Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: CLK LM engine confusion

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2

    CLK LM engine confusion

    Hello,

    I recently saw an entry list program cover of 1998 Le Mans:

    http://www.racingsportscars.com/cove...998-06-07e.jpg

    it shows the CLK LM has a 6000cc NA engine (A stands for atmospheric I believe), but the rest of the website shows that the CLK LM engine displacement is 4989cc

    These two pages also say CLK LM has 5 liter v8 but one of them says it is designated as GT108B revised from the Sauber C9/C11's M119HL and the displacement is 4986cc:

    http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/spec/...nz-CLK-LM.html
    http://media.daimler.com/marsMediaSi...14&oid=9919089

    so which one is correct? I highly doubt CLK LM used the 6L to race, maybe there was something else went on? Does anyone know about this?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zsm5833 For This Useful Post:

    gsxr (07-12-2017), TerryA (07-12-2017)

  3. #2
    E500E Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    DFW Texas
    Posts
    2,621

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    I'm not sure which motor was used in what race.... MB had 2 M119 race engines. The turbo'd 5.0 liter and an aspirated 6.0 liter. I think the 5.0 liter set the Nuremberg track record.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to samiam44 For This Useful Post:

    TerryA (07-12-2017)

  5. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by samiam44 View Post
    I'm not sure which motor was used in what race.... MB had 2 M119 race engines. The turbo'd 5.0 liter and an aspirated 6.0 liter. I think the 5.0 liter set the Nuremberg track record.
    I dont think there exists a 6L racing M119, or they probably never raced it.

    First, if you see the CLK LM section on the third website I provided(which is MB official Daimler) the displacement the gave is 4986cc. I saw the official results of 1998 Le Mans it showed 4989cc, but i never see a result showed 6000cc, only the entry list program cover

    Second, this website says CLR has the 5.7L M119 enlarged from the previous CLK LM 5L M119. If what it says is true, then 6L racing M119 will conflict

    http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/txt/4...-Benz-CLR.html

  6. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA
    Posts
    205

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    It looks like the program sheet you posted is incorrect on the engine displacement for the CLK-LM in 1998. It seems they just posted bad info and perhaps used the specs from the CLK-GTR which was the basis for the CLK-LM and was raced in the FIA GT series the same year.

    For clarification, there are 3 version of this fine racecar: the CLK-GTR, CLK-LM and CLR.

    The CLK-GTR was used only in the 1997 and 1998 FIA GT series and won both driver's and constructors' championships both years. It had a naturally aspirated 6.0l M120 V-12 engine.

    The CLK-LM was raced only in the 1998 24 hr of LeMans and had a naturally aspirated 5.0l M119 V-8 highly modified and renamed a GT108B as the block was completely different due to integral structural gussets for the chassis/rear suspension and dry sump system. The CLK-LM was modified from the CLK-GTR with different front fenders to improved aero, and the V-12 was changed to the V-8 because of weight and durability. The engine had a massive inlet resitrictor to reduce power output to comply with the LeMans class rules and so the V-12 was considered overkill. The V-8 offered an advantage of less weight over the V-12 so they could use weight ballast elsewhere in the chassis for improved chassis balance. Unfortunately the V-8 suffered from excessive vibration and was not as reliable as the smooth V-12 and both cars entered were retired with engine failure early in the race (I don't remember exactly but it was less than 6 hours).

    The CLR was raced only in the 1999 24 hr of LeMans and had a naturally aspirated 5.7l M119/GT108C V-8 engine. The engine is the same at the CLK-LM but with a larger displacement due to smaller inlet restrictors that were a rule change for 1999. The additional stroke also helped with vibration to improve engine reliability. The CLR was the famous 'flipper' that flipped 3 different times during qualifying, practice and finally in the race too, so Mercedes pulled the remaining car from the race at around the 6-hour mark if I remember correctly. Mercedes/AMG dropped the GT program entirely after the trouble with the CLR and didn't participate again until the SLS-GT3 customer program started in 2011.

    Sorry to geek out with the info here, but I've been a huge fan of these cars for years. For the record, I don't know of any 6.0l M119 race engines either, as posted above.
    Last edited by SG-Motorsports; 07-13-2017 at 12:12 AM.

  7. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to SG-Motorsports For This Useful Post:

    albdentist (07-13-2017), gerryvz (07-13-2017), gsxr (07-13-2017), sheward (07-13-2017), Taxi Driver (07-13-2017), TerryA (07-13-2017)

  8. #5
    E500E Guru TerryA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,214

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    I agree w/SG on the V12. I to was a nut about these cars and I try to watch LeMans every year for as long as I remember as far back as the Speed Channel.

    I know the V12 was the first version raced at LeMans and was dropped in favor of the V8 the following year. I wasn't into the specs at the time so I will let others speak to that.

    I got to see what I believe we're two CLK-GTRs race at Laguna Seca. I don't remember if it was 97 or 98. I believe that Bernt Schneider was lead driver in one car and Claus Ludwig the other car. They were awesome to watch but really had no competition to speak of. If I remember correctly Schneider's car broke down and Ludwig won the race. It was my one and only time I went to Laguna Seca. I have the race program somewhere but probably couldn't find it in a million years.
    Last edited by TerryA; 07-13-2017 at 05:28 AM.
    Terry

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TerryA For This Useful Post:

    albdentist (07-13-2017), sheward (07-13-2017)

  10. #6
    E500E Guru Taxi Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Stockholm Sweden
    Posts
    894

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    The CLR was raced only in the 1999 24 hr of LeMans and had a naturally aspirated 5.7l M119/GT108C V-8 engine. The engine is the same at the CLK-LM but with a larger displacement due to smaller inlet restrictors that were a rule change for 1999. The additional stroke also helped with vibration to improve engine reliability.
    What do you know? I have been saying for years and years, do a stroker M119! A slight overbore an you have the 5.7 allready.
    No messing about with 100mm+ Just get the 97mm pistons w correct comp. height.....
    '92 500E 6.0 AMG
    '93 400E 5.0 AMG
    '96 E50 AMG
    '96 CL500
    '99 C43 AMG

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Taxi Driver For This Useful Post:

    TerryA (07-13-2017)

  12. #7
    Site Honcho
    Klugscheisser
    Ich bekenne mich
    nicht schuldig.
    gerryvz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    17,478

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Stroker crank from an M117 5.6L.......

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to gerryvz For This Useful Post:

    TerryA (07-13-2017)

  14. #8
    .036 Hoonigan™
    E500E Boffin
    gsxr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Boise, ID, USA
    Posts
    20,993

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by gerryvz View Post
    Stroker crank from an M117 5.6L.......
    ... and modified rods, and different pistons, and modifications to the block, and let's not forget modifications to the crank itself.

    Probably require at least two weekends under the hood in your garage. Maybe three.


  15. The Following User Says Thank You to gsxr For This Useful Post:

    TerryA (07-13-2017)

  16. #9
    Site Admin
    auto enthusiast...
    Glen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Carlsbad, CA USA
    Posts
    2,742

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by gsxr View Post
    ... and modified rods, and different pistons, and modifications to the block, and let's not forget modifications to the crank itself.

    Probably require at least two weekends under the hood in your garage. Maybe three.

    I know of such a motor...but it's in need of a full rebuild.
    '94 E500 (744) | '94 E500 (199)         Misc. snapshots

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Glen For This Useful Post:

    gsxr (07-13-2017), TerryA (07-13-2017)

  18. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    I found this thread when I was searching for information about why the CLK-LM sounded totally different at Le Mans in 1998 than it did in all the FIA-GT races it participated in after Le Mans.
    So I registered here to correct some stuff that was written just because I'm a huge fan of these cars and non-current Mercedes-Benz models in general.

    So here we go:
    First of all they were all normally aspirated!

    CLK-GTR has a V12 engine and was raced by the works team in the 1997 FIA-GT Championship, which did not include the 24 Hours of Le Mans and the works team did not race at Le Mans that year.
    The CLK-GTR was also raced by the works team in the 1998 FIA-GT Championship rounds that took place before that years 24 Hours of Le Mans plus two CLK-GTR were raced for the whole 1998 FIA-GT Championship season, which again did not include Le Mans, by Persson Motorsport. The works team abondoned the CLK-GTR after the opening rounds of the FIA GT Championship and had developed the CLK-LM as the successor. Only the works team took part in the 1998 24 Hours of Le Mans and debuted the CLK-LM there. It had a V8 engine and ABS (anti lock braking). At Le Mans it had the rumbling sound typical for an American V8.

    After Le Mans, where both cars failed to finish, the cars got modified. The ABS was removed because in contrast to the ACO rulebook it was forbidden in the FIA rules. Also the engine must've been altered, because in all the FIA-GT races the rumbling sound is gone and instead it sounds like a high revving V8, to me somewhere between a current DTM V8 and an early 90s Ford/Cosworth V8. I do not know though, why the engine was changed that way and what the displacement numbers were at and after Le Mans. So if anybody has more info about the changes that were made I'd be glad to know.

    CLK-GTR and CLK-LM were both built to GT1-regulations while the 1999 successor called CLR was a LMGTP-class car. It was paddle shifted and also had a N/A V8 but only raced at that years Le Mans. The planned or at least rumored participation in the ALMS wasn't realized after the desaster that happened at Le Mans, which was sad but seems to have been the right decision considering the Porsche 911 GT1 '98, that had absolutely no aerodynamic trouble at Le Mans had flipped at the ALMS's Petit Le Mans race at Road Atlanta the year before.

    So the V12 CLK-GTR never competed at Le Mans, but the V8 CLK-LM competed in both Le Mans and FIA-GT.

    @TerryA: FIA-GT came to Laguna Seca in 1997 and 1998, so if you remember seeing any blue Mercedes cars you were there in 1998 and therefor saw both the CLK-GTR (blue) and CLK-LM (silver). In 1997 all Mercedes cars that competed there were silver CLK-GTRs and the famous Greg Moore was brought in as a driver since he also raced a Mercedes engine in CART.

  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to villeneuve For This Useful Post:

    captruff (09-12-2017), Glen (09-12-2017), TerryA (07-12-2018)

  20. #11
    E500E Guru TerryA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,214

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Villeneuve,

    Thanks for the update. Now I'm going to have to go out and look for that race program. It seems to me both cars I saw were the same silver color, only difference being one had yellow mirror pods the other red.
    Terry

  21. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Evansville, IN
    Posts
    83

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    From the 2018 Goodwood Festival of Speed
    Press Release : https://mercedes-benz-archive.com/ma...l?oid=40526215

    Mercedes-Benz CLK-LM GT-racing sports car, 1998
    The sports car scene was revived in 1997 with the introduction of the FIA GT Championship. Mercedes-Benz and AMG developed the CLK-GTR for the new race series in just 128 days. Powered by a six-litre V12 engine, it dominated the 1997 season, winning six of eleven races, including four double victories. At the end of the season, AMG-Mercedes took the team title and Bernd Schneider won the drivers‘ title. The further developed CLK-LM equipped with a five-litre V8 engine arrived at the end of June 1998 to replace the CLK‑GTR - and it proved even more dominant in the races than its predecessor: not only did it win its very first race at the Hockenheimring, it also won the following seven races that season. After the two wins for the CLK-GTR, this record-breaking performance secured yet another team title for AMG-Mercedes. At a tense finale in Laguna Seca, California, Klaus Ludwig won the FIA GT Championship drivers‘ title together with the Brazilian Ricardo Zonta.

    Technical data

    Cylinders: V8
    Displacement: 4,986 cc
    Output: 441 kW (600 hp)
    Top speed: 360 km/h


    By application x r2) x (Stroke) and I infer (Stroke = 85mm). Albeit my inference or plug/assumption is logically derived, in that (Bore) is more elastic/variable by function of implementation (engineering/labor/etc) than (Stroke) it is not or has not been confirmed or documented in any public information to my knowledge.

    Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 10.58.41 PM.png
    Last edited by BigWillieStyle; 07-12-2018 at 07:59 PM.

  22. #13
    E500E Guru TerryA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,214

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Thanks BigWillie for the up-date

    BTW, Just happened upon this at the Father's Day Auto Show on Rodeo Drive

    Pretty sure this is the V12

    Don't drool over your computers Guys
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Terry

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to TerryA For This Useful Post:

    BigWillieStyle (07-12-2018)

  24. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Evansville, IN
    Posts
    83

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by BigWillieStyle View Post


    Technical data

    Cylinders: V8
    Displacement: 4,986 cc


    By application x r2) x (Stroke) and I infer (Stroke = 85mm). Albeit my inference or plug/assumption is logically derived, in that (Bore) is more elastic/variable by function of implementation (engineering/labor/etc) than (Stroke) it is not or has not been confirmed or documented in any public information to my knowledge.

    Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 10.58.41 PM.png

    Update, I found some additional info to support my prior assumption with regard to engine stroke in the LM-GT1 classification circa 1998-1999.

    https://www.motorsport.com/lemans/ne...esented/26494/

    A production engine provided the basis for the engine block and the crankshaft...
    Two major outliers are piston compression height and intake valve diameter. I'm not going to make any claims but I've got a relatively good idea on the mechanical strategy used by HWA AMG to obtain the advertised (SI) units of power HP/kW etc.

  25. #15
    Intl 500E GTG coordinator 195910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,638

    Re: CLK LM engine confusion

    Interesting article, it confirms the 6L AMG M119 as the base engine.

    6L M119 was making 381hp in the W124 (rumored to have 408hp same as the BRABUS 6.0), 600HP NA does sound possible on this block with a more advanced exhaust and intake system, as well as higher compression ratio and RPM range. They also had a more advanced engine management systems.

    The SLS's M159 was the same block as the M156, but with considerably more power. The Intake and exhaust system on the M159 alone gave a 50HP difference compared to the SL63 M156. The SLS BS has nearly 60HP more than the SLS with a higher RPM limit and lighter moving parts.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to 195910 For This Useful Post:

    gsxr (2 Weeks Ago)

Similar Threads

  1. Hydraulic Lifter confusion
    By Christian_K in forum M119 Engine
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-26-2018, 07:41 AM
  2. Gerry's Engine and Engine Bay
    By Ron500E in forum Appearance and Detailing
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 02-07-2015, 10:25 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-07-2013, 05:08 PM
  4. Codes pulled with engine running/engine off
    By Benzer in forum M119 Engine
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-30-2011, 07:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •