[W126 Coupe] OFF TOPIC - 126 CHASSIS DIESELS 300SD VS 350SD

[Mister McGoo]

"Does anybody know if kerosene can be used in the 80 - 85 300D turbodiesel?"

Can't say for sure, but I don't think so.  In the Petroleum refinery chain 
Kerosene falls between gasoline and diesel and I suspect kerosene lacks the 
lubricating charcteristics that diesel has.

In the Old Country (hello. anyone there?) they use (used to use?) kerosene 
(paraffin) in petrol (gasoline) engines particularly on farm tractors.  
You'd start on petrol and once running switch to the other tank of kerosene 
which was much cheaper.  But you had to remember to switch back before you 
turned the engine off or it wouldn't start again.  Right?

But these were NOT diesel engines, they required a spark for ignition.

If it is of any help I understand that when Fritz Diesel was demonstrating 
his revolutionary new engine at a World's Fair in America,  he used PEANUT 
oil.  (Diesel fuel was hard to find then because he hadn't invented it yet)

Ask Jimmy Carter.... my guess is he'd be driving HIS car on peanuts.

-Bellamy


>From: jymiejam at aol.com
>Reply-To: Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists <mbcoupes at mbcoupes.com>
>To: mbcoupes at mbcoupes.com
>Subject: Re: [W126 Coupe] OFF TOPIC - 126 CHASSIS DIESELS 300SD VS 350SD
>Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 22:12:06 -0400
>
>Does anybody know if Kerosene can be used in the 80-85 300D Turbodiesels?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: eurotech1 at charter.net
>To: Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists <mbcoupes at mbcoupes.com>
>Sent: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 13:40:16 -0400
>Subject: Re: [W126 Coupe] OFF TOPIC - 126 CHASSIS DIESELS 300SD VS 350SD
>
>
>Hi Richard,
>
>   I owned an '82 300SD about eight years ago, with the 617 five cylinder 
>diesel,
>it was a good car, albiet a little underpowered for my tastes. I averaged 
>about
>22- 24mpg around town, and 28-30 on the highway. Following that car, I 
>bought an
>'87 300D (W124), a far superior car, better handling, way more power, and 
>more
>modern styling. It had the 603 six cylinder diesel, which was totally 
>different
>design than the 617 five cylinder. It got about 24-25 around town, and 32+ 
>on
>the highway. I would definitely recommend the 124 diesel over the 126, less
>weight, better mileage, and more power.
>
>                        Later,
>                 Christopher Huffine
>
>============================================================
>
>
>  > From: "RICHARD JAFFE" <RSJAFFE at msn.com
> > Date: 2005/09/03 Sat AM 12:15:11 EDT
> > To: <MBCOUPES at mbcoupes.com>
> > Subject: [W126 Coupe] OFF TOPIC - 126 CHASSIS DIESELS 300SD VS 350SD
> >
> > I'm thinking about getting a diesel as a daily driver. The issue is 
>whether to
>stick with the 3 ltr 5 cyl turbodiesel (these seem to be pretty bullet 
>proof) or
>go with the 3.5 ltr 6 cyl turbodiesel (1991 model year). One website 
>mentioned
>numerous problems with the 3.5 ltr motor that MB did not acknowledge. 
>Anyone
>have any experience with either of these vehicles?
> >
> > Rich Jaffe
> >
> >
>
>The MB Coupes Website!
>W126 SEC Mailing List
>Postings remain property of MB Coupes, L.L.C.
>
>The MB Coupes Website!
>W126 SEC Mailing List
>Postings remain property of MB Coupes, L.L.C.


>The MB Coupes Website!
>W126 SEC Mailing List
>Postings remain property of MB Coupes, L.L.C.