My Official OM617 Toyota Pickup Repower Thread

[mach4]

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

How old is your Honda? Newer vehicles have every part built to be more maintenance free.

2000 Odyssey

[Cadin]

Both platforms certainly have their advantages and disadvantages. As far as electrics go, it seems like Japanese auto makers are light years ahead of the German manufacturers for the most part. I also have piles of receipts for this car (85 300TD) from all the PO's, and the most frequent thing beside brakes and valve adjustments were relays, most of them pretty expensive, and at 100k miles, etc.

That's why with the FJ80 I feel like I have the best of both worlds! Toyota electrics (and more modern, but still with circuit boards that are easy to shoot, and work on, and parts are pennies at Radio Shack, and they very rarely fair in the first place; apart from water intrusion!)

But the OM617's machining is top notch, and the mechanical fit and finish is excellent, of course similar quality replacement parts are more expensive too.

((I really would love to see an auto market that was similar to desktop computers, easily interchangeable parts on a universal platform. Kind of like how the Rally Fighter uses parts from many different vehicles, but having some kind of monocouque frame/body.))

[Cadin]

Originally Posted by ROLLGUY

I once saw a photo of the throttle linkage on a Mercedes Benz (it actually looked more complicated than that of a 300D) with the caption that read something like this: "This is why Germany lost the war". Al kidding (and throttle linkages) aside, I still hold to the opinion that the W123 was the most and best engineered car of it's time. That may even hold true for other models of that era. Every day I see a different 80's vintage Mercedes Benz on the road, and I very rarely see ANY OTHER MAKE of 80's car on the road. Not even Japanese.....Rich

All kinds of 80's cars are on the road out here, I wonder if your experience is more due to rust? Do they salt the roads where you live? Are annual safety inspections required?

Subaru's EJ22 engine is famously durable and used in light aircraft, but in rust states they get scrapped very young. Similar to 300D's and dead transmissions in the parts yards around here.

[Dan Stokes]

Originally Posted by JB3

Id keep an eye on this. The ones from a 115 drilled through with a smooth hole have a lot more aluminum support in that area. Drilling right through might build in a failure point on one designed to be a threaded hole. Not that i dont agree that this is an attractive idea for sure

So far so good. Really all I did was take out the threads and there's little strength in there. If you think about it, threads are just a (necessary) series of stress risers. Every one of those valleys is a crack waiting to happen.

I was able to use one of the aluminum mounts but had to make a steel one for the other side. You do what you have to or, as my brother said, it becomes the art of the possible.

And 'Yota - I can relate. My standard description of a Mercedes is, "If two bolts are adequate to hold on a part, there will be 5. And they will have 3 different head sizes with at least 2 different sized socket heads. And 1 will be behind something that you have to remove to get to it (like, say, the turbo). This is NOT good design, it's over-engineering without regard for serviceability and is why Daimler couldn't make a go of Chrysler. Notice that Fiat is doing pretty well as a partner and not a dictator like the Germans were.

That said, the OM617 is tough and high RPM for a compact Diesel. It's conceptually understandable and once you accept the difficulty in wrenching on it they CAN be fixed. Anything else in this size range (like say, a Perkins or Onan) are much more expensive and have less support out there in the world. So all in all I'm glad I chose it.

Dan

[Cadin]

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

How old is your Honda? Newer vehicles have every part built to be more maintenance free.

Certainly not all of them, in my experience, and certainly not every part!

The rub is that better engineering can also mean less over-engineering, so that a vehicle doesn't persist as long after the manufacturer is free of liability (Warranty).


Mach4: How is the transmission on that 2000 Odyssey? That is an Achilles heel on those vehicles.

[mach4]

Originally Posted by Cadin

Mach4: How is the transmission on that 2000 Odyssey? That is an Achilles heel on those vehicles.

It's OK for now... The shift down to 1st coming to a stop is late, so if you don't wait for it to "clunk" into first and just hit the go pedal it will chatter. So probably symptoms of impending failure or who knows it may last awhile yet. Since it's not an "enthusiast vehicle" that, or any number of other things, will likely put it past the tipping point of value vs repair cost. Kind of looking at a TDI as a replacement down the road.

[Cadin]

Originally Posted by mach4

It's OK for now... The shift down to 1st coming to a stop is late, so if you don't wait for it to "clunk" into first and just hit the go pedal it will chatter. So probably symptoms of impending failure or who knows it may last awhile yet. Since it's not an "enthusiast vehicle" that, or any number of other things, will likely put it past the tipping point of value vs repair cost. Kind of looking at a TDI as a replacement down the road.

Well, if you catch it soon, you can usually get a lot more miles swapping the ATF, but ONLY use HONDA fluid, and never use a flush. They are stupid specific; and to clean the filter, you have to pull the the Tranny (IIRC), so fluid swap is the most economical route. They usually overheat due to contaminated oil and some design issues, the shifting thing you mention is usually the shift solenoids on the front of the tranny, easy and cheap to replace and check with a multimeter.

(Well this thread is for OM617's , so I will leave it at that, but feel free to PM me if you have any questions!)

[t walgamuth]

Originally Posted by Cadin

Certainly not all of them, in my experience, and certainly not every part!

The rub is that better engineering can also mean less over-engineering, so that a vehicle doesn't persist as long after the manufacturer is free of liability (Warranty).


Mach4: How is the transmission on that 2000 Odyssey? That is an Achilles heel on those vehicles.

What is built less good on modern vehicles, please?

[Cadin]

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

What is built less good on modern vehicles, please?

I wasn't saying it is build less good necessarily, and it all depends on context, but instead engineers are trying to do the same or more with less.

Close the door of your Studebaker, close the door of a Merc, now close the door of an 2015 Honda Civic? Which do you think will tolerate rust for longer?

Here's a more specific example: The Subaru EJ22 was and is a venerated engine, so they developed the EJ25, an essentially bored out EJ22. It generated more power, but has huge problems with head gasket failure under 100k miles, almost to the point of recall.

Modern vehicles are also laden with amenities, which take up weight and reliability. Have you ever tried to back up a Prius when the backup cam doesn't work? Sometimes just a simple unobstructed window can be golden.

I'm not saying they are worse, I'm just saying they have different advantages.

And as electronics are made cheaper, we will just print entire embedded circuit board, with just enough material to lower costs. Will these be as robust as the rugged boards of the 80's that are readily repairable? I think not, it will be made to replace as a unit.

Things don't need to be designed to fail, but in the face of progression, engineers can fail to design as robust equipment with less/lighter material, it is a learning curve. And don't forget reliability is being phased out for efficiency in most of the venerated engines. (OM617 vs OM647)


Often one's biggest blessing, is also one's biggest curse!

[t walgamuth]

Of the three door examples I bet the stuebaker door is the flimsiest. You can literally bend it with your body...hands, feet etc.

As for your example, sure the wiring is simple on the 39 Studebaker, heck it had next to no amenities. And cars back then were considered knackered at 100K. Heck I had to change plugs on my 62 Mercedes every 10K, points too and tires did not last much longer than that. Water pump every 40K and valve job every 50K. On a modern car you'd do none of that before 100k except maybe tires.

The 62 benz was a nice quality car in its day....because it was so much better than what came before!

[Dan Stokes]

Tom makes a good point. When I was a kid (mid-1960s) a ten year old car was at the bottom of the food chain. That's what we kids would buy and drive 'till death did us part - usually pretty quickly. Any car with 100K was running on borrowed time, "No sense changing the oil in THAT one.....".

A bunch of us bought a '55 Ford 2 door sedan, with a trunk full of transmissions (3 speed manual) and rear ends of unknown ratio, for maybe $100 or so (can't remember the exact price). It was less than 10 years old at the time and it's what we all learned to drive a stick in - I mean REALLY drive a stick. We all learned to shift without a clutch, double clutch and down shift, that sort of thing. We'd blow the trans or rear, drag it back to the main owner's house (the guy who's Dad would put up with it), toss in another one, and get back to our "driver's ed". Which reminds me, when I got to the official driver's ed the instructor had to constantly remind me to use the clutch and have both hands on the wheel. I DID pass! I think we ALL had trouble driving the driver's ed automatic, pushing in the non-existant clutch and and trying to shift when we were already in drive.

Back to the point: Cars have NEVER been as reliable and as durable as they are today. Even the paint and interior on most of them are good for 200K or more. As an SAE member I get the magazine and I see what the manufacturers and third-party suppliers do to increase durability, reliability, and safety (for the majority for whom driving is down their priority list when they're behind the wheel).

I was there and working in the automotive field back in "the good old days" so I've seen and lived it.

Dan

[Cadin]

Fair enough, I'll certainly concede your point!

My original point wasn't really with anything pre-1990; vs current tech, And I will admit that I abhor working on anything with a carburetor, so the monoliths of yesterday are kind of before my time.

My point was that technology goes in leaps and bounds and that it is highly improbable that EVERY part is certainly not built to be more maintenance free. Any blanket statement is difficult to substantiate, and there are plenty of examples of vehicles since 1990 requiring more maintenance that earlier vehicles, hence my point about the Subaru engines becoming MUCH less reliable than the prior; the problem was rectified later, but it is still trying to do more or the same job with less.

(E.g. - Newer vehicles have every part built to be more maintenance free.
Reply - Certainly not all of them, in my experience, and certainly not every part!)


Better Engineering does more with less, thus reaching the end goal with less material/resources.

My point I guess was I don't see how more modern vehicles (Post-2010), could possibly have every part be more maintenance free. They certainly don't want to employ engineers to work them selves out of a job, but to do work on relevant issues; safety, efficiency, environmental regulations. There is not as much pressure on engineering less maintenance into the system if the vehicle is not problematic for the warranty period.


Fun Fact= Many American and Japanese alternators and starters of similar year ranges have identical internals, but proprietary cases; precluding universal fitment. Designed to replace the entire assembly ($$$ and time), instead of a couple of easily removable parts (and yes it would be easy to perform the work, in situ, instead of pulling the alternator.)


As a bonus, as systems get more complex, there are more and more failure points, more sensors, more to maintain. Sensors are also often less robust since they are constructed more efficiently.

Since the 90's cars have become safer, more efficient, and cleaner. But will the 2015's require less maintenance? Hour for hour? Certainly not from what I've seen of 2005 until now.

[OM617YOTA]

Glad I'm not alone on this one!

The 617 definitely has it's good points. The water pump is pleasure to change compared to a small block Chevy, which is itself a pleasure to change compared to most Japanese engines. Might as well do the timing belt at the same time.

Originally Posted by Dan Stokes

My standard description of a Mercedes is, "If two bolts are adequate to hold on a part, there will be 5. And they will have 3 different head sizes with at least 2 different sized socket heads. And 1 will be behind something that you have to remove to get to it (like, say, the turbo).

This is exactly my frustration.

The motor mount took ~15 mins to replace. Four bolts, all the same size head with the same size nut on the back. Three on the frame, one long one on the engine mounting arm. No big deal.

I bought my Mr2 at 130k miles. It has by far been the easiest/least cost per mile vehicle I've owned. The GTO has been the most expensive.

[Dan Stokes]

Originally Posted by OM617YOTA

Glad I'm not alone on this one!


The motor mount took ~15 mins to replace. Four bolts, all the same size head with the same size nut on the back. Three on the frame, one long one on the engine mounting arm. No big deal.

Don't tell Stuttgart. They'll send an undercover team out immediately to make the mount less serviceable. I'm pretty sure they have "agents" for that.

Dan

[OM617YOTA]

If the attitude of the MBZ dealer parts people is any indication, they'll refuse to acknowledge that they even know anyone who might know someone that has anything to do with my hacked-together nightmare of automotive miscegenation.