like youre driving the worlds best brick with the frame rigidity of a bridge. its all you. but moving from the expectations of an 80, i think you'll need to start with a g500.
me? ida kept the 60 you had.
zimm
Expedition Leader
useless but funny. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhdfmZYR3ow&feature=player_embedded#!
otiswesty
Regular guy
Well, let me moderate my comments. A 617a is a great motor, but asking it to push a LWB Gwagen over a high pass is still a big job. Very simple and serviceable, it is an ideal motor for the 460 which also has a timeless mechanical simplicity to it. I test drove 2 1993 Defender 110's prior to buying my 300GD LWB and found the Gwagen to be much smoother with nicer interior finishes than the rover. To call the Gwagen 460 a primitive interior may have more to do with neglect. Now that alot of older European imports are coming over, that may be the case. 10 years ago these were almost all well cared for special interest vehicles.
The G500 has a stiff ride, probably a performance setup for the 300hp motor. In contrast, my 300GD had a very soft and supple ride, with the factory Recaro seats it was the best...:drool:
The G500 has a stiff ride, probably a performance setup for the 300hp motor. In contrast, my 300GD had a very soft and supple ride, with the factory Recaro seats it was the best...:drool:
ChuckB
Expedition Leader
I hear you on being a little different. I'm having a hard time deciding between an 80 or a G500, but there is something about the G that I really like!!
zimm
Expedition Leader
yes, having had a 110nas i can attest that the fit and finish are abominable.
the parts are cheaper though. seriously, a 110nas's street value is more than the purchase sum of its parts. a door in britania is 300 bucks, the same gwagon door is 1500. figure an NAS like the one i sold goes for 60g and the same year G is... 17G, and a rough equivalent capability wise... and the G looks like a value leader....
(never thought id say that!)
Viggen
Just here...
yes, having had a 110nas i can attest that the fit and finish are abominable.
the parts are cheaper though. seriously, a 110nas's street value is more than the purchase sum of its parts. a door in britania is 300 bucks, the same gwagon door is 1500. figure an NAS like the one i sold goes for 60g and the same year G is... 17G, and a rough equivalent capability wise... and the G looks like a value leader....
Okay, so coming from an LR and British background, what is the main drawback to a G wagen? I find myself looking at them more and more and have found an 85 SWB and an 85 LWB that I really like. A lot. My main concern is parts availability and cost of ownership. I know this sounds funny as I drive a Land Rover but I can get LR parts relatively easily (a day or two normal ground) and the price isnt too bad. The aftermarket is much kinder to the LR stuff but there is just something about a G that I love. Im looking for an early, pre 88 RRC for the simplicity of the electricals (no ecu for stupid stuff like windows and wipe/ wash feature) and, well, overall simplicity. The lack of availability of parts and cost of ownership scares me a little bit. Reading through this thread and seeing that MB isnt supporting the early versions anymore doesnt help (although Tata is doing the same thing with the D1).
zimm
Expedition Leader
all things being relative, ive only LR was a D110nas, and my G is a '96 4sp auto, with a 3.2 I6, europa import. basically the same "era" vehicles. im sure experiences in each truck of more modern vintage would vary. i know i couldnt pay the more modern vintage price and use them.
the defender mechanical parts arnt all that spendy if you avoid dealerships. MB just shut down gray market exports from europe, so i doubt that will bode well for G owners. to avoid long lead times i think we'll eventually be backed into MB dealership pricing. i just made a deal to sell my wheeler fj40, as i plan on getting used to this thing off road the next year, and im hoping this isnt a mistake.
the defender has a larger aftermarket parts support system, if you dont like making your own fun parts.
the g's storage is smaller than it looks. in that way its the opposite of a defender. its seating and ergonomics are good, but the cargo kinda blows. the AO drawers in my lx470 are both too wide and too deep, for comparisons sake.
less articulation in the suspension, and a poorer turning radius.
im not a diesel owner, but i think if i was leaning that way for a conversion... i may lean defender. it looks to me like the OEM motors available for the G, while sturdy, are a bit pokey compared to the ones easily plopped into the defender. (im excluding the latest generation of oem available stuff, as all the ECU inputs, put them far beyond what i can do or what i'd be willing to pay someone smart for.)
the g's construction makes the defender look like it was built by drunken african tribesmen. its difference between a granite block mansion and a vinyl double wide.... if thats a drawback to ya.
Last edited:
Viggen
Just here...
Well, I wish I could blame drunken tribesmen for build quality but itll just have to be drunken Englishmen I guess. I know that the trucks are quality and built well but concern is parts availability. The two I am looking at are 2.8 I6 motors. Is there a G FAQ or buyers guide out there?
zimm
Expedition Leader
nothing like land cruisers and land rovers. there are some technically proficient guys at pointed 3 forum, but... they arnt the knowledgeable hands on mechanics you see on Mud, or some of the rover forums.
explore the 4x4abc site, he's got allot of technical details on there, and all the manuals. i'll end up picking up a set myself soon.
thats the motor i have. it lacks a bit in low rpm tq compared to the toyo sixes, but it has nice power up top. not "ideal" but not bad. its much better than than the stock 3.9 that was in my rover. its rated between 210-220 and all the horses can be accounted for if you tromp it. i think the rovers let a few get away.
scott, the site owner has the brabus 3.6. if the increase is a longer stroke and revised heads, i bet that clears that issue up a tad. ask him how he likes how that performs in slow low.
mine has 280k miles on it, and it still purrs, so i think its keeper of a design durability wise. im getting the 4 speed trans worked on now by a large local shop, i'll post up how that works out. im a bit concerned, its taking too long. the shifting wasnt up to par but it wasnt dead.
Fernweh
Supporting Sponsor
Yeah, that is true - but we don't need to, we can just get into the truck and drive it - anywhere ECU's or not, you name it.
Good move my friend - he has it all, need to have the manual!
Sorry Charlie, but you wrong....the 2.8L I6 is the older dual overhead cam M110 motor - they used that one short after the war....
You have either the M103 or M104, both much better than the M110 and have been a reliable source of power.
I myself like all the ECU's and computers I can get. Nothing is better than driving the un-passable roads for hundreds of Kilometers and after reaching the asphalt jungle again, cruising the last 1400Km in a G-500 very comfi home:smiley_drive: while doing that in any W460 becomes a real chore :Wow1:
zimm
Expedition Leader
me wong about what, fernwen san? me have a 1995 imported in 1996.. m104e32 3.2 litre I6... i think it was a factory 217 hp??