Choosing one of the MB trucks

sharkbait73

New member
Hi Folks, I have been investigating a very similar path with the MB trucks.

Forgive my ignorance, but I am stuggling when looking at the trucks in ads, determining if the engines for any given ad are turbo or naturally aspirated.

Is there a designation in the truck model name/model that indicate turbo?

Or maybe are the engine model always turbo or NA? (Ie: is OM353 always turbo...or are there both versions fir that (or any) engine)?

Thanks in advance for any insight!

Scott



Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

Neil

Observer
Likewise the vehicle model number also tells you if the vehicle is 2 or 4 wheel drive.
IE 1017 is 10 ton 170hp 2 wheel drive.
1017A is the same but 4 wheel drive

Neil
 

sharkbait73

New member
Thank Folks! So if I see "1222AF" is that a 4x4, turbo, and is the "F" the faster axles/gearing?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

mog

Explorer
The 'A' in the model number is for Alrad, so 4x4, that does not mean the engine is a turbo. The 'A' in the engine number like OM352A means turbo. The 'F' in the model number means a firetruck, which might or might not have fast axles. More likely but certainly not a guarantee.
Model designations are the first 1 or 2 numbers are the weight category in tons, second 2 numbers are horsepower. So a 1017 is 10 tons, 170 hp, a 914 is 9 tons 140 hp
after those numbers, letter(s) indicate: A-all-wheel drive, B-concrete mixer, F-firetruck, K-dumptruck, KO-municipal, S-tractor truck.
 

sharkbait73

New member
Gotcha! I was aware (through you guys!) of the tonnage/hp portion...but i was confusing the letter after the truck model and after the engine model!

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

VerMonsterRV

Traveler
Not sure but I think the 1222 was a NA V6, Sitec here on the board has one. I know the 917, 1017 (OM352A I think), 1120, 1124 all have inline turbo 6's. The 1120 (which we ended up with) and the 1124 also have intercoolers (the engine is a OM366LA of different HP's). Not sure but what I have sort of concluded is the engine numbers represent the cubic inches with the following letters being turbo/intercooled. I never really figured out any other inline 6's other than these trucks I listed earlier. I also decided I wanted a inline turbo 6 so ended up with the 1120.

On a side note, you can buy the electronic MB workshop manual on Ebay. I think it was around $20 and is probably pirated. It will let you enter in any VIN and give you the details about that specific truck, for things like the engine and axle ratio.
 

Sitec

Adventurer
Hi Sharkbait73. As Jonturgeon rightly says, I have a 1222A (which equates to a 12 tonne (12), 220hp (22) with the OM441 V6 engine, A (Allrad or 4x4). It is a large 10.5 +/- naturally aspirated V6 coupled to a 6 speed gearbox. It has a small tail shaft going to a remote two speed transfer box, and then has a hub reduction axle at the rear (the one with the huge lump in the center of the rear wheels), and a 'normal' front axle as found on Bull Nose Mercs, 1017's etc. Both axles have air operated cross axle diff locks. The V6 is a large lazy engine with enough power for what we are doing, but mine is on the slow axles hence the thread about gearing up trucks and another thread on 'bigger tyres'. I have a donor prime mover/tractor unit/horse (dependent on where you come from as to what you call it) which is a 1934. It has the same OM441 V6 engine but is turbo intercooled, making it an OM441LA. Same cc, same block, heads, pistons etc, but instead of being 220hp naturally aspirated, it's 340hp turbo intercooled. I plan to add the turbo to mine and a smaller intercooler aiming for about 280-300hp... just because I have the parts, and because I'm planning on gearing it ip for the long distances here in Oz, so more power will be handy. You'll buy what suits your need, and what you like. All you have to consider really are a few things... Where in the world you plan to go, how heavy you want/plan it to be, and how often you are going to go really off road... Of all the overlanders in this Merc section, most of us have 4x4, but I'm tipping we don't use it or need it a lot, but it is a 'nice to have' when the need arises. The 1120/1124 are a nice usable size and suit 4 to 4.5 m bodys and come in at around 2.2 to 2.3m wide from memory. They are an all round 'easier' truck to drive, maintain, ship etc, and can be kept around the 8 or 9 tonne mark. The 1017's, 1617's, 1222's 1734's etc all have larger engines, heavier axles wider cabs, a taller stance etc, but fall into the heavier class of truck. They allow for a 2.5m wide body and up to 6 m long (if you have a 4.5m wheelbase truck). They will cost more to ship, cost more to run, but allow you weights from 9 thru to 12 tonnes. I have the 1222A as I know and have used them in anger in Africa, can get parts everywhere and love the look of the bigger older Merc. Others go for the lighter truck, as it's more managable, more fuel efficient etc. I'd be fine with the lighter truck for the whole of Oz, NZ, US etc, but if i do get into the deapths of Africa again, South America etc I think the heavyweight will be more tolerant of prolonged abuse. Just my thoughts and view. Neil will give you a very good run down on costs, fuel figures and general usage with the larger truck. We have some friends of Neil and Pat's who plan to visit us soon and they are in the lighter 1124 I think, so it will be good for me to see their truck, setup etc and get feedback on their thoughts so far. Hope this helps a bit. Either way you won't go far wrong with a Merc! :)
 

VerMonsterRV

Traveler
Hey Sitec, our habitat is 5.3m and almost 2.4m wide. The width is from the rubber fender wells on the front tires. The box length hangs over the rear of the chassis about 300mm (the bottom of the 45 degree angle is at the end of the chassis). Once we got the 385/65 R22.5 tires on our height of the chassis is around 39". For some reason the GVWR of a 1017 and 1120 are the same at 12,000kg (I thought the first digits were the weight rating). Our cab is definitely narrower than the pictures I have seen of the 1017's, but still seems large. Although a little late for me, it would be interesting to see the chassis/axle differences between these 2 trucks as our plans are essentially a land circumnavigation, hope we made the right choice (they all seem pretty robust but I am new to medium duty trucks). We are getting right around 13mpg which I am pretty pleased as the 1120 is full time 4WD. After our cab upgrades and new higher sidewall tires the ride is actually pretty good, not sure how it compares to the 1017. I keep mentioning the 1017 as it was the other truck I was looking into. I bought our truck sight unseen, so was unable to visually compare the 2.

When you say the 1017's have larger engines I am a little confused (happens often). I think the 17's (though not the 917 which uses the OM366A) use the OM352A which I also think is a 352 c.i. inline 6. Our truck has a OM366LA, so a 366 c.i. inline 6. I sort of figured it was just a slightly larger displacement of the OM352, is the block lighter? Now your 1222 has the much larger V6 and they even offer a larger V8. Given that our truck is the only MB cab over truck I have personally seen anything I think I know is just internet reading.
 
Last edited:

VerMonsterRV

Traveler
OM352 motor is 345 ci. OM366 is 346 ci.
Substantial differences of design between them.
As much as I like charming oldschool 352s. Given me choice, 366 any day !!
Thanks Verkstad for the info. Since I am new to these trucks and have only seen ours I have no base for comparison. I do feel though that the OM366LA is a nice smooth engine and have been impressed by it. Just also found out that with an injector pump/injector upgrade I can get a bit more power out of the engine (up to 270hp). Also figured out our truck has the 39:8 ring/pinion so there is a possible upgrade to get a bit more top end speed with a swap. All it needs is a pile of money (which I am exactly one pile short right now ;)).
 

VerMonsterRV

Traveler
Btw, 39:8 seems an odd way to express gear ratio. But maybe not if one cant use decimal numbers.
Not sure about that, I know the American way is the decimal ratio (so 4.875). From the EPC and contact with a UK supplier MB does it this way. Guess this way describes the ring and pinion number of teeth (so 39 for the ring and 8 for the pinion)? It seems the American decimal way just describes the overall ratio. Once again, very green about this stuff and trying to learn along the way. I mean, this is not only my first medium duty truck but also my first 4WD (why start small?).

And at this point I am happy with the HP (no worries on the hills or getting to speed), just if I was to change the gearing and that changed I know of a relatively simple upgrade path (the OM366LA originally was offered in the 240hp trim).
 

Sitec

Adventurer
Hey Sitec, our habitat is 5.3m and almost 2.4m wide. The width is from the rubber fender wells on the front tires. The box length hangs over the rear of the chassis about 300mm (the bottom of the 45 degree angle is at the end of the chassis). Once we got the 385/65 R22.5 tires on our height of the chassis is around 39". For some reason the GVWR of a 1017 and 1120 are the same at 12,000kg (I thought the first digits were the weight rating). Our cab is definitely narrower than the pictures I have seen of the 1017's, but still seems large. Although a little late for me, it would be interesting to see the chassis/axle differences between these 2 trucks as our plans are essentially a land circumnavigation, hope we made the right choice (they all seem pretty robust but I am new to medium duty trucks). We are getting right around 13mpg which I am pretty pleased as the 1120 is full time 4WD. After our cab upgrades and new higher sidewall tires the ride is actually pretty good, not sure how it compares to the 1017. I keep mentioning the 1017 as it was the other truck I was looking into. I bought our truck sight unseen, so was unable to visually compare the 2.

When you say the 1017's have larger engines I am a little confused (happens often). I think the 17's (though not the 917 which uses the OM366A) use the OM352A which I also think is a 352 c.i. inline 6. Our truck has a OM366LA, so a 366 c.i. inline 6. I sort of figured it was just a slightly larger displacement of the OM352, is the block lighter? Now your 1222 has the much larger V6 and they even offer a larger V8. Given that our truck is the only MB cab over truck I have personally seen anything I think I know is just internet reading.
I probably banded the 1017 into the larger engine group incorrectly and it's not an ideal example of what I was getting at, but what I was trying to simply explain is that the NG, SK, MK trucks are all 'heavier' and 'bulkier' trucks. You are right that the first digit is weight, and in that respect an 1120 will carry more than a 1017. The 1120 is a later truck with a lighter cab and more refined build. If you put an 1120 beside a 1222, the 1120 is smaller, easier to drive, has a similar payload and HP and is probably more fuel efficient... The 1222 by comparison is taller, wider and a little heavier (and definitely more clumsy), making it quite a different truck to own and drive.

Your setup sounds really good, but now it's taking shape you would probably agree that you wouldn't go much bigger with the box on your platform. The chassis on the 1222 is taller coming in at around 48/50", and I've settled at a 6m long body (that's 94" tall giving a total height of approx 142" or 3.6m) as it's what I have, but could have gone longer. Adding a bit of height, and 100mm in width suddenly makes for a bigger handful. I've driven a few 1120's but not for a long time, so it'll be interesting to sight Traveling Babo (the incoming 1120) and park it beside the 1222 and see how they compare. I might be surprised at how little difference there is! :)
 

Neil

Observer
Just to add a little confusion the german army had thousand and thousands of 1017,s. I looked at hundreds lined up for sale in several german military sites. They were all plated at different weights fespite all being 1017

Some were as expected 10000 .kg they then went up litteraly in 100 kg increments to about 14000 kg .

Mine is in the middle at 12200 kg .

This is a bit confusing considering that there is an 1117 and a 1217 and a 1317

Work that out

Neil
 

VerMonsterRV

Traveler
Just to add a little confusion the german army had thousand and thousands of 1017,s. I looked at hundreds lined up for sale in several german military sites. They were all plated at different weights fespite all being 1017

Some were as expected 10000 .kg they then went up litteraly in 100 kg increments to about 14000 kg .

Mine is in the middle at 12200 kg .

This is a bit confusing considering that there is an 1117 and a 1217 and a 1317

Work that out

Neil
See, now that is yet another reason for my confusion (other than the other more obvious reasons ;)).

You are right Sitec about the length, I could have extended the 45 degree angle back a little more and would have looked OK visually, but not a huge amount. Now if you are saying the 1120 is an easier truck to drive, then man I got lucky. Not sure you would want to share the road with me driving anything larger :). Some more dimensions of our truck, the top of the habitat comes in right at 11'. We have 6' 6" headroom inside but since we used a Total Composites kit the floor and ceiling panels are 83mm thick. Our subframe is 5"x3" rectangular tube. The rooftop A/C adds another 8" to the overall height, so a total of 11' 8". We have already brushed a few low hanging branches.
 
Top