M-100 Message Board
M-100 Message Board
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 M-100 Message Forum
 6.3
 Justins 6.3 project with pictures..
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 16

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 03/19/2008 :  08:14:46  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In fact Justin has used one stage water based Wurth stoneguard, not two pack. Here is the package alongside the antirust gapfiller wax he plans to use.





Here is the outcome.





Art
Go to Top of Page

Mike Freed

USA
826 Posts

Posted - 03/19/2008 :  09:49:58  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
That's a great "Before and After" saga. I can only imagine the hours put into this project. I respect that greatly.

Thanks for the photos!

Edited by - Mike Freed on 03/19/2008 14:34:58
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  03:51:48  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here's another detail difference I have noted between early and late cars after seeing #5810 in detail. On #1702, the two fuel and one air line run along the tunnel to the rear of the rear engine mount support bracket and then do a right angle turn to run out to the sill. There is a protective shield in front of the lines at right angles to the sill. On #5810, the lines run on a 45 degree angle through a cutout in the front chassis rail in front of the rear engine mount bracket to reach the sill and the protective shield is appropriately furhter forward and at 45 degrees to the sill. This modification involved a different shield and a modification of the rear part of the front chassis rail. Looking to the Parts Manual, this change probably occurred at #2020 when the part number of this section of chassis rail changed from 110 610 07 13 to 108 610 01 13.





This isn't the best view of it on #1702 but the better ones are not jpg files so I can't post them. You can at least see the fuel lines running inside the support mounting and then turning outwards at a right angle. What is very apparent on this view is the tilt to the left of the RHD motor and gearbox.





The fuel lines are off but you can clearly see the cutout in the chassis rail and the protective shield that the lines run behind.
Art
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  04:25:05  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
#5810 has had a serious smack in the front at some time, worse on the right than the left. The front crossmember and radiator support panel have been replaced but the right front chassis rail and the inner guards (wheelhousings) were repaired. I presume the outer guards(fenders) were replaced as well. Here are some pictures showing some of the "repairs".





When we got the car, the chassis number was missing from the right front chassis rail and someone had stamped it into the top part of the wheelhouse. The reason it was missing was because the distorted chassis rail had been bogged up.





Here is the rail a bit further forward. The outer half of the rail is a couple of centimeters lower than the inner half. This was the reason for the bog, to make them look equal. The bog was a centimeter or more thick, covering the chassis number. The support brackets for the aircleaner need a rebuild as well as the rail which will be pulled back up to the correct position.





Here's the "repaired" wheelhouse outside the chassis rail. The front cage nuts and cage nut housings for attaching the outer guard (fender) are missing or crushed flat. I'm not sure how that will be done. I'd be inclined my self to replace the front part of this wheelhouse with a part from a donor but I haven't spoken with Justin's panel beater.





The front of the left wheelhouse is not as bad as the right, but the same problem applies to the cage nuts and their cages. The front two are missing, and a couple more further back crushed but repairable. The solution to the missing cage nuts on this side can be seen if the image is sharp enough. The fender has been rivetted to the wheelhouse. The rivet heads remain.
Art
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  04:31:42  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here's one more picture to finish off for the minute. On the right is the rear engine mount support bracket that was on the car. It's off a 3.5 or late 109 016. On the left is the one off #771 which will be the donor. The hand brake cable ring bracket is missing off the #771 bracket, but we'll fix that.




Art

Edited by - Art Love on 03/20/2008 04:33:02
Go to Top of Page

Mike Freed

USA
826 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  10:42:35  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
That's some major surgery that I would like to be in on. Body and chassis work has become a major interest to me and it has just started recently. I guess I was watching one of those car shows on TV. I have done just a little body work on my 6.3, primarily when I had the carpet out of the car and the dash out. I was able to see some rust on the passenger side of the transmission tunnel. I do believe I fixed it with that new stuff that you paint over rust- POR-15 type. However, you all have gone to the limit and that's what I would like to participate in.

It would be great if there were such a clinic available for members who could get their hands dirty on a doner chassis.

Michael Edwin Freed

Edited by - Mike Freed on 03/20/2008 10:46:58
Go to Top of Page

Ron B

Australia
11633 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  19:15:47  Show Profile  Visit Ron B's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Some panel beaters musn't have a conscience ...to use bog to cover a repair is bad news. Then again the cut down fan was a fair indication of the 'workman ship' used on that poor car over the decades.
I would suggest measuring the front axle too,because it is probably bent.
I was thinking yesterday that most of the 6.3's I have seen have been real victims of bad driving and owner neglect,especially when compared with W108's. I have two here now and both have really good body work. in fact one is a real nice car,shame about the owners desire to install a chev.

...There are old cars,and then there are Classics..(Mercedes Benz Ad. 1999)
Go to Top of Page

Ron B

Australia
11633 Posts

Posted - 03/20/2008 :  19:17:57  Show Profile  Visit Ron B's Homepage  Reply with Quote
I guess Justin has a Wurth applicator gun? or is that different stuff to the PVC that wurth also use ?


...There are old cars,and then there are Classics..(Mercedes Benz Ad. 1999)
Go to Top of Page

Dan Smith

USA
1623 Posts

Posted - 03/22/2008 :  11:30:36  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Ron's comment just above: That's a safe bet Ron on loads of them but I have found a few that were not abused. It seems to be real similar to what I witnessed in 1960 muscle cars. The second or third buyers were just terrible idiots. I guess the describtion as an "idiot" might be too kind.
For example, I'll give a Chevy 409 story. First purchased by a just a high screwll grad but the guy could afford it. That guy ran it real hard. I was 12 or 13 but still recall the sounds. He Sold it for less than 1/2 about two years later. That guy made less cash and could barely afford it. He ran it harder until the rear diff blew and he sold it for about 500 $. That guy repaired the rear diff, but drove it reasonably. He was my best pal in school. In 1974, the price of uel spiked, my pal threw in the towell and sold it for around 500 $. It didn't look bad but it was a bucket of bolts. It rattled. At any speed over 70 MPH it seemed barely under controll. That buyer trashed it. It ended up as a parts car owned by a 409 fan. That fellow had at least five of them in 1985. What happened from there, I have no idea.
Moral of the story? The 6.3 was damn costly when new, similar to at least buying three new Caddys. If that 6.3 remained in that family it had a good chance to make it. If it was sold to a fan without the funds to maintain and repair it, it went downhill fast. If one was sold to an idiot, it became a parts car. Part of my economic theory and 6.3s.
Now, compare the above to 600s. Ever wonder why so many 600s are quite decent? It's the proof of my Economic Theory.
What the guys are doing with 6.3s in Oz is admirable. I can't even guess the time involved.
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 03/30/2008 :  05:52:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In addition to #5810, Justin also has #771 which I bought as a parts car years ago. He started with #1428 which I had also bought as a parts car. When #1428 turned out to be a dog, he took on #771 instead with the intention of turning it into a race car. It has been hiding in a panel shop for about 3 years, maybe more. Various bits and pieces have been done to it including the start of flaring of one rear guard. He retrieved it last week. All the work is unbelievably BAD. Agricultural is the best adjective I can think of to describe it. Have a look at this lot of pictures. It will be on the back burner till #5810 is finished. Everything will have to be redone if the project is to continue.
Art



































Go to Top of Page

Ron B

Australia
11633 Posts

Posted - 03/31/2008 :  01:32:46  Show Profile  Visit Ron B's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Art,do remember wolf mentioning something about that guy ,and saying something like " why would you trust him with a Ferrari resto..." ? .It's bad alright but I know some guys who may be able to rectify it and finish it properly. The sill boxes are 'interesting.'

...There are old cars,and then there are Classics..(Mercedes Benz Ad. 1999)
Go to Top of Page

Craig Tucker

Australia
654 Posts

Posted - 04/15/2008 :  02:58:30  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Art,

Be sure that the rear cross member is in fact "incorrect"!!!!

Late 6.3's had different rear x-member and gear box mount than the earlier ones.

My Latish 6.3 (#5713), has a "square" box mount, not round, the same as the 116; complete with 116 part number.

C.T.

1971 300SEL 6.3
1969 280SE
1979 280E
1979 450SEL 6.9
1959 220SE Ponton
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 04/15/2008 :  05:52:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Craig,
That is interesting because that is exactly what was on the car. I checked with Tom Hanson as to whether late 6.3's had the later mount and he didn't think so. Maybe Ron can have a look under Rob Fulton's current car if he still has it. I seem to recall it has a pretty late chassis number.
Art
Go to Top of Page

Craig Tucker

Australia
654 Posts

Posted - 04/15/2008 :  09:36:52  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Art,

do the chassis number thingie with MB to secure the correct mount number. If the rear mount starts with 116, then the x-member on the right is the correct one! Marvelous things, these computers.

C.T.

P.S. Art, please send me your home number (I've deleted it.....ooops)via email. I need to chat!

1971 300SEL 6.3
1969 280SE
1979 280E
1979 450SEL 6.9
1959 220SE Ponton
Go to Top of Page

Art Love

Australia
6237 Posts

Posted - 04/15/2008 :  18:02:01  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Craig,

I've been through the Parts Manual (and I'm sure Tom would have gone through the M-B computer) and it does not record this change. But it also does not record a 6.3 ever having a pistol grip gear shift lever either. I'll check with tom again just to be sure. My number is 07 33435593. Ring in the evening.
Art
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 16 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
M-100 Message Board © 2002-2015 International M-100 Group, Inc. Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.5 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06